​The rapid strengthening of the Black Lives Matter movement since the murders of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd in early 2020 has forced America to ask itself tough questions—a skill that Americans all across the political spectrum can find quite difficult. One of the most pressing issues has been how far America really has come in terms of how we treat citizens of color, especially Black citizens. When we look back on our country’s history, we must ask ourselves: how much of it has venerated racists, how long has that been glossed over, and how can we move forward?

To start, there is a surplus of monuments and statues in the United States of America that honor the Confederacy and infamous Confederates—771, to be exact. A large number of them are in the South where the Confederacy once was located, with just four Southern states harboring half of them, but monuments can still be found from California to Pennsylvania. In the wake of the nationwide protests that have been happening in 2020, at least thirty statues built to honor the Confederacy have been removed—either by protestors or by the city. While this has been a subject of controversy among those who support keeping the monuments up, this is certainly not a new phenomenon. Four statues were removed after the Charleston church shooting in 2015, and thirty-six were removed following the death of counter-protestor Heather Heyer at a far-right rally in Charlottesville in 2017. And after every event, we have heard the same argument, often from conservatives, that removing the statues is removing our history.

In my opinion, that’s a load of bull. Make no mistake, in order to give Black Americans the justice they deserve for experiencing centuries of institutionalized racism, we need to remember all aspects of American history, even (and especially) the parts that don’t make white people look good. To try and remove the Confederacy from America’s history would be like pretending it never existed, and we cannot let that happen.

Because to be clear, the Confederacy was not honorable. It was not grand. It was not glorious. It was evil. It was a breakaway state from America that valued money more than it valued Black people, and was willing to create an entirely new country that would allow them to treat enslaved people as subhuman to keep their precious economy stable. The Confederacy is not something that anyone should remember with any trace of fondness.

But the thing about statues is that, at their core, they aren’t made so that people can remember history—they’re made so we can glorify it. So that we can immortalize the people that they’re made for. There is plenty of educational content out there concerning the Confederacy if one wishes to learn about it, and it should be learned about.

But removing those statues isn’t an “attack on our heritage” like Donald Trump seems to think it is, nor erasing American history. History is already there. Removing a statue of a Confederate soldier is removing a symbol of oppression, of hatred, of racism. Why that seems to be a problem with anyone—especially the president of the winning side—is truly beyond me.

--

Sources:

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2020/06/mapping-hundreds-confederate-statues-200610103154036.html 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/national/confederate-monuments/
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/07/02/nation/trump-warns-his-mostly-white-base-threat-heritage-confederate-statues-come-down/

​China denied the claims of covering up the severity of the virus, stating that it wasn’t aware how infectious the coronavirus was. The Chinese officials spent weeks denying the severity of the coronavirus outbreak which eventually spread to the rest of the world which cost nations crucial time in preparing for the damage which would eventually be caused by the virus. Experts believe that the CCP should be held accountable for more than 3 million infections and 200,000 deaths worldwide. However, China isn’t letting the crisis go to waste, and is taking advantage of the crisis to pursue its long term foreign policy goals. First by claiming authority over disputed territories in the south china sea and claiming sovereignty over hong kong, second by taking advantage of the struggling african countries who are unable to cope up with the crisis, and finally by launching a disinformation campaign to blame the virus on other countries.

In April, The Chinese ministry of civil affairs announced that the state council had approved two new administrative divisions under Sansha City, which was created in 2012 to encompass the south china sea China claimed these two districts, Paracel and Spratly islands, under its nine-dash line claim. Five other states - Vietnam, Philippines, Brunei, Taiwan, and Malaysia - have territorial claims over China’s Nine Dash Line. These claims led to criticism from Vietnam, unsurprisingly, as Vietnam has faced challenges from China as Chinese ships have been operating in its economic zone. Vietnam has also claimed sovereignty over the Paracel Islands. China has also used this opportunity to try to gain control over hong kong, aiming towards getting rid of the pro-democracy movement there. This has caused all the G7 countries to sign an official statement urging China to reconsider the new Hong Kong Security Law, which China has Opposed. China has also taken advantage of the vulnerable countries in Africa who are unable to cope with the virus.

Nearly every african country has recorded cases of COVID 19, which has lied to over 30 countries in the continent to impose lockdown. This caused the governments to ask for debt relief so they can invest more healthcare, sanitation, and food. China is one of the continents largest creditors and counts for 17 to 24 percent of Africa’s external debt. According to the Wall Street Journal, Chinese leaders have asked Zambian officials to provide Collateral for the loan defaults, in this case the Copper mines in Zambia. China has a very transactional view of foreign policy. If they give something, they expect something in return. Finally, China has launched a disinformation campaign which blames the virus on other countries.

China has alleged that the virus has originated in the US, stating that it originated in a US bioweapons laboratory and was spread by the army. More than a dozen Chinese embassies amplified the story on twitter, making it viral. Global times, the english version of the CCPs People's daily, stated another theory that the virus may have originated in Italy. Beyond these disinformation campaigns, Chinese operatives have also amplified false text messages that went viral in the US in Mid march warning that US president Donald Trump was going to order a two week national quarantine. The message caused such chaos that the national security council had to tweet that it was false. China is also sending medical aid to countries in Europe which are unable to cope up with the virus, such as Italy, Netherlands, Spain, and Serbia. China is trying to make itself look like the hero of the crisis, rather than the villain.

Chinese efforts to exploit the pandemic will make it difficult for countries like the US to work with the country, and will negatively impact China's relations with other leading powers.

--

Sources:
https://www.vox.com/2020/4/28/21234598/coronavirus-china-xi-jinping-foreign-policy https://thediplomat.com/2020/04/making-sense-of-chinas-latest-bid-to-administer-sovere ignty-in-the-south-china-sea/ https://www.vox.com/2020/4/21/21225002/coronavirus-africa-cases-death-food-debt-ec onomy https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/21/world/asia/coronavirus-hong-kong-protests.html https://www.state.gov/g7-foreign-ministers-statement-on-hong-kong/ https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/14/zambias-spiraling-debt-and-the-future-of-chinese-loa n-financing-in-africa.html https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2020-04-22/chinas-coronavirus-information -offensive https://medium.com/@eolander/analyst-explains-why-chinas-debt-trap-diplomacy-critics -are-wrong-74773e229f4f

​World War II was a time period of fear, chaos, and destruction, with countries constantly engaging in battles and fighting amongst one another. 

The Holocaust was one of the most well-known and disturbing events to happen during World War II, where an estimated 11 million innocent lives were lost. Let's take a look at Germany- is there a statue of Hitler being displaying? Most definitely not, because that would be insensitive. Are there Nazi flags hanging from trucks? No, because the Holocaust was a horrendous event that should not be glorified.

However, let's look at the United States, where between 10 and 15 million slaves were forcibly transported across the Atlantic Ocean.

​But we see statues of Robert E Lee, a Confederate General. You could say he was a great general, although he lost, he was still racist. Then we have George Benning, who was an enthusiast for slavery as a military base. Is that how we want our country to be represented?

History is something we learn from: history textbooks are there for generations to read and benefit from past generations' decisions of what to include in the books. Of course, we want to remember what has happened in the past, but it's more important to adapt and grow from mistakes. Glorifying history will only preserve the ideas and policies in place.

Amidst the current Black Lives Matter movement, many museums, universities, and cities have been taking down racist statues, monuments, and renaming buildings. Some people are for it, but I myself have seen a lot of arguments against it.

Stop glorifying history and start learning from it.

   "The moment when we all look at ourselves as a brotherhood regardless of our race, skin color or ethnicity is when the starless midnight of racism has finally come to an end, and then we would have brought to reality what has been read on papers right from generations past"
 
   Martin Luther King, in his lifetime fought a war of redemption for negroes of the United States and eventually, a black ruled America. Nelson Mandela's resolve was unshaken even at the face of persecution until South Africa was free from racial segregation. We have had great legends who stood up for the victimized race, against injustice and their efforts were not futile but it shouldn't shock you to realize that even in this century, there are still many forms of segregation that shouldn't be overlooked.
​
   I consider it selfish (no, foolish!!) to set up another standard of humanity for a fellow brother. This has been among the ambiguities of our time right from prehistoric period that needs to be firmly resolved. When we were all given birth to, we came as humans by all biological and natural standards.

   The qualification for humanity is not (and should not) be based on skin color or racial background. As long as there are no tails on the fellow, there is no reason whatsoever to compare any race to the generation of apes. Black or white, red or brown; humans are humans.
There is no doubt in the advancement and improvement of life which is the era we now live in, however the racist in his folly cynically brings up his shallow ideas and concluded outrightly that his race (which no one should give a damn about) is superior to others. He challenges the segregated race with inventions of his fellow brother (who he considers human because of the similarities in their skin color and racial background). He makes comparisons with his way of life to his victim's, and they (the victims) are bamboozled into buying his idea, hence the racist dominates them and make them feel inferior.

   Looking at the background of the racist, he has a long history of development in the areas of government, politics, inventions and many more, than the segregated community. Rather than rendering encouraging assistance to the secluded community, he (the racist) out of a selfish ambition of self-glorification make some developments in the community rather than guide the community (of the segregated) on how to develop on their own (that is how I consider the racist's alleged charity). If his intentions of charity were pure, the racist would not raise indictments against the segregated community, rather he would share in their hope of improvements and advancements.

   Making stereotypical remarks of indictment on a race is folly in display. The liked of Barack Obama who became the first black (segregated community) president of great America should not have emerged as so, if he was an ape.

   Why do we have to oppress another race and judge them by the color of their skin?! If this injustice was because of the pant color we wore, there would have been no problem as I can hop into my car; zoom off to my house and change into the accepted color of pants; but this is an injustice on something almost unchangeable. This is an injustice of skim color!!!
Global awards or certain positions should not be limited to a certain race but should be based on the fair judgement and assessment of what we can offer, if truly we claim the absence of injustice. We have had blacks who did exploits in their fields and their accomplishments are undeniable.

   Just like Martin Luther King, I have refused to accept the cynical notion that mankind is bound to the starless midnight of racism and war. These biases are consciously done but the black community will continue to thrive and prove to the world that what we have to offer is not determined by the color of our skin.

   My charge to the black community is to not respond to the racist's folly with violence or defeat. Do not try to alter the color of your skin as you will only be proving the racist's ideas to be true. This is a call to all humanity, black; red; brown; or white, to stand against racial injustice, and we should see  it as a thing of pride to exist in diversity. Just like Martin Luther King, I have a dream when one day the world would be void of racial or skin color biases, whether conscious or unconscious and that we may all stand as a brotherhood to sing the song of liberation together. Bringing to reality a long age fiction: Racial equity - is my cry to everyone.

By: Kiana Maria

   In school, students are taught about Alexander Graham Bell inventing the telephone and Thomas Edison for creating the movie camera. The conversation of how history books have become whitewashed has been gaining a lot of momentum recently. For instance, in school, not many are taught about Garret Morgan, Philip B. Downing, and Frederick McKinley Jones. The men mentioned are African American inventors who changed our lives, however, they’re rarely ever spoken of. They deserve to get their moment of recognition in our textbooks.

   Garret Morgan received education only up to sixth grade and was the son of a slave. He learned how sewing machines worked and built a business out of repairing them. However, his determination to create soon grew into an item that has saved thousands of lives. Being a firefighter is no easy task. They risk their lives and jump into fires to save others. Concerned that firefighters would get killed from the smoke, he invented an item that has saved a lot of men and women in service. He created the gas mask. “Morgan developed what he called the safety hood. The hood, which went over the head, featured tubes connected to wet sponges that filtered out smoke and provided fresh oxygen.”(Edmonds) It became a major deal in 1916 after he went into a building to save trapped workers.

   In Kindergarten or even before that, children are taught the importance of the three-light traffic lights, and which color means a certain action. However, are children ever taught who invented them? Once again, Garret Morgan comes to the rescue and invents the first electric traffic light. In 1923, cars were becoming popular in Ohio, however, they were deemed to be dangerous. It was hard to know when and where you could move. In 1868, the only traffic lights that were used were gas lit and originated in London. Due to his large successes, he was even the first African American in the area to own a car.
​
   With in-mail voting becoming a large discussion due to the pandemic, mailboxes are most likely going to hold our ballots. Imagine if the mailboxes seen today appeared different. For instance, they would be somewhat open, snow, rain, and even thieves could sneak their way in. On top of that, there were very few of these unsafe boxes, and post offices were far away from most people. Had it not been for Philip B. Downing, that might have been the case today. Downing is credited with creating the first mailbox that was secure and closed. He created it in 1891 and patented it on October 27th of that year. He called it the Street Letter Box. The box had an outer door and an inner safety door that gave way to what is on many corners now!

   Soggy ice cream and spoiled milk do not sound appetizing at all. Frederick McKinley Jones helped prevent that. He is credited with creating the first refrigerated trucks which would send produce to and from grocers. “He received a patent for his invention in 1940 and co-founded the U.S. Thermo Control Company, later known as Thermo King. The company was critical during World War II, helping to preserve blood, food, and supplies during the war.” (Morgan) Thermo King is still around today and is a billion-dollar company!

   Black history isn’t brought up in many schools, which is a shame because there is so much that many children are missing out on learning. Garret Morgan, Philip B. Downing, and Fredrick McKinley Jones deserve to be taught and learned from. As Gen Z, we should share the stories of those who aren’t getting the recognition they deserve.

   Sources:
Edmonds, Molly. “Top 10 Inventions by African-Americans.” HowStuffWorks Science, HowStuffWorks, 20 Aug. 2020, science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/inventions/10-inventions-by-african-am ericans.htm.
Morgan, Thad. “8 Black Inventors Who Made Daily Life Easier.” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 20 Feb. 2019, www.history.com/news/8-black-inventors-african-american.

        During the 18th century, scientists began conducting experiments that showed the effects of man-made gases, specifically carbon-dioxide, on the earth’s atmosphere. They noticed how it was trapped in the air and formed a “covering” made out of gas, insulating the earth. Following these observations, in the mid-1900s, scientists used CO2 readings to find more evidence supporting the climate change theory, convincing some in the field to see its importance. But, it wasn’t until the theory was proved factual by a great deal of data that scientists started taking global warming seriously, and began to inform the public. Fast-forward about 100-200 years, we are already beginning to see the massive impacts of a warming earth; and even more consequences are to come, scientists and climate activists warn. These warnings were amplified after the 2018 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) meeting, bringing together the most accomplished climatologists from across the world. In the meeting, they changed the safest global temperature to 1.5 degrees Celsius, instead of 2 degrees, which is what they thought before. The result of rising above the mark would include mass extinction of different species, excessive droughts, devastating wildfires, warming oceans, rising sea levels, mass migration, trillions of dollars, millions of lives, and a collapse of the entire ecosystem and environment. This announcement induced panic because with the world’s current fossil fuel and greenhouse gas emission rate, keeping global temperatures low enough is downright impossible. Scientists and climatologists are treating this with severe urgency, but politicians certainly aren’t; except Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Ed Markey. They put together a congressional resolution to tackle climate change, healthcare, jobs, and education all at once.

        The Green New Deal (GND) is a fourteen-page resolution that outlines a ten-year plan for the US to follow in order to help solve the climate crisis. The intent of the GND is to transition off fossil fuels and onto a system based on 100% renewable energy; and in the process, providing new high-wage jobs and a brand-new economy. By cutting fossil fuels entirely, the amount of greenhouse gas (carbon-dioxide, methane, fluoridated gases, nitrous oxide) emissions will drop dramatically, which will in turn help stop the global human effects on the climate and earth. This is because the US has a large effect on the global temperature, being the second-largest carbon contributor. If the US stops contributing to greenhouse gas emissions in the next 10-15 years, we have a chance to keep the global temperature below 1.5 degrees Celsius, which would be implausible with fossil fuels. Changing to renewable energy would help prevent the mass destruction to come from climate change, and would save future generations. Although the result of dropping fossil fuels would be extremely rewarding, the task would also be extremely difficult. The US is solely reliant on fossil fuels; a cheap, reliable, easily transported, abundant, source of energy that we have been using for centuries. They make us an estimated 20 billion dollars annually; provide thousands of people work, healthcare, food, and housing; and, they supply almost 70% of our energy. Cutting them will be a large and risky sacrifice, so the last several pages of the resolution detail a procedure the US would follow to help American workers shift into the new system. This includes providing a high-wage job for all transitioning workers, education and preparation for new jobs, public employment, and healthcare for all people. This will protect workers until the adjustment is completed, to make sure that people will be able to survive the change. Speaking of change, what would happen if the Green New Deal is enacted as a bill?

​     The Green New Deal expects the US to build new products and structures to supply the country with renewable energy. These products would create energy from water, wind, the sun, plants, animals, and the earth’s subsurface heat. Houses would be powered by solar panels; and electricity would be generated by wind turbines, hydropower (waterfalls, etc.), and biomass energy (corn, soy, burned). There would be no more factories or power plants, and only wind turbine farms and renewable energy manufacturing for production. Thousands of people will be employed in the renewable energy industry, which would be the bases for a new economy. In fact, because of the agenda to create more jobs the Green New Deal was named after President Franklin Roosevelt’s “New Deal,” which helped employ around 20 million people and built a stable economy after the Great Depression. Next, transportation would change. Instead of driving cars powered by gasoline, we would all use battery powered cars. They would be much like the current Tesla cars, but they would be much more common. And, there would be only electric trains, transporting people without engines. Also, for food, produce would be bought and farmed locally, not shipped from places elsewhere. These are just a few of adjustments that would come from the GND, but there are many more. The entire US system would be completely different, fossil fuels entirely replaced. There would be massive change, changes to things we do daily, and it would be difficult; but, nonetheless, it has to be done, to save us, Gen Z, and to save the next generations to come.

 
​With the ever-increasing threat of climate change, the future of today’s youth is in crisis. It is no longer premature to imagine that climate apocalypse is coming. In fact, we are already experiencing the serious impacts of climate change.

 In 2018, South Korea was hit by a scorching heatwave. The record-breaking temperatures left at least 42 people dead and more than 3,400 people treated for heat-related illnesses. In 2019, the country was affected by 7 typhoons, which is the highest number in history. This year, we are witnessing deadly floods and landslides in many regions across the country. This is not just happening in Korea but all around the world. People are suffering, and so much more will as climate change exacerbates.
 
 One of the main culprits of climate change is coal. A single coal-fired station can generate carbon emissions equivalent to 6 million cars on the road. Therefore, building new coal power plants directly contributes to climate change and takes away our right to have a livable planet in the future. Furthermore, coal inflicts substantial harm to people’s health. Since coal plants release particulate matter and toxic chemicals, those who live near the power plant are often vulnerable to deadly diseases.
 
At this point, you might be guessing that the use of coal is cheap, that that’s why we still continue to build coal-fired stations despite all the hazards I mentioned above. Wrong. Coal is cheap only when we choose to simply ignore its societal costs. The final price of coal does not reflect the devastating impacts on our climate, ecosystem, and health. These costs, also known as “externalities,” are huge. According to the IMF report, the costs of climate change have already reached $1.27 trillion a year. 
 
But we don’t even have to delve into these facts to know that renewable energy is a better choice than coal. Renewable energy is getting cheaper and cheaper every day. For instance, in the U.S., wind power is now half the price of existing coal plants. Coal is increasingly considered to have high financial risks compared to renewable energy. This is why some of the leading banks such as Morgan Stanley, Standard Chartered, and HSBC have recently decided to exclude any financing for coal-fired power plants. These banks divested from coal not because they are ethical but because they know that coal projects are not profitable in the long-run.
 
The world’s scientists confirmed in the 2018 IPCC report that in order to avoid devastating climate catastrophes, we need to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. In order to achieve this goal, we need to end coal use as soon as possible. More specifically, it is suggested that OECD countries should phase out coal by 2030 and the non-OECD countries by 2040. This is not something radical; it is what we must do if we want to meet the objectives of the Paris Agreement.


The fight against coal is led by young people in many parts of the world. Last month, School Strike 4 Climate Australia called for a boycott of Samsung products, urging Samsung Securities to stop funding Adani’s coal project. Few days after their protest in front of a local Samsung store, Samsung Securities pledged to end its financial backing for Adani coal. 
 
Although this is a welcome change, we have so much more to do. There are still 2,425 coal power plants around the world, emitting massive amounts of greenhouse gases that threaten our lives. We the young people deserve a safe, clean, and sustainable future, and we cannot let fossil fuel billionaires ruin that. It is important that we hold polluters accountable and push corporations to stop using their money to back fossil fuel projects. This will be a hard fight, but we’ve got this if everyone is willing to be involved. Are you in?
 
Sources
 
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/09/south-korean-heatwave-causes-record-deaths
 
https://climateanalytics.org/briefings/coal-phase-out/
 
https://www.greenpeace.org/international/tag/coal/
 
https://350.org/science/
 
https://www.wrongcalloncoal.com/
 
https://endcoal.org/coal-myths/myth-1-coal-is-cheap/
 
http://ieefa.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/IEEFA-Report_100-and-counting_Coal-Exit_Feb-2019.pdf
 
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/every-coal-power-plant-1927-2019/