Microaggressions are daily verbal, behavioral, or humiliation, that conveys hostile and derogatory insults towards minorities. Many perpetrators make statements that are racist without them knowing it. It’s due to the lack of education and awareness of other cultures that they feel the need to ask racial questions or comments. I will take a look at microaggressions at an institutional level, specifically the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Due to these understatements, many POC feel aggravated, oppressed, alienated, and unsafe on campus. Given the long history of white supremacy and exiling out minorities, these stereotypical ideas still exist in the minds of people today. Microaggressions occur because of insufficiency of education of minorities’ history and culture.
Recently, I have been listening to relationship problems from friends and family. I’ve noticed that during these situations active listening doesn’t take place, which escalates the issue further and typically ends messy or bad. I’m sure everyone has experienced these types of situations before, which I believe stems off of miscommunication, poor communication, and not actively listening. There can be many reasons and situations, but it all really comes down to these two important tools. These two tools are the basis of solving problems, so the situation won’t end with bitter feelings towards each other.
International climate change negotiations may appear fruitless and frustrating, but there is hope for action in the state of Wisconsin following the recent COP25 and the first meeting of Governor Evers’ Task Force on Climate Change. It is important to see state and local governments stand up for climate action despite the federal government’s clear disengagement during this critical time.
Sonia Suter of The Baltimore Sun posits that political fallout from recent state laws banning abortions as early as six weeks into pregnancy will result in a Supreme Court that is reluctant to consider appeals to overturn lower courts' decisions that find them unconstitutional — much less reconsider Roe v. Wade.
Patricia Murphy, from CQ Roll Call, outlines five reasons that Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders who were in office when House Republicans voted to impeach Clinton in 1998 are hesitant to begin proceedings against Donald Trump.
Francis Wilkinson of Bloomberg News writes that Democrats can't win impeachment — or the 2020 election — without first winning the war for truth. That, she says, will take consistent, methodical highlighting of Trump's ethical and policy failures. And Mueller's testimony before Congress.
Even if impeachment proceedings are brought against Trump in the House of Representatives, writes Scott Martelle, the Senate is unlikely to convict him, which he says would end up empowering the president. The best way to get rid of Trump, he says, is to vote him out of office in 2020.
Trudy Rubin of The Philadelphia Inquirer is struck by how quickly the fire that severely damaged the Notre Dame Cathedral in France has ignited "dueling narratives" regarding the future of the country and the European continent.