Use the fields below to perform an advanced search of The Chronicle's archives. This will return articles, images, and multimedia relevant to your query. You can also try a Basic search
14 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
What a year. America’s election news cycle oscillated between riveting five-star drama rife with side-splitting irony and realizations which induced stomach-churning dismay. But perhaps “oscillate” is not even an appropriate word; 2016 showed us that you could have both at once, as these two elements fused into the ultimate black comedy. 2016 beat fiction, gang.
As we stumble towards the end of 2016, politics is perhaps the last facet of our livelihoods we wish to ponder. Nearly six hundred days of bitter divisions, rhetoric and scandals have fractured and exhausted us as a people. All our pent-up apprehensions boiled over on Tuesday night, when Trump vaulted over the predictions of polls and pundits to seize the rust belt on his trip to 270. Even now that this trial and shock has passed, I know that many people on both sides of the aisle are reeling—uncertain and anxious about the future of our country.
“If Trump is such an undesirable presidential candidate, why not jump on board with Hillary?”
The state of manhood within American society is progressively becoming a crisis. Although fascinating reports and opinions regarding the U.S. 2016 election are rolling in like a flash flood and consuming our attention, there are other developments that likewise deserve our notice.
In August of last year, nearly no credible pundit would have predicted that Donald Trump would claim the Republican nomination. Yet here we are, in the beginning of September 2016, with the boundaries of a seeming impossibility shattered and in the rear view mirror. We gape in disbelief at a Republican nominee whose lumbering campaign, to quote a conservative radio host in Wisconsin, is a “dumpster fire inside a nuclear meltdown.” The insistence that Trump’s impropriety during the primary was “fourth-dimensional chess” and that he would mature and pivot to the general election has so far proven to be a gross miscalculation.
What does it mean to call something figuratively “backwards?” This term makes sense in the fields of technology or economics, but how about as a moral category? Today’s progressives fight to “move forward” and chide restraining legislation or ideas or leaders as “backwards,” but this moral classification is often not sustainable.
“Everybody chill out…can’t we just get along?” This was the gut of John Kasich’s remarks regarding the controversial HB-2 legislation passed in North Carolina. A part of me feels sorry for Kasich; whether the question involves same-sex marriage or the emergence of trans/queer concepts of gender and sexuality, he has no firm, convictional allegiance in these debates. Yet he finds himself ever lonelier in a disappearing middle ground. To make matters worse, these questions are not fading away; unceasingly, they bombard the news headlines and are on everyone’s mind, as America continues to descend into a cultural civil war.
Every year, the night before Easter, a group of students paint the walls under the bridge on Campus Drive with the words, “CHRIST IS RISEN” and the verse Matthew 28:6 next to art depicting a cross and an open tomb. And every year, after a week or two, the Easter proclamation is eventually painted over, just like all other murals in the endless circle of paint under the bridge.
Whenever the Supreme Court of the United States passes down a ruling that upsets people’s moral intuitions, a question arises: will this verdict clearly establish a right and a wrong side of history and gradually be accepted by the American people? More than 40 years after Roe v. Wade, the American people are still roughly divided between the camps of pro-choice and pro-life. Abortion remains an incredibly polarizing subject which is fought over every year in our nation’s courts, the public square and in our political parties.
Duke’s campus is driven by pain, a fair amount of which arises from race-related issues. America has a bad track record on race—from slavery until the 1860s to progressivist eugenics in the 1910-20s to Jim Crow through the 1960s. Now at Duke, while many of us hope that racism is behind us, we continually confront it and are horrified and traumatized. Last year, racial issues on our campus reached a climax after the noose incident and the defamation of a Black Lives Matter sign. When I first came to Duke as a freshman, I was told during orientation week that the narrative of the campus divide was “everyone versus the fraternities.” But now it seems as if the controversy centers around the BSA and Duke Enrage. Why?
Have you ever called someone xenophobic, Islamophobic, or homophobic? We use these labels all the time and hear them every day. But do we really understand the meaning of these “phobias,” and do they deserve a place in our vocabulary?
"Search your feelings. You know it to be true."—Darth Vader, “The Empire Strikes Back”
13/11.
As the internet has already told us, Donald Trump’s proposal for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States” is outrageous. But nonetheless, this new proposal to combat ISIS raises very pertinent questions: “What are we really at war against, and how do we fight it?” Trump’s call to action suggests that America is at war with a religion (or at least part of it) and that the temporary solution is to act as if America is at war with all of it.
