It is time for the UC Davis administration to listen to the students.

On Jan. 29, I, and other faculty members, were invited to attend the meeting at which ASUCD, as elected representatives of the student community, passed a resolution presented to them by Students for Justice in Palestine to urge the UC Board of Regents to divest from four corporations that aid the Israeli occupation of Palestine.

This was the third time in three years that such a meeting was held. Each year the students in support of the resolution spent hours drafting the resolution, making sure that the language was clear, precise and free of any explicit or implicit references that could be construed as anti-Semitic, anti-Jewish or in any other way targeting citizens of the Israeli state. The resolution simply targeted certain corporations that quite openly assist the Israeli government and army in carrying out activities in the West Bank and Gaza, the occupation of which has been in violation of numerous UN resolutions, activities which themselves are in defiance of international law and in certain cases of the rulings of the Israeli Supreme court as well. Each year the students engaged in informative campaigns designed to educate the campus community about the occupation of Palestine, the suffering of the Palestinian residents of the occupied territories and the practices of the Israeli government, which are often nothing short of genocide, as can be seen by a cursory look at the international news from last summer. Each year the students who opposed the resolution also ran their own campaigns urging the student community to rally behind them and oppose the resolution. Each year, the students from both sides packed one of the large auditoria on campus, presented their arguments to the ASUCD until the senate was ready to vote. Each year, the student conduct was exemplary and not in any way infringing upon the university’s Principles of Community.

This year, nothing was different, except that the ASUCD passed the resolution with an 8-2-2 vote. Student governments at UC Berkeley, UC Irvine, UC Riverside, UC San Diego and UC Santa Cruz have passed similar resolutions. When the vote was announced, the attendees in the room, a mix of ethnicities, religions and ideological affiliations were jubilant. Those who were in opposition had already walked out rather demonstrably, accusing SJP of making a mockery of the student government. The foundations for such an incriminatory remark continue to elude me.

The mockery of the student government was yet to come. Less than 12 hours after the vote, Chancellor Katehi sent an email to the UC Davis community essentially dismissing the ASUCD resolution.

The text is fraught with unfounded implications and reflects a deep disregard for the student government, organizations and to the multiplicity of opinions and positions on the UC Davis campus.

In the first comment on the resolution, Chancellor Katehi says that it does not reflect the “position of UC Davis,” thereby implying that the students (and workers, given the UAW vote last fall) as well as a number of faculty members who have spoken in support of the resolution, are not part of UC Davis. If one then wonders who UC Davis is, some clarification comes in the following sentence: “The investment policy… is set by the UC Regents.” Since the ASUCD resolution already reflects that understanding, (you don’t urge someone to change a policy unless you know that they set the policy) the sentence must be construed as a clarification of who/what UC Davis is, according to its chancellor.

Additionally, the chancellor claims that the call upon UC Regents to change their investment policies is “very personal and emotional.” This is a claim that students across the country, whether they are calling for divestment from companies that operate in the Palestinian occupied territories or from companies involved in hydraulic fracturing, have long put to rest. Divestment is one of few widely accepted practices by which civil society can influence corporations and their impact on global politics.

Last but not least the Chancellor’s final paragraph affirms the University’s renowned academic position but I must say I find it less than convincing when she refers to a belief in a goal of “teaching, learning and serving the needs of society in a climate of justice and respect,” since I see her message as testimony to the lack of such a belief and to an utter disregard for the role of the academy as an active agent of social change.

On Tuesday, Feb. 10, students planned a march on campus. They wanted their voices to be heard by the administration and their wishes, as expressed by the vote of their student government to be respected. Their message was quite clear: We are the UC Davis community. We matter, and not only as payers of absurdly increasing tuition. Needless to say, I will be there to support them.

-Noha Radwan

Associate Professor of Arabic and Comparative Literature

Graphic by Jennifer Wu

To the Editor,

In Stephen Silver’s opinion piece regarding satirical comments made by Azka Fayyaz, Silver gets the facts so wrong and exhibits moral inconsistency so drastic that it is difficult to take his concerns seriously. First, the resolution does not blame “Israel for the impasse in peace efforts,” but rather blames Israel and its corporate partners for violating human rights and international law. These violations are spelled out clearly by the UN Security Council, the International Court of Justice and the 4th Geneva Convention.

Second, Silver attacks Fayyaz for her satirical support of Hamas, claiming that the satire was offensive given Hamas’s past anti-semitic sentiment and their actions. Silver cites Hamas’s 1988 charter, ignoring much more recent diplomatic developments, such as the acceptance of a two-state bargain and a long-term peace agreement offered by Hamas in 2006. Silver also condemns criminal actions perpetrated by Hamas but is silent on the far-more extensive criminal actions perpetrated by Israel. While Hamas has used terrorism to resist the occupation of Palestine, Israel has used far more deadly terrorism to impose it. Even at the height of the second intifada, Hamas’s most violent campaign, for every one Israeli killed by Hamas, Israel killed three Palestinians.

Silver’s arguments are also simply incomprehensible given his non-satirical support for Israel. Israel is currently governed by the Likud Party, whose charter argues for a Jewish “right” to colonize palestinian land and rejects any Palestinian state west of the Jordan river. This summer, Israel initiated a bombing campaign and ground invasion in the Gaza Strip which killed over 2,000 Palestinians, including 500 children.

Silver and his pro-Israel partners do not wave Israeli flags ironically or satirically, they do not wear Israeli military uniforms in their Facebook profile pictures as a joke, they do not support Israeli terrorist campaigns for kicks – they do these things in seriousness. And that is far more offensive than Fayyaz’s comments could ever hope to be.

Evan W. Sandlin

Political Science Graduate Student

Graphic by Jennifer Wu

I am as shocked as you, but we must face the facts: week five is over and we’re halfway through another UC Davis quarter. It’s time for another round of midterms. And another round of study habits.

The quarter system has a lot of benefits. Unlike the semester system, we get a full month of May (the best month of college) before finals, spring break comes without study stress and they give us one extra registration time! The main benefit though, in my opinion, is that you aren’t stuck with your classes for too long. This includes my Geology 1 class I took to balance out a hard schedule but ended up writing a 20-page essay for. This includes all upper divisions, and depending on who you are, all classes in general.

The main point is that in the quarter system you aren’t stuck with those classes for half of the school year, and they don’t count toward half of the year’s GPA, like the semester system does. It’s nice to be able to switch classes often, and it comes with gaining more knowledge than you would at a semester school, meeting more people and having more random dinner table facts to prove to your parents that you are learning. It also comes with buying more notebooks, reading more textbooks and taking more midterms and finals. This brings us to the central theme of this column: what type of studier are you and how can you change your stars like Sir Ulrich von Liechtenstein. Watch the linked movie, A Knight’s Tale, treating it as a metaphor for how you used to be a procrastinator and became an amazing, famously good studier. Watching this movie will of course reverse that, but imagination goes a long way.

Here are the main study types:

1. The Studier: This is a person who actually has studying figured out. They are organized, take great notes in class, but still feel the need to retake the notes the day after the lecture and again when the test is approaching. They spend time in the library and use it wisely. It may be the result of AVID (the class that takes people on college tours in ninth grade and teaches note-taking) in high school or good habits created otherwise. It may also just be a rare breed of people who do the right thing. For that, these people are fine and have no need to change their stars.
2. The Unproductively Productive Studier: The second type is the first of the bad studiers. This person drinks strong coffee and maybe takes certain prescribed study helpers too. Like The Studier, they always allot a good amount of time for studying. The problem is the coffee always makes them motivated to do good work, but this doesn’t always translate to studying. The bad news: this person often wakes up the day of the test with minimal knowledge for the midterm. The good news: their room is impeccably clean and in a different layout than before, including moving the desk that they finally fixed. Their fantasy lineups are set for the entire year, and they’ve probably reconnected with old friends, worked on their resume and may even have color-coated their notes, but haven’t actually studied them. If you are this type of person, to change your stars, try to keep your room relatively clean leading up to midterm season. After that, make sure to study in the library or somewhere outside of your home. As soon as the coffee and others hit you, start looking at your notes. You will study well if studying was the first priority, but if you start with anything else, you may be doomed.
3. The Facebook Status Poster: I spent much of my college career in this category. This person’s Facebook, Instagram and overall social media presence increases exponentially during study times. The statuses are usually related to studying and how much it sucks. This is ironic, of course, because immediately after posting, they fall into the trap of hoping for and waiting for likes, and then studying who is liking it, how many likes they got on the last one, how much they’re on pace to get now and more. They often fall into the other trap of full-on Facebooking, learning the news feed, finding that person they secretly admire and all of their best pictures, wasting hour after hour. If you recognize this, to change your stars here, remember that your midterm isn’t on Facebook. Don’t study your likers; study your notes. Get a friend to change your passwords for you. I have used this successfully many times. You can change each other’s passwords and not tell them until after the test, just make sure you don’t end up Facebooking on their account. You can also find sites that block Facebook and Reddit and other distractors until you are done studying, but self-control is still needed here to not undo them or find new bad sites.
4. The Constant Study-Breaker: Like the name suggests, this person is good at studying while they are studying, but they constantly need to stop for a while to get their mind off of it. Some people study for 30 minutes and take a 10-minute study break, while some study for 20 minutes and take a two-hour break. While study breaks are healthy and recommended, these aforementioned ratios are not. Sounds like you? To change your stars by making a set schedule of when your breaks will happen and what you will do. Don’t start a movie and promise yourself you’ll just watch a little on each break, because you’ll never stop. Don’t go home on your breaks, because you may become The Unproductively Productive Studier. Keep your breaks for getting some food or coffee, checking on the success of your Facebook status and other similar short-time activities.
5. The Overachiever Who Thinks They’re Underachieving: Though this person may get the best grades, their study plan is still arguably flawed. This person has a white board calendar they update daily. They have perfect handwriting on their perfect notes. They are constantly in the library because they have two midterms coming up next month. They made the entire Google Doc but aren’t sure if they did enough for it. They will always walk out of a test they aced saying “I failed it, I know it.” If this is you, to change your stars, Studier No. 5, study hard but keep time for the rest of your life. If you are this type of studier, look at your grades and look at how much time you’ve spent on them. Remember to have a little fun, but please don’t stop making that Google Doc — Studiers No. 1 to 4 need you!

With the second round of midterms right around the corner, take the time to evaluate yourself. It’s perfectly OK if you find that you are one of the above studiers or maybe a combination of them all. Try to change your stars like Ulrich did (watch that movie before the midterms start). It is possible to become a better studier, and you can thank the UCD Files when you do.

The UCD Files is your weekly in-depth look at our campus and the lifestyle that comes with it, featuring an occasional dropping of knowledge from a senior who has experienced it all.

Feel Free to send questions, comments, hate mail, or anything you would like to see in future articles to ADAM MARX at almarx@ucdavis.edu. I’ll try to answer them before midterms start, but no promises.  

Graphic by CA Aggie Graphic Design Team

Photo by CA Aggie Photo Team

I read a fantastic Radio Parallax interview in the Winter edition of KDViations. It was with Dr. James Fallon, a neuroscientist. In the middle of the interview, and also in the middle of a story that Fallon is telling, Fallon asks some of his psychiatric friends what they really think of them. He has recently found that he, a happily-married neuroscientist with no criminal record, has genetic markers that suggest he is a psychopath. The diagnosis  actually comes from himself. After several years researching the genetic signs of psychopaths, Fallon by chance used himself in a control group and discovered he has these psychopathic indicators.

The psychiatric friends that Fallon asked did not even know about his finding, but told him nonetheless (and unanimously) that he had psychopathic traits. To Fallon it was a huge surprise. He had been successful and, perhaps more importantly, happy in his life. But now came the news that he had achieved this life while simultaneously dealing with psychopathic tendencies. Or, as he puts it: “The basic conclusion was that I [had] the drives, ideations and urges of a full-blown psychopath – it’s just that somehow I control[led] them; I never act[ed] them out.”

Why is Fallon able to control these drives while others aren’t? In other words, what  factors make winners and losers in mental health? I ask these questions because they don’t just apply to Fallon’s condition but to my bipolarism as well. Besides being a psychopath “lite,” Dr. Fallon also has bipolarism to a small degree. According to his research, the two conditions are linked. So, because I have bipolarism, I am also borderline Hannibal Lecter, apparently.

Let me add that, really, controlling your mental health applies to anyone who worries about their future sanity. And who doesn’t?

If I knew what the actual solutions were, I would list them right here. I have some ideas though, and I’d like to explore a couple of those below:

The first has to do with my father.  My dad is a doctor, and though he was never diagnosed, he appears to deal with many of the symptoms of that same condition – bipolar. Like son like father. His indifference in certain situations and willingness to overstep bounds revealed him to me growing up as someone who swung between intense moods. One thing my father had though, was discipline. He excelled in biology in high school, and was willing to leave his parents in Maryland to endure depressing winters as a pre-med at Cornell and the rigor of med school at Stanford. Then he opened his own practice – eventually moving from being a practicing doctor to a full-time business owner. I wasn’t there to see my father do these things, but I have a good sense of the kind of self-control they required. Despite his faults, he’s been able to achieve a lot. Whatever discipline pushed him through life, I hope to find it in myself.

Secondly, in order to control mental health we have to be able to emote. Important within our range of emotions is our ability to empathize. Dr. Fallon’s research sheds a little light in this area, suggesting that there are two kinds of empathy, and we can usually only be good at one. One of those is cognitive, “cognitive empathy,” found in people who care about the world at large but are cold to their friends and family. Nelson Mandela in one example of someone with cognitive empathy. The other is “emotional empathy,” seen in those who don’t care about charity work but are adored in their families and communities.

Why aren’t we usually good at both? Well, the closest I have to an answer is the following scenario (this actually comes from the film The Third Man [1949]). Imagine you’re at the top of a ferris wheel with your friend, looking down at all the dot-sized people. Imagine your friend says to you, “I’ll give you $100,000 for every one of those dots that stops moving.” And, what if that money could save the lives of your loved ones, or do something equally important? If you choose to keep the dots alive, I’d say that you care about the world at large, but maybe you cherish your principles more than those close to you. If you calculate the minimum number of dots it’d take to help your community, then you probably don’t care as much about the world at large. It’s practically impossible to be both kinds of people. Then there’s the psychopath, who perhaps doesn’t empathize at all and would stop all the dots just for the heck of it.

In my own life, instating discipline and managing emotions (including empathy) has always been challenging. The longer I’m alive, though, the easier I’ve found it to come to grips with these two factors of mental health. I talked about these two today, but there are many more, of which I’m sure you’re aware.

Life is a balancing act. Sometimes you have to execute your plans and sometimes you have to embrace the unknown. Somewhere amongst these life choices, big and small, we find the sense of control that we’re ready to live for.

PAUL BEREZOVSKY can be reached at pbberezovsky@ucdavis.edu.

Graphic by Andrew Li

Photo by CA Aggie Photo Team