On Monday, Oct. 7, rapper, entrepreneur and philanthropist Tip “T.I.” Harris visited Tech to speak about entrepreneurship, Tech’s community outreach and the relationship between technology and entertainment.

The fireside chat, as it was called, was organized by Magnus Egerstedt, Steve W. Caddick School Chair and professor in the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering. Egerstedt said he hoped the fireside chat would bring in people from the local community.

“As a public school, we have a public school mission, and that mission is to be a good partner in the local community, local neighborhood, and if I’m completely honest we haven’t always done as good job of reaching out,” elaborated Egerstedt in his introduction before bringing on the evening’s guests. “We really want to be a better and more inclusive partner in our community.”

In attendance from local neighborhoods were more than 100 Atlanta Public Schools (APS) students, with whom the speakers on stage actively engaged. The audience also included members from the Atlanta community and Tech students.

Joining T.I in the discussion was his longtime friend and business partner Vernell Woods. Woods is a Georgia Tech Stamps President’s Scholar and the first African-American Electrical Engineering alumnus at Georgia Tech. T.I has been an investor in many of Woods’ companies, including their newest mutual venture Moolah Mobile. Moolah was designed to allow under-privileged communities to pay off phone bills by engaging with advertisements on the Moolah app and receiving 10% of ad revenues towards their bill.

“If you have Metro PCS or Boost Mobile or Cricket … when you kind of refresh your screen and you might see a Ford ad or you might see other ads that pop up. When you have to look at these ads whether you go buy Ford or not, they are receiving funds for you watching that ad and we just said, well why would they not kind of cut you in on the business? Because they wouldn’t be able to receive the money from Ford if you weren’t paying attention to the ad so we just said we’re going to share ad revenue with everyone who downloads this app,” explained T.I.

Both Woods and T.I are passionate about helping the local Atlanta community, and the discussion revolved around community engagement and Tech in the latter half of the event.

“We are not always as effective as we could be when it comes to partnering with our immediate neighbors and communities, it’s true that every year we get a little better, our student population looks a little more like the student population in the city of Atlanta but there is room for improvement,” Egerstedt said before inviting his guest speakers to contribute their thoughts on how Tech can be more inclusive of its local community.

In response, T.I stated, “The problems that plague our community, I think they can all be traced back to the lack of three things: The lack of formidable education, lack of opportunities, and lack of exposure … We have that and an alignment with an entity like Georgia Tech that could solve all three of those things. Then I think we have no choice but to advance.”

Both Woods and T.I emphasized the importance of understanding when you need help and asking for it.

“For me personally, failure isn’t really an option,” Woods said of his experience. “When you set your mind to something, go for it, solve problems and just challenge everything you can and understand you need help … It’s a balance, you gotta have confidence to attack this problem around you that no one is looking at or no one really believes you can solve. You gotta have confidence in you but you gotta have an understanding of yourself. Here’s my limit, here’s where I need help, here’s where I need to lean on Georgia Tech, here’s where I need more advice.”

T.I. added that the reason for their success together was they each did the things they knew really well and could depend on the other to do the things they didn’t do well.

“Give 100% in one area, instead of 50% or 20% in areas you are not good at.”

Rainbow flags hung from flagpoles, windows, storefronts and homes this weekend to celebrate the 49th annual Atlanta Pride, one of the largest and longest-running LGBT pride celebrations in the country. Over 320,000 people were expected to attend 2019 Atlanta Pride.

As an integral and active part of the Atlanta community, many Tech students dressed in their brightest colors and made their way into Midtown to partake in the festivities. LGBT students and their allies alike marched in the parades and attended the myriad events.

“I participate in pride because it’s really cool to reflect on where I’ve come as a person as well as seeing how the community as a whole has evolved,” said Christian Sewell, fourth-year BA. “This is my fourth Atlanta Pride and my seventh pride [overall], and it’s so empowering to be able to be myself with so many others in the community in an environment where there shouldn’t be any retaliation.”

Festivities began at the kickoff party at the Georgia Aquarium on Friday, Oct. 11. Saturday featured three parades for specific groups within the LGBT community: the Annual Trans Pride March to promote visibility of the transgender community, the Annual Dyke March to honor and empower women and the first occurrence of the Annual Bi and Pan March to promote visibility of bisexual and pansexual communities.

Throughout Saturday and Sunday, Piedmont Park transformed into the headquarters for proud celebrations. A free festival through Saturday and Sunday featured Kesha and other popular artists, art exhibits, vendor booths, several performances and community discussions.

The main event, however, is the Pride Parade on Sunday. Tech students march every year, escorted by a Tech Trolley decked out in flags, streamers and other decorations. The parade “float” is jointly coordinated by Pride Alliance and the LGBTQIA Resource Center.

“There are a few reasons we have the trolley,” said William Harrer, fifth year EE and VP of Pride Alliance. “One is that it’s big, it’s obviously Georgia Tech and it’s easy to identify. But two, it’s accessible. If someone can’ walk in the parade, they can sit on it.”

“This year my partner and I had the privilege of watching the Tech Trolley roll by from atop the Fox Theatre,” said Aaron Fowler, Director of Transportation. “Our Trolley has always been such a joyful and beloved expression of the Georgia Tech identity, and I was so grateful we were able to serve as a representative for our Institute’s inclusivity in the Pride Parade.”

The trolley is surrounded by dozens of students dancing, cheering and waving flags – everything from the rainbow gay pride flag, the blue and pink transgender awareness flag and the gold Tech flag. Harrer said that anyone and everyone in the Tech community is always welcome to walk alongside them. This year, Pride Alliance was joined by Grad Pride, Tech’s Pride Employee Resource Group and even the roller derby club.

“I know a lot of people love it, especially just because it’s a fun time. You can see friends in the crowd and run up and hug them. Everyone is cheering you on,” said Harrer. “It’s really cute to watch people whose first pride it is. It’s so wholesome, and you can just see [the excitement] in their eyes.”

For Pride Alliance, the parade is the culmination of Coming Out Week.

The week is full of celebratory events such as the Big Gay Brunch, several informative panels and Pridefest.

The spirit of the weekend is largely light and celebratory, but Atlanta Pride has more somber origins. Atlanta Pride was first held in 1970, a year after the Stonewall Riots in which police violently clashed with gay-rights protestors after raiding a known gay nightclub. Pride festivals, including Atlanta’s, take time to remember those that were lost to the LGBT-rights fight. This year’s festival also included a memorial to those the Atlanta community lost to AIDS. Much has changed since 1970, but LGBT rights remain a contentious topic in American politics.

Navigating the professional world while belonging to the LGBTQIA community can be a difficult process. Figuring out how to come out in a workplace context, dealing with co workers that toe the line of ignorance and discrimination and seeking out LGBTQIA friendly corporate companies all pose an extra challenge when it comes to finding your ideal career. The “My Queer Career Panel” hosted by Scheller Pride on Sept. 25th strived to provide advice on those unfavorable situations and more. 

The panel consisted of the following three members of the LGBTQIA community who attended or currently attend Tech: Chad Slieper, Director of the Law, Science, and Technology minor program and PUBP graduate, Kantwon Rogers, a first-year CS PhD candidate and Laura Hall, a graduate of the MBA program who now works in digital marketing and communications. 

The forum was moderated by Peter Severa, who serves as the director of MBA Student Engagement at Tech. Severa started off with a question that asked the panelists to consider how Tech has transformed in terms of LGBT awareness on campus. 

Rogers, who has studied at Tech for the past 8 years and is currently working as an RA mentioned the increase in gender inclusive and gender neutral spaces on campus, as well as the introduction of gender inclusive housing. 

“The housing department has started gender inclusive housing. It’s not widespread just yet but they started this program where they offer rooms to people based off of their gender identity as opposed to their sex. I think there is a push for more gender inclusive spaces across campus,” said Rogers. 

The conversation then turned toward the professional world and concerns about putting LGBTQIA related activities and research on your resume. 

“I say, just own it, put it on your resume: why would you want to work somewhere that has a problem with you supporting LGBT causes?” Hall asked. 

Slieper added that the resume process is also an opportunity for you to screen potential companies and their tolerance. 

“It’s not just them screening you, but it’s also a way for you to make sure this is a company that is going to be okay with your identity,” said Slieper. 

The panel went on to discuss more in depth issues including the caution that has to be taken when studying and traveling abroad, the issue of sexual racism in the LGBTQIA dating community and how to deal with conflicts with coworkers who make assumptions based on your sexuality. The members all stressed the importance of voicing concerns. 

“Just remember that it’s not all about you. It’s not just that you’re feeling personally offended and you want to go to HR. It’s making sure that that doesn’t happen to other people too” said Slieper. 

The average college student most likely has a limited relationship with Judy Garland (“The Wizard of Oz,” “Meet Me in St. Louis,” “A Star Is Born”), although her work and music still permeates the culture today. After all, her death in 1969 precedes the births of most college-aged students by some 25-30 years. To those in the generation that was actually alive during Garland’s career, one cannot understate how wildly beloved the legendary performer was.

As such, the new biopic “Judy” proves a wonderful glimpse into the life and career of a long-lost American icon, despite often presenting an often flawed, cheesy representation. Perhaps the most valuable feat of this film, however, is the remarkable, transformative performance from Renée Zellweger (“Chicago,” “Cold Mountain”) in the lead role.

Where films in the history and biography genres have a propensity to span decades of events and relationships needlessly, “Judy” dances around these beats with grace. From director Rupert Goold (“True Story”) and writer Tom Edge (“The Crown”), the play-to-screen adaptation portrays the actress and singer in two timelines: one on the cusp of stardom, and another just months before her untimely death at the age of 47 — with the latter taking precedence. The structure allows for allusions to Garland’s work, without compromising the film’s quality with egregious fan-service and without sacrificing the insights of critical character development.

During the earlier timeline, the young, wide-eyed Judy — played by relative newcomer Darci Shaw “The Bay” — is subjected to abusive, controlling behavior from entertainment executives. Nothing about her warrants nor justifies the criticism she receives, but the actress endures nonetheless because of her career aspirations. About three decades later, an alcohol and drug-dependent Judy struggles to maintain her family’s stability while her substance-abuse issues torpedo her career and personal finances.

Sometimes, playing with multiple timelines leads a story toward an unfocused mess. Here, however, the script and direction navigate these deftly, using each one to complement the other. Where substance-abuse on the screen often proves difficult to endure for viewers, those representations in “Judy” are offset by her troubled upbringing, thereby inducing empathy rather than frustration.

Moreover, the singer’s earnest ambition rationalizes why she continues to perform despite the problems that show business brings her. This approach highlights the woman behind the work, as opposed to rapid-firing the greatest hits like many other biopics do.

Critical to unlocking the magic of Judy Garland and the effectiveness of the film is Renée Zellweger. Discussing an actor’s transformation generally leans toward cliché, but there may not be a better description for the extent of Zellweger’s greatness in this movie. The one-time Oscar-winning actress captures the frustrations and demons of the late-stage star without losing her characteristic class and charisma.

Despite the terrific representation of Judy Garland, however, “Judy” is a far from perfect film. The visual stylizations rarely turn heads. Every character other than Zellweger’s Judy is more caricature of plot function than completely realized human being. Some scenes — most often those in which Judy is subjected to criticism — feel so forcefully rendered that they become unrealistic despite the fact that they did, indeed, happen in reality. Most alarming and abrasive of all, though, is the final scene that oozes with corniness to such a degree that it very nearly ruins the entire film retroactively.

Yet the flaws, although difficult to endure in the short-term, prove inconsequential to one’s lasting takeaways from the biopic. What “Judy” does well is exactly what Goold and Edge sought. The biographical film successfully develops insight into the tumultuous life of its titular character and, likewise, gives one pause before exercising judgment toward troubled stars.

More importantly, however, “Judy” connects a bygone artist to younger generations, allowing them to share in the goosebump-inducing magic when she wistfully sings, “Somewhere over the rainbow.”

Korean pop phenomenon Twice is widely known as the nation’s girl group for their charming, girly concepts, with some worldwide hits including “TT,” “Cheer Up,” “Fancy” and more, but the “cute” title that they bear doesn’t diminish these nine girls to hair bounces and pleated skirts.

The name Twice itself represents the desire to touch people’s hearts twice: once with the eyes and once with the ears. The members have always taken this goal seriously, aiming not only to capture an international audience’s heart, but also to inspire girls of all ages and instill happiness and connection with their fans.

The group’s newest album, however, directs those characteristic feel good vibes not only towards their listeners worldwide but also toward each other. With a title like “Feel Special,” it should come as no surprise that the album’s high spirited vibes exude contagiously from start to finish. Each song offers lively melodies and bright chords true to the group’s traditionally charming sound while simultaneously exhibiting experimentation with more artistic creativity and diversity, creating a slightly more mature vibe than that of most of Twice’s previous releases.

Fans should not be fooled, though, by those bright sounds and catchy beats. While the album does sing promises of everything from friendship to true love to empowerment, the album’s themes parallel that of its sound: true to Twice’s defining spunky lyricism with a slight leaning towards more mature themes.

Sprinkled with self-produced tracks, the album has some run-ins with mature topics such as a love confused with hate in the track Love Foolish, and even titular Feel Special has some darker motifs masked by an overall upbeat tone. The song is not, as one may assume based on the tune alone, about a girl who feels special because of some man’s presence; rather, it follows the journey of a girl feeling helpless and torn down by a cruel society. Unsurprisingly, though, the song does not end on such a pessimistic note. The song’s true meaning lies within the nine girls’ abilities to pick each other up when everything else has them down, as well as the coinciding desire to make their fans “feel special” and vice versa.

Yes, the wholesome turnaround of the lyrics reflects the optimistic bliss that Twice portrays in Korea and around the world, but the song’s deeper core message of uplifting friendship in the face of extreme adversity is a sign of thematic maturation, and that theme itself is certainly not something to be ignored.

Alongside their label, JYP Entertainment, the group exhibits the pathway for one of the smoothest concept transitions to date, maintaining the cute yet elegant hybrid that defines the girls’ classic image while also approaching something more mature and chic.

With a lavishly aesthetisized music video and performances ripe with flowy silk and classy sequins to match, there is no doubt that there are signs of serious change on the horizon for the girl group icons, but the group and company are still careful to reassure fans who are happy with the group’s traditional image. The group constantly reminds fans of their commitment to upholding their long-standing title as the nation’s girl group. It is no surprise, then, that this good girls gone classy album has already soared to the top of Korean charts and snuck its way onto many an international ranking as well.

A warm hearted message with cheerful beats to match, dazzling visuals, and refreshing but classic styling makes the comeback a near perfect fit for everyone from the wildest of K-Pop fans to the most clueless of neophytes.

Such a perfect balance of artist creativity and genre loyalty proves maturity on the part of these nine girls, whose names will only ring louder and louder with every coming release. Already well over 70 million views, the “Feel Special” video has proven to be one of the most popular releases from the group to date, and fans should look to it for some inspiration this midterm season.

Still, fans should go beyond simply adding “Feel Special” to their playlist and listen to the full album for a real hint at what these nine girls are all about. Potential listeners be warned, however: anybody who’s listened to the new release is bound to have at least a few Twice melodies stuck in their head for weeks.

On Sept. 20, Atlanta’s tattooed masses filed into Variety Playhouse in Little Five Points, shuffled to the bar for 20 ounce cans of Yuengling, Miller Lite and Coors, and eventually found their way to a comfortable spot to wait for the night’s entertainment to emerge from backstage.

The entertainment for the night was Whitney, a Chicago-based indie-folk outfit that earned extensive praise from critics with the release of their 2016 debut album “Light Upon the Lake.” The group, which is on tour in support of its sophomore album “Forever Turned Around” — released in late August — has carved a niche out of the crowded alternative landscape with a uniquely pleasant, intoxicating sound complemented by raw, sincere and uncomplicated vocals.

At first listen, Whitney’s sound does not actually stand out from the rest as being particularly distinctive. Sure, vocalist Julien Ehrlich’s voice is noteworthy for its smoothness, but the group does not really differentiate itself with its arrangements or production. In fact, just what it is that gives Whitney’s sound such a unique quality is quite difficult to pin down. In fact, it may just be that Whitney does exactly what every other indie-folk group does, they just do it better.

The group has cited Allen Toussaint and Levon Helm as inspirations, and the influence shows. Many Whitney songs would feel at home on “The Last Waltz” — the Band’s legendary live album — if it were not for Ehrlich’s soft, thoroughly un-Levon Helm-ish vocals. Whitney is certainly not the first indie-folk band to try to channel the Band, but no one has yet done it with quite the same sincerity which Whitney brings to the table. The secret may just be the dramatic difference between Ehrlich’s vocal style and Levon Helm’s signature gruff southern accent; Helm’s voice is so distinctive that imitations often feel more like caricature than homage.

Whether already a fan of the group or not, it is difficult to imagine anyone being disappointed by a Whitney concert. For those familiar with “Light Upon the Lake,” last month’s show was an opportunity to sing along to some beloved tracks. Still, for those not already acquainted with the group, the show provided a relaxed opportunity to enjoy some new music on a Friday night. In fact, while the vast majority of the attendees seemed to be fans — despite all of the critical success, Whitney has not entirely broken into the mainstream yet — many were not familiar enough with the songs on “Forever Turned Around” to sing along. Still, there was no drop in energy or audience engagement during these tracks.

Sept. 20’s show was listed to begin at 7 p.m., but by the time an opening act and sound checks were complete, and the band ambled onto the stage — clutching their own Miller Lites — it was well past 9 p.m.

The group opened with “Polly,” the penultimate track of “Light Upon the Lake.” The song begins deliberately, with soft piano and Ehrlich crooning to a past lover. For this song, the stage at Variety Playhouse was awash in blue light. Eventually, the song breaks out into a series of crescendos, smooth and intimate yet, at the same time, bold and intense. The piano is joined by a slide guitar, drums and, most striking of all, a trumpet. This building structure, and the song’s loud, almost triumphant ending give it an optimistic sound which is juxtaposed with Ehrlich’s sweet but melancholic lyrics. This juxtaposition is a common thread through Whitney’s music, and opening the show with “Polly” was an excellent way of setting the tone for the night.

The group followed this opening with “No Matter Where We Go,” a much faster-paced song which built nicely on the momentum set up by the end of “Polly.” The track, which comes in the middle of the group’s debut album, is unique among Whitney’s repertoire in that its lyrics are sung in the future tense. This gives it a much more optimistic tone than any of their other songs, and the positive energy it brought could be felt both in the audience and on stage.

After “No Matter Where We Go,” the band launched into “Giving Up,” one of the singles from the new album “Forever Turned Around.” The track begins with a slow, jazzy jam, driven by simple drums, cascading piano and light guitar playing. Quickly, Ehrlich’s vocals join the party. In this case, the laid-back sound of the music is juxtaposed with a certain anxiety in the lyrics. Ehrlich sings about waiting for the sun to come up, wondering when — or if — his lover will return to him. Ehrlich’s performance allowed the audience to feel a sense of insecure impatience while the relaxed sound kept the party going. While fewer members of the audience sung along — as with most of the tracks from the new album — there was actually a greater sense of engagement with “Giving Up” than with nearly any of the other tracks. In many ways, this was the emotional climax of the set.

Emotions may have peaked with “Giving Up,” but the set as a whole certainly did not. The energy of the audience continued to build as Whitney played hit after hit from “Light Upon the Lake,” from a foot-tapping rendition of “Golden Days” to a slow, reflective, Allen Toussaint-esque performance of the titular track.

Just as the energy felt ready to break, the band paused, and Ehrlich explained to the crowd that after the next song they would be taking a short break then returning to play a few more songs as an “encore” — it is in vogue these days for artists to rebel against the stiff, awkward tradition of leaving the stage fully expecting to return at the urging of a not-quite-satisfied audience.

The set ended with a fitting pairing of “No Woman,” easily the biggest hit off of “Light Upon the Lake” — and Whitney’s career so far — and “Valleys,” one of the better tracks off of “Forever Turned Around.” “No Woman” is a slow song driven by an interesting juxtaposition between the polished sounds of an electric slide guitar and Ehrlich’s smooth vocals, and the much rawer sounds of an acoustic guitar and, infrequently but quite prominently, loud trumpet flourishes. The song, which is already a masterpiece in recorded form, is even more beautiful live.

If there was a disappointment in Whitney’s performance on Sept. 20, it was the band’s decision not to play their version of “Southern Nights,” the 1975 classic penned and originally recorded by Allen Toussaint, though probably most famous for a 1977 recording by Glen Campbell. Whitney’s cover was included in a release of the demos from “Light Upon the Lake” and has become one of the group’s more popular tracks. While its inclusion would have improved the show, the performance does just fine without it.

Another aspect of Whitney’s performance that deserves praise is Ehrlich’s comfort interacting with the audience. The vocalist engaged well with fans throughout the set, introducing songs and often sharing little quips about various tracks. This type of interaction is obviously nothing new, but Ehrlich’s sincerity was uniquely good at putting the audience at ease and making the show feel informal and relaxed, like much of Whitney’s music.

This attentiveness to and honesty with the audience also helps to make up for what might be described as a lack of on-stage energy from the group — one should not go to a Whitney concert expecting head-banging or multiple Mick Jagger-style outfit changes.

Whitney is by far one of the best groups to come out of the crowded indie-folk scene to date, and the biggest surprise about the group’s young career is that they have not become more popular than they already are. Anybody with any interest in music at all should check them out immediately, whether by going to a show or listening to their albums.

Tech basketball received backbreaking news last week as the NCAA announced a series of sanctions against the program for violations of NCAA policy from the past two years. The sanctions included a post-season ban for the upcoming 2019-2020 season, a reduction in scholarships and probation for the program for the next five years.

The infractions stem from two incidents from 2017. In one incident, a highly-touted recruit under the supervision of assistant coach Darryl LaBarrie, Wendell Carter Jr., was given $300 for use at a strip club by a booster of the program, later revealed to be former Tech basketball standout Jarrett Jack, violating NCAA guidelines on compensating athletes during visits. LaBarrie later lied to investigators regarding the incident and encouraged a Tech player to lie as well, according to the NCAA’s incident report.

In another incident, Ron Bell — at the time a close friend of Tech head coach Josh Pastner — flew two Tech basketball players to his home in Arizona and paid for gifts and groceries for the players, again, violating NCAA guidelines. Bell later reported his actions to the NCAA, evidently as a means of revenge against Pastner whom Bell felt had betrayed him as a friend. Bell’s girlfriend would later accuse Pastner of sexual assault, but charges have been brought against the couple for fraud and lying to law enforcement stemming from the allegations. Bell is also currently involved in numerous civil and criminal suits relating to his actions. When the NCAA initially attempted to investigate Bell’s allegations, they ruled that he was too dangerous to interview in person. The NCAA cleared Pastner of wrongdoing in both incidents.

Tech claimed to have self-reported both violations as soon as they were discovered, in addition to suspending athletes involved in the incidents and separating with LaBarrie upon discovering his actions.

Tech also complied with the NCAA’s investigation and imposed their own penalties upon the program, but the NCAA cited Tech’s history of major violations as well as the severity of the above violations as aggravating factors in their decision to lay down such harsh penalties for the program.

The move comes as the NCAA has sought to crack down even more upon programs in violation of NCAA rules.

Following a national corruption scandal that implicated some of the biggest programs in men’s college basketball — schools like Arizona, Louisville and Kentucky — the NCAA has begun building up greater measures for investigating and punishing non-compliance and corruption, including the creation of a commission headed by former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice to ensure compliance by member schools.

The measures were viewed by some members of the media as overly harsh, a message sent by the NCAA to other programs to resolve compliance issues or face serious penalties. Jeff Goodman, an analyst for sports site Stadium, called Tech’s infractions “small potatoes” compared to the levied penalties on Twitter, noting that the “NCAA [is] swinging a big stick these days.” For Tech, a rebuilding program struggling with both attracting talent and keeping resources, the loss of a scholarship as well as a reduction in budget further harm and already hurting NCAA program that has yet to find its feet in the most competitive basketball conference in all of college athletics.

Tech athletics agreed that the measures went too far. In a statement, Tech director of athletics Todd Stansbury said that “[We] are disappointed with the severity of the penalties imposed, some of which will have a direct and unfair impact on current student-athletes,” and promised that Tech would be “exploring [their] options and giving serious consideration on whether to appeal some aspects of the decision.”

When the conversation of making post-secondary education in the United States tuition free comes up, it generally revolves around young students moving directly from high school to college before entering the workplace.

To be clear, the exorbitant cost of college in this country prevents many bright young minds from reaching their full potential, and this barrier ought to be eradicated; furthermore, as candidate Pete Buttigieg pointed out in the first Democratic debate earlier this year, we need to make life affordable for people who choose not to go to college.

However, an often overlooked facet of the push for free postsecondary education is the potential for adults to go back to school.

Take the energy sector, for example. Scientific consensus points in part to the use of fossil fuels and other nonrenewable resources as major sources of air pollution and global climate change.

There are pushes all around the world to reduce emissions and reach a state of carbon neutrality to prevent environmental catastrophe. This means that old energy businesses like oil and coal will be phased out in favor of renewable resources like solar and wind, and other alternative sources like nuclear. Working in these fields necessitates specialized education almost exclusively limited to universities

Unfortunately, this presents a problem for workers suddenly without jobs due to their industry becoming obsolete. Many areas in Appalachia have cultural roots in coal mining, and this will be a genuine disruption to people’s way of life.

Considering the rampant poverty already present in the region, this is a major upcoming problem.

Imagine what tuition-free college could do for workers displaced by industry shifts. Coal miners and their families could potentially go to school and learn new skills without having to take on debt just to fund that education. They could potentially create new businesses and bring economic growth to their region, or they could take their knowledge elsewhere to begin a new job.

Of course, this doesn’t just apply to coal miners. With tuition-free college, adults could train for new jobs while continuing to work their old ones, or even pick up part-time work without having to put it all towards school. This could easily expand the pool of nurses and other medical workers who were able to transfer to that field later in life, positions consistently needed in hospitals and smaller practices around the country.

It could also allow for workers to convert their expertise in their fields into education and begin training the next generation for their careers. This isn’t just a pipe dream, by the way. The state of Tennessee already has Tennessee Promise, a scholarship that guarantees two years of tuition-free community college for in-state students just out of high school, and Tennessee Reconnect, a program designed to help adults returning or beginning college.

Granted, these aren’t the same as what’s being argued for here, but they represent important facets of such an idea. New Mexico’s governor recently introduced legislation to make all college tuition-free for in-state students, regardless of age. It’s happening slowly, but state governments are waking up to the potential economic benefits of tuition-free college.

This is not to say that tuition-free education doesn’t have criticisms or potential drawbacks. Economists point out that tuition isn’t the only major college expense, and it may not be enough to help low-income students achieve higher education. In the same vein, upper class students may disproportionately benefit from tuition-free college because they can afford books, housing and organiation dues.

These are entirely true, and they are obstacles that need to be surmounted, but eliminating tuition from the equation is the first step towards affordability that so many students need to live productive lives after school.

In our modern world, higher education is becoming more and more necessary for finding work, and many people who could contribute economically and socially but cannot afford to keep going to school need this financial barrier gone, especially adult students who want to potentially change their lives. Education is a human right, and it ought to be shared with everyone.

On Sept. 26, 2018, off-duty police officer Amber Guyger stepped into a room that she allegedly thought was her apartment, and fatally shot what she allegedly thought was an intruder.

In reality, she had just stepped into her neighbor’s apartment and fatally shot the resident, Botham Jean, who was simply watching television on his couch.

Just this week, Guyger was convicted of murder for the shooting but recieved a laughably light sentence of just ten years in prison. This tragic incident reminds us that there still remains a spectre looming over the judicial system, that of racial disparity with regards to “justified shootings.”

In trying Guyger, who is white, for the shooting of Jean, who is black, the presiding judge, Tammy Kemp allowed the jury to consider Texas’ “castle doctrine”— a law that permits the use of deadly force by any person so long as they are within their residence, or “castle” — in providing a verdict. Other states have similar doctrines, generally known as “stand your ground” laws.

According to Fort Worth law firm Barnett, Howard & Williams, under the law, a person can claim self-defense in using deadly force if they believe someone to be trespassing or breaking in.

The specifics of the law are still up to the deliberations of the jury — and yet, there remains serious bias in terms of who is exonerated by “stand your ground” and “castle doctrine” laws.

A 2015 study from Washington University found that in cases in Florida where “Stand Your Ground” doctrine was cited in legal proceedings, the shooter was half was twice as likely to be convicted if the victim was white as opposed to if the victim was non-white. In other words, the use of deadly force was found to be justified more frequently if the victim was not white.

This is just a brick in building an entire case of our legal system’s bias against persons of color in America. There are well documented racial disparities in arrest rates, deployments of lethal force and conviction rates. Arguably, this phenomenon represents just one aspect of a much larger issue facing the country.

But simultaneously, the disparity in the application of “stand your ground” doctrine is troubling simply in its nature: the American legal system protects you from the consequences of extrajudicial violence better so long as you have victimized a person of color.

Even mass-media reinforces these behaviors, casting victims of police violence who are persons of color as “thugs,” as though their behavior or manner of dress somehow justifies the action.

Consider the Trayvon Martin shooting, where the shooter’s attorneys publicly released Martin’s texts and photos from his phone in an attempt to portray him as some sort of gang member, demonstrating how Martin had texted others about marijuana usage and references to guns.

Martin’s purported drug usage and talk of guns had nothing to do with the fact that he had been gunned down in cold blood while unarmed, yet media ran with the texts as though they were some justification for what transpired.

That Guyger recieved such a light sentence for the killing of an unarmed black man in his own residence demonstrates the impact of “castle doctrine”. This is not just one case. There are numerous cases of far lesser notoriety where these legal principles are applied selectively — but the Guyger case presents the opportunity to begin again a national discussion regarding a legal system designed to protect its most privileged offenders.

The disparities in stand-your-ground law convictions represent merely a symptom of a fundamentally and intrinsically unjust legal system, and yet the symptom alone presents a compelling argument for dismantling the structure of American justice as it stands.

The Wreck the Vote Debate is an event sponsored by SGA and the Nu Mu Chapter of Alpha Phi Alpha inc. during the annual week-long event, Wreck The Vote. The goal for this initiative is to encourage students to register to vote and to be politically active.

The debate was set up in a format of two rounds, one pertaining to national issues and the other pertaining to state issues. During each round, there were three prompts on which each of four student organizations were allowed to state their stance. These organizations included College Democrats (CD), College Republicans (CR), Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) and Young Democratic Socialists of America (YDSA). After each group made their arguments, an eight minute rebuttal period began where any team could take the floor to dispute the other groups’ claims. Two fact-checkers were on sight in case any debaters wanted to call out another team for inaccuracies, as well as two moderators to ensure the event ran smoothly.

Below is a summary of the topics covered during the Wreck the Vote Debate.

Major Players

Moderators: Shekinah Hall & Samuel Elis
College Republicans (CR): Jacob Chambers & Sidharth Eleswarpu
Young Americans for Liberty (YAL): Ethan Offenbacher & Andrew Babbitt
College Democrats (CD): Abhishek Khandal & Nishat Firoj
Young Democratic Socialists of America (YDSA): Nikhil Pailoor & Ariella Ventura

Healthcare

College Democrats showed overwhelming support for Medicare for all, but mentioned a government aided transition from private healthcare to a public healthcare system. College Republicans argued in favor of health savings accounts, meaning that, instead of paying premiums for health insurance, a person would pay into a savings account specifically reserved for medical expenses. The idea revolves around keeping money in Americans’ pockets, and YAL had similar thoughts. The latter encouraged fostering a c ompetitive healthcare market in addition to the use of health savings accounts. YDSA, like CD, supported medicare for all with no room for negotiation.

Gun Control

CR started their statements with wholehearted support of a mental health-based approach to gun control and were strongly in favor of red flag laws. YAL also supported mental health-based approach and red flag laws, stating, however, that the importance of gun control issues was “somewhat exaggerated.”

YDSA followed their statements with denouncing white supremacy, then argued for proper gun registration. The representatives also brought up instances of weapons from the U.S. being smuggled across the border into South America for the purpose of encouraging lawful gun ownership and government-mandated weapon registration.

“Down south of the border there is a drug war that has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives,” Piloor said. “The cartels responsible for much of this get their most powerful weapons through legal sales in the U.S. that are then taken to the black market, smuggled across the border and used to escalate this kind of violence. This is something that the gun industry has profited on and there is a clear amount of data that shows that this originated from the end of the assault weapons ban.”

CD supported banning AR-15s outright, and spoke on the possible benefits of gun buyback programs. In regards to ignoring certain statistics that could potentially misrepresent U.S. gun fatality rates, Khandal said, “We can take statistics and warp them to make ourselves look comparable, but being comparable is not good enough.”

Immigration

All organizations believed that there should be a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants currently in this country.

YAL and CR supported securing borders, CR calling for more physical and digital security. They brought up a program called E-Werify, a web-based system able to confirm the employment eligibility of any worker in the United States. Babbitt said, “A lot of these [immigration] initiatives don’t make sense because it is unfeasible to move all these people back to their countries of origin and also immoral. What we need to be doing is created a way for them [immigrants] to legally integrate into society and we should also be securing the border so we don’t have to repeat this every ten to fifteen years. This is a two-pronged approach: we need to create a pathway for illegal immigrants that are already here to become legal residents and we need to limit as much as possible the influx of illegal immigrants into the United States.”

YDSA responded in favor of banning ICE. CD discouraged the banning of ICE altogether because of the group’s other essential duties, but spoke against the current actions of the group. CD also called for the immediate legalization of immigrants and for DACA to be reinstated.

A sudden comment from an audience member accused members of CD of “hate speech” when they brought up white privilege as it pertains to advantage in American society. The moderator quickly shut down the commentator, as audience participation was not allowed during the event.

Intermission

During the intermission the Technique spoke to two of the participating debaters. Ventura, spoke about her family’s personal experiences of persecution in Chile.

“Politics is personal,” she said, in hopes to demonstrate the severity of the immigration crisis through her own story.

Khandal responded to the hate speech accusation. “I think it’s an overgeneralization, and rather ignorant, of the fact of what’s going on in this country. Just to reiterate, in the justice system white people often receive less severe sentences, they are more likely able to afford lawyers, and often their cases get thrown out. It’s not against white people — it’s about pointing out that there are problems with the current justice system we have and that people of color are unfairly targeted.”

Religious Freedom

To preface the question, the moderators brought up the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Each debater agreed that the bill was unnecessary, as religious freedom is already protected under the first amendment. During the rebuttal period, a debate ensued over whether it is acceptable to refuse a customer on the basis of religious belief in reference to the case of a Christian woman refusing to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple on the basis of religious belief.

YDSA stated that the bill promoted discrimination and brought up that LGBTQ+ people are an unprotected minority group in the state of Georgia. The group also argued against refusing to make a “gay wedding cake.”

“People have been denied essential services because of their identities. Back during the days of segregation, there were world-renowned jazz musicians that died because they were injured, they went to a hospital, and the hospital didn’t serve black people. In theory, you could use boycotts or really targeted campaigns to stop it but in practice, we haven’t really seen that work which is why I think we should have protections enshrined in law,” Pailoor said. He then called for a fact check on the status of legal protections of LGTBQIA people in the state of Georgia. Currently, there are none.

YD argued that the bill promoted homophobia and, similar to YDSA, was strongly opposed to refusing services on religious belief. CR chose to side with Governor Deal and claimed the bill was unnecessary. The group was in favor of a person or business’ right to refuse a customer based on religious belief with the “gay wedding cake” as the example. YAL was also against the bill, and was in favor of a person or business’ right to refuse a “customized good” as opposed to an essential good.

Private Prisons

All groups were against private prisons because of their cost-ineffectiveness and “immoral” nature. A debate broke out over whether or not prison labor is akin to modern-day slave labor. YDSA and CD argued that it was, as they are paid pennies on the dollar, and in one state, not at all. CR and YAL claimed that prison labor was not the same as the atrocities of slavery. While there was a general consensus on all parties being against private prisons, no consensus was reached over the morality of prison labor.

The Heartbeat Bill

The topic of abortion incited heated debate over, not only whether or not it should be legal, but when exactly life begins. CR stated abortion is morally wrong and life begins at conception.

“The Democratic Party’s position on abortion is that abortion should be quote ‘Safe, Legal, and Rare.’ Why rare?” Eleswarpu asked. “If abortion isn’t morally wrong why should it be rare? That statement acknowledges that abortion is not some regular healthcare procedure and acknowledges that the living thing is an unborn child that has value.”

YAL argued that life begins at conception and abortion should be totally illegal. YAL also declared that Roe vs. Wade should be overturned and the decision of whether or not abortion should be legal should fall on the responsibility of state governments.

YDSA replied that abstinence-only sex education Georgia needs to end, and that proper sex education to be a requirement. The group brought up that abortion is a woman’s choice and should, therefore, be legal and covered by Medicare for all.

CD responded that Georgians need safe-sex education and concluded that abortion should be legal.

Post-debate

The Technique touched base with moderator Shekinah Hall (undergrad PUBP). “[I] think the debate went really well. We definitely touched on some controversial issues, in that people had different opinions on social issues and economic issues … We wanted to do that because college is a time to really explore our differences in a respectful way, and understand where the opposite side is coming from. We were glad to provide a platform for everyone’s ideas and to let people come and share.”
Registration to vote in Georgia closes on Oct 7. Readers can find a blank voter registration form on page nine in the Life section.

Editor’s Note:
An earlier version of this story did not include correct sponsorship information for the Wreck the Vote debate. The article has since been corrected.