Although this increase in tuition remains the same for Spring 2012 registration, we now have very specific guidelines which we are to follow. For giving the university, yet again, more money, our receipt reads something like this:

“Thank you for the extra money, kids! When your registration day finally comes, you can register for a maximum of 13 units! But wait, there’s more! You can add two additional units after Dec. 11! Good luck trying to get classes!”

We are paying more money, yet there are less classes, less teachers, and a cap on units? Where is that extra money going?

We turn to Chancellor Reed. This man proposed a $100,000 salary raise for campus presidents the very day the CSU decided on the 12 percent tuition increase!

Although we are experiencing budget cuts, evidence suggests that currently our CSU budget is $213 million, which is 5 percent more than we had in the 2007-2008 school year. (calfac.org)

Being a native Californian, a former Brahma of Pierce College, and a current Matador, it deeply saddens me to see that education is no longer emphasized as it used to be. It is simply not fair that we, the student body, who pay to attend CSUN, are no longer given the priority, nor the opportunity which the generations before us had. It is us, the student body, and all our professors who provide the big wigs with their fat salaries; they sit there lighting cigars with our dollars, while we stand in line, waiting, hoping for that window of opportunity to open up.

In the words of Muse’s Matt Bellamy, most perfectly put, it’s time to “rise up and take power back, it’s time the fat cats had a heart attack.”

-Alexandra Derse

Today’s 9 percent increase in tuition for Cal State students has finally galvanized our apolitical student body, creating a scene at the chancellors office in Long Beach that looked like Vietnam-era student protests. Just as our parents recognized the threat to their future posed by the draft and misguided foreign policy, students and Occupy protesters alike know that growing income inequality and consolidation of wealth in the hands of a tiny elite signals a great existential threat to our generation.

With real income stagnant, historically high unemployment numbers for recent college graduates, and a corporate culture that compels the best and brightest to compete for “work-experience” as unpaid interns, we face an uncertain future of deferred hopes and dreams. Anesthetized by technological toys, lulled into mindless consumerism and entertained by “reality TV” that glorifies empty celebrities, we have long been too distracted to notice the crumbling inheritance foisted upon us by a corporatocracy that eschews the basic social contract for the 99 percent and pits us against one another in a race to the bottom.

But no more. We have awakened and are no longer silent. What you are witnessing in Oakland, Zucotti Park and L.A.’s City Hall is a harbinger of things to come. Corporate tax rates are at the lowest point since the Eisenhower administration and we know that the real special interests, the lobbyists who represent the financial services industry, have bought and paid for our Congress. Based on economic justice and income distribution, the U.S. ranks 27 out of 32 nations, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Massachusetts U.S. Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren said it best: nobody gets wealthy on his own. Our “socialized” system of education, transportation and public safety enables businesses to prosper. Let business and the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes so we can invest in our educational infrastructure and ensure the future of the American dream for future generations. Occupation may be the last resort of the jobless and those with no hope of getting a foothold on the ladder of prosperity.

-Max Blum

As a student at CSUN and a veteran, I believe that we have a right to an education.

Our tuition keeps going up, and all we keep hearing is that our classes are getting cut. Every time I come to this campus I look around and I see the thousands of students waiting for the opportunity to make something of themselves.

We too have a place in our community, as we can’t wait to get out there and start changing lives. This dream seems to be slipping away from us, and it’s because of people in positions like Chancellor Reed, who, instead of looking out for our best interests, are looking out for theirs.

How is it that people in his position don’t seem to get affected by this? It’s because others, the chancellor of course, are giving 71 percent pay raises to executives, as we are getting the short end of the stick along with the faculty, who are not getting the pay raises they were promised.

Well, it’s time that we make a difference. If, as students, we cannot get the classes we need in order to graduate and the tuition keeps going up, I wouldn’t be surprised if students said “screw it” and leave the whole idea of furthering their education behind.

That’s when the universities will really be hurting. Unless the chancellor changes his priorities, we will start changing ours. If they make it harder for us to get an education, we will end up not getting one. If we allow that to happen, that’s placing a hardship on our goals and dreams and we can’t live that way.

Please help me in letting him see that our future is important, he had his chance to better his life and now it’s our turn.

Sincerely,
Erika L. Franco

When I hear people complain that they’re tired of the ongoing press coverage of the Penn State sexual abuse scandal and ask whether it all might be a little overblown, it makes me wonder, “What will it take?”

The Penn State case has taken the national epidemic of sexual abuse against children and made it a mainstream topic – finally – for debate and dialogue throughout our country. And, this case triggers a level of outrage that should lead to overdue changes in our society’s indifference toward and tolerance of sexual abuse of children.

The simple, sobering fact is that childhood sexual abuse is rampant and needs to be addressed with changes in public policy and public education.  In the Penn State case alone, consider that:

• An eyewitness allegedly saw a 10-year-old boy being raped and didn’t intervene or call police.

• The top coaching staff at Penn State apparently knew about these allegations but didn’t limit the abuser’s access to young boys.

• The school system and the Foundation that supposedly existed to help children repeatedly allowed the alleged abuser to have time alone with the victims.

One good thing to come from this case is that it has made all of us more comfortable talking openly about this issue in schools, at dinner tables and at work places across the country.  Americans are asking themselves: “What would I have done?”   Would I have trusted my eyes and acted on the spot to rescue a child?  Would I have jeopardized my career and the reputation of a school I loved? Would I have faced embarrassment and ridicule?  Or, would I have taken the minimum steps required by law and looked the other way?

Those conversations are a good start, but they’re not enough.

If we are serious about changing our culture to reject sexual exploitation of children, we need to change our laws to demand greater, personal responsibility of every adult and institution to step up and do the right thing, even when the consequences are painful.  At a minimum, we need to:

• Make it clear that everyone is required to report suspected child abuse no matter what the abuser’s relationship with the child.  Currently, the law in many states is murky about whether abuse must be reported if the abuser is not directly responsible for the child’s welfare and to whom it must be reported.

• Increase the penalties for failure to report childhood sexual abuse. How sad that under Pennsylvania law, the penalty for failing to report childhood sexual abuse was merely a $200 fine?  How much value does that place on the life and soul of a child?

• End the statute of limitations for prosecution of childhood sexual abuse, as Florida did in 2010.   As a victim, I can tell you there is no statute of limitations on how long it takes victims to heal.  So why should abusers have the benefit of a statute of limitations to shield them from prosecution?

Let the Penn State tragedy serve as a national teaching moment. Let us change our culture to place an overarching priority on protecting children from sexual abuse.  If that is the legacy from Penn State, it will mark a positive turning point, rather than a darkest day.

Lauren Book is author of “It’s OK to Tell” and founder of Lauren’s Kids, a foundation that works to fight child sexual abuse through education. For more information, visit laurenskids.org.

It is protested at times that some of us are born with more ‘capital’ than others, but what is the real claim being made? Is the objection that man should be unable to inherit from his father? If so, then it would follow that we should destroy the sum savings of our ancestors and revert to a state of primitivism.

There is nothing inherently wrong with primitivism, but it is doubtful that much of the present society would be able to tolerate the living standards of such society. If present living conditions are to be retained then inheritance from father to son in any sum must be regarded as legitimate and any talk of inheritance tax ceased.

There is admittedly the issue of inheritance involving wealth unfairly gained. If a robber, or the 32nd President, stole a gold coin it would be wrong to allow his son to inherit it. In regards to the market though this is a non-issue for the entrepreneur did not steal his wealth. He gained it by providing goods and services that others voluntarily bought.

Regardless of inheritance we all are born with one minimum piece of capital; ourselves. Like any other piece of capital it may be further refined through training or education. In this sense we are all capitalists.

Michelangelo Landgrave
CSUN Libertarians
Economics Undergraduate

Lee Hulteng portrait of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi. Courtesy of MCT

By Rosstene Valikhani

With Muammar Gaddafi’s demise, understand that the so-called “reporting” done by the mainstream media has been deliberately distorted to legitimize the NATO invasion of Libya.

Dan Lieberman writes in “NATO Conquers Libya,” that the pretext for invading Libya was the false claim that Gaddafi was mass murdering Libyan’s prompting NATO to intervene with authorization from U.N. Security Council Resolutions 1970 and 1973.

The U.N. Resolutions however, only authorized “to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011), to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory.”
This makes the NATO presence in Libya illegal whatever the case is. In addition, Alan J. Kuperman writes in “False Pretense for War in Libya,” that Human Rights Watch reported that there has been no civilian bloodbath by Gaddafi. Such as in Misurata, with a population of 400,000 population, after two months of war only 257 people were killed, including combatants.

So if there was no bloodbath or authorization for invasion, why did NATO invade Libya? Again, Dan Lieberman writes that Gaddafi’s portrayal as a ruthless dictator by the mainstream media was used to arouse international sentiment and support for the NATO invasion of Libya.

Consider if Gaddafi was really the tyrant the media said he was. P. Ngigi Njoroge writes in “The Destruction of Libya and the Murder of Muammar Gaddafi. NATO’s Moral Defeat,” on September 1, 1969, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi overthrew the despotic Western-backed King Idris in a bloodless coup. Gaddafi then ordered the U.S. and Italian militaries to leave, nationalized Libya’s oil reserves, and closed down the Wheelus Air Force Base. To pacify tribal and ethnic tensions within Libya, Gaddafi established a revolutionary political and economic system based upon his Green Book.

Again, Dan Lieberman writes that the ideas expressed in the Green book were a bold far cry from the Western liberal democratic institutions of Europe and Communism of the Soviet Union. Gaddafi understood that a strong leadership was necessary to quickly carry out economic policies committed to help ordinary Libyan’s while weakening unwanted foreign meddling in a sovereign nation. For Libya, writes Dan Lieberman in “NATO Conquers Libya,” and Jean-paul Pougala in “Why the West Wants the Fall of Gaddafi,” adopting a Western style political structure would only inflame tribal and ethnic tensions because western democratic institutions encourage division and sectarianism through partisanship and corruption making progress extremely difficult.

Consider the freedoms Libyans have previously enjoyed under Gaddafi written in an article from Global Research.com titled “Sixteen Things Libya Will Never See Again…”

Gaddafi’s positive effects don’t stop there. Before Gaddafi only 25 percent of Libyans were literate. Today, the figure is 83 percent and 25 percent of Libyans have a university degree.

If Libyans cannot find the education or medical facilities they need, the government funds them to go abroad, for it is not only paid for, but they get a U.S.$2,300 per month for accommodation and car allowance.

Libya has no external debt and its reserves amounting to $150 billion are now frozen globally. If a Libyan is unable to get employment after graduation the state would pay the average salary of the profession, as if he or she is employed, until employment is found. A portion of every Libyan oil sale is credited directly to the bank accounts of all Libyan citizens. Gaddafi carried out the world’s largest irrigation project, known as the Great Manmade River project, to make clean water readily available throughout the desert country.

Sarah A. Topol writes “Libya’s Path from Desert to Modern Country, Complete with Ice Rink,” Libya’s nominal gross domestic product (GDP) rose from 16.7 billion dinars ($12.8 billion) in 1999 to 114 billion in 2008, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

The year after the US lifted sanctions, the countrys economy surged 10.3 percent in 2005. Foreign direct investment increased more than 50 percent from $1.5 billion in 2000 to $2.3 billion in 2007, according to the World Bank.

Internationally, according to Farouk Chotia of BBC in “What Does Gaddafi’s Death Mean for Africa,” Gaddafi supported many revolutionary movements such as the Sandinistas of Nicaragua and the African National Congress led by Nelson Mandela.

Mr. Mandela was so grateful for Gaddafi’s support in dismantling apartheid in South Africa, that when Bill Clinton visited newly independent South Africa and criticized Libya under Gaddafi, Nelson Mandela rebuked him using the following words: “We cannot join you in criticizing the people who helped us in our darkest hour.” Mr. Mandela would even name one of his grandson’s after Gaddafi!

If these facts are not enough to convince you to at least reevaluate the ridiculous narrative established by the mainstream media that Gaddafi was just a ruthless tyrant who did nothing for his people, then consider this: How long has the illegal NATO operation in Libya been going on for? Thirty days? Sixty days? Ninety days? No! Libyans have been resisting NATO for over two hundred and twenty days and counting or since the offical invasion by NATO began (NATO.com)!

If Gaddafi was as brutal as the mainstream media said he was, wouldn’t ordinary Libyans have cheered on the rebel fighters in overthrowing Gaddafi? Would not this operation have ended quickly and decisively months ago? The NATO mission in Kosovo lasted a measly seventy-eight days (NATO.com) thus, Libya is the longest military invasion since the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

In conclusion, my claim is that Libyans have resisted NATO not because they were afraid of Gaddafi’s retaliation otherwise, but because they are not willing to abdicate their hard-earned freedom’s to a dubious foreign presence that claims they are protecting Libyan’s.

Would a brutal dictator give so much to his people and to others? Why is NATO intervening in Libya and not in Yemen and Bahrain whose repressive governments have killed untold number of protestors?

Is the brutal killing of Gaddafi, his convoy, and his family without a fair trial taking “all necessary measures, notwithstanding paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011), to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory?”

This is not to say that Gaddafi was a saint, as forty-two years of control would entail keeping a lid on dissident and anti-state activity.

Nevertheless, as the vicious murder of Gaddafi and wholesale destruction of Libya by NATO sends shock waves all across Africa and the world, we should question the legitimacy and intentions of NATO and whether there was a non-humanitarian goal for their schizophrenic decision to invade Libya.

We, as citizens, should investigate the facts further and draw conclusions from our own efforts and not continue being spoon-fed by the mainstream media whose “reporting” on Libya has been deeply distorted.

Illustration by Lindsey Maldonado

The fact that more people are now familiar with the term “debt ceiling” than “capitalism” is indicative of the level of ignorance or indifference. Capitalism is not the “free market” — we have a not-so-invisible hand giving million dollar salaries, billion dollar subsidies, and trillion dollar bailouts to people that don’t deserve to be called human beings.

Capitalism is paper controlling labor. Paper in the form of $,  ¥, €, ? or debt in the form of a mortgage, car note, credit card debt, or student debt.

Because you weren’t born into this world with capital, you have to labor in a cubicle for someone like Paris Hilton who came into this world with a lot of paper. Just because they have wealth, doesn’t mean they are intelligent, capable, or important.

The way we treat animal life extends into the way we treat human life. Farm animals are treated simply as a commodity, something in which the business invests to get a financial output. Capitalism is about animalizing people; looking at the poor, illiterate, and uneducated masses as cheap labor. To view life as a financial investment and ignoring the intrinsic value of life is inhumane.

I believe that California State University Northridge is going to lead a revitalization of the Dissenting Academy.
When the Campus Radical is capable of having a civil debate based on factual evidence, the level of political thought and social dialogue will be raised.

Ankur Patel (M.S. Interdisciplinary 2012)

This was not a necessity for the recreational center to have been built. When a new business opens, no one is obligated to purchase from them, and an entrepreneur has to be careful when investing whether people will be interested or not. It is because of this that they have an innate interest in ensuring that their businesses offer what people want. Why should the recreational center not need to oblige this economic law?

If it has something for everyone, why does it need to force us to purchase its membership?

Mind you, this is not a matter exclusive to the recreational center. We are forced to support things we don’t support or want all the time by not only the university, but by the state as well. Why do we stand for it? It is our hard earned money, is it not? If it is our money, then have we not the right to use it as we wish?

Michelangelo Landgrave
Students for Liberty – CSUN Economics Major
Michelangelo.landgrave.461@my.csun.edu

Illustration by: Kristin Hugo / Opinions Editor

What better way to describe the purpose of Food Day than what was voiced by its sponsors, “we want Americans to cook real foods for their families again”.

Over the last thirty years, the American diet has transformed from one that involved the preparation of fresh applesauce by our grandmothers to one that is ordered from fast-food restaurants, highly processed and nutritionally empty. Convenience, instead of wholesomeness, has become our priority in foods.

The American diet, high in calories and poor in nutritional quality, coupled with a sedentary lifestyle, has exponentially increased the rate of obesity in Americans, contributing to innumerable chronic diseases and premature deaths.

Food Day, which takes place on October 24th, is dedicated to bring “real” back into the American diet, and return it to its wholesome and sustainable roots. It is a day where consumers and food producers join each other in celebrating foods that are safe for our health, and that of our farm workers, farm animals, and environment.

The history of Food Day dates back thirty-six years. In 1975, the first three national Food Days took place to raise awareness of food safety and nutritional issues.

Food Day has since contributed to major accomplishments nationwide, including food sodium and trans fat labeling, ban on food sulfite preservatives, funding for food safety inspections, fast food restaurant menu labeling, reduction and ban of soda and junk foods from public schools, and Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative.

This meaningful day is sponsored by the Center for Science in Public Interest (CSPI), a program that has been committed to promoting nutrition, health, and food safety since 1971.

Food Day is not only about food consumption, but also about changing food polices, making people aware of our nation’s food system and how they can become a part of the change process. Food Day brings people together and creates a forum where people can discuss healthy foods and how to access them.

Demonstrate your advocacy of Food Day by requesting congress to support Food Day’s following goals:

1. Reduce diet-related disease by promoting safe healthy foods
2. Support sustainable farms and limit subsidies to big agribusiness
3. Expand access to food and alleviate hunger
4. Protect the environment and animals by reforming factory farms
5. Promote health by curbing junk-food marketing to kids
6. Support fair conditions for food and farm workers

No venue is too small to participate in Food Day activities. In fact, churches, schools, and homes are encouraged to cook healthy meals on National Food Day. Recipes will be included in the Food Day recipe booklet provided by CSPI, free of charge. Visit http://foodday.org/newsroom/releases/food-day-cookbook-release.pdf to find a multitude of recipes. Delicious recipes such as Fennel Apple Soup and Hot and Sour Salmon with greens are available in the booklet.

The booklet is given not only as a tool, but also in hopes of inspiring more people to cook for themselves and their loved ones.

Students can participate by organizing pot lucks encouraging students to bring small dishes made from scratch to share with their peers.

There are a variety of events taking place on October 22-24th.

To learn more about Food Day and how you can celebrate this year’s event, visit: http://www.foodday.org/

Sincerely,

California State University Northridge

2011-2012 CSUN/NEVHC

WIC Diatetic Interns

http://www.csun.edu/hhd/fcs/di/

Several complaints seem to be about Bank of America ‘stealing’ the hard-earned money of its consumers, but let us carefully consider this. Bank of America does provide a service to its clients; it allows one to avoid carrying large amounts of cash on them for their daily transactions and to make purchases over catalogs and the Internet. A $5 monthly fee is hardly much compared to these services.

Do you disagree? Then simply close your account with Bank of America.

That is beautiful thing about the market, is it not? You are never forced to purchase any service or good. You can elect to be the patron for any company as you please.

If you wish to terminate relations with, you simply do so. A company can offer all the discounts in the world, but ultimately, it can’t force you to do business with them.

Compare this to our government, which does not allow you this luxury. You cannot simply choose to no longer be a citizen of the United States. You can nominally terminate your citizenship, but you’ll be forced to leave your home under the threat of violence.

Coincidentally, it is the state’s mandates that have forced Bank of America to charge the monthly fee. Previously, it would have been acquired through vendors, but someone in the state decided to ‘help’ and ended up shifting the burden to consumers directly.

Sincerely,
Michelangelo Landgrave
CSUN economics student

I have been puzzling lately over the abysmal condition of the restrooms on campus. It’s gotten so bad tat the Oviatt Library that, from top to bottom, there isn’t a usable men’s restroom in the place. Is this a visceral example of the results of our state’s savage budget cutting at the CSU? Is it that mend are even more disgustingly barbaric than I thought possible? Or is the truth somewhere in between?

The horrific condition of our bathrooms may be a signal of our incipient decline at CSUN, and maybe in our nation as a whole–to third world status. Perhaps you can assign a reporter to figure out how corners of our campus are becoming hellholes unfit for human use.

Paul Russel Laverack
Journalism Student

In response to your article “PETA Goes Too Far With Trick Porn Site” (13 Sep. 2011), I would like to give some insight into the motives behind PETA’s PETA.xxx website. PETA’s job is to draw attention to animal suffering, and we have found—and your article confirms—that people do pay more attention to our racier actions. As a result of our tactics, PETA representatives have been interviewed, and our ads have been run—for free—to audiences numbering into the millions. This means that people across America are hearing about how animals suffer in the industries that use them and that more people than ever before are taking a stand against such companies.

All the activists featured on PETA.xxx are adults dedicated to helping animals by drawing attention to how foxes are electrocuted and skinned by the millions for the fur industry; calves are torn away from their distraught mothers and slaughtered for the meat industry; elephants are beaten bloody and forced to live in chains year after year in circuses; rats, mice, rabbits, cats, dogs, primates, and other animals are confined to cages and mutilated in laboratories; and billions of animals suffer torture, maddening isolation, starvation, terror, and violent deaths for various human amusements and industries.

We must make our message impossible to forget, and launching a website with an .xxx domain name helps achieve that goal. For more information, please visit peta2.com, where you can also request a free vegetarian/vegan starter kit.

Sincerely,

Amelia Jensen
College Campaigns Assistant
peta2.com