Judaism – We The People

Survivors in Trouble

Today is International Holocaust Remembrance Day. It has been seventy-seven years since the Shoah ended, and the number of Shoah survivors is shrinking rapidly as many of them reach their nineties even turn one-hundred. In a very short amount of time, there will be nobody left to tell their stories. Tragically, those who are still with us are living in poverty.

According to the United States Census Bureau, only ten percent of adults sixty-five years of age and older are living in poverty. According to The Blue Card, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that provides Shoah survivors financial and living assistance, an estimated one-third of the 100,000 survivors in the country live at or below the poverty line.

Survivors like Madga Rosenberg, who lost her entire family in Auschwitz in occupied Poland and now lives in Long Island, are living in poverty.

We’re dying out. In ten years, there won’t be a Holocaust survivor left.

Of the 50,000+ survivors residing in the New York Metropolitan area, 52% are considered “poor,” meaning that they are living below 150% of federal poverty guidelines or with an individual annual income fewer than 18,000 dollars, according to Selfhelp, an organization that has been helping victims of Nazi crimes since 1936.

Hanan Simhon, the vice president of the Holocaust Survivor Services at Selfhelp, says survivors from the Soviet Union have it particularly bad—eighty percent of them living in poverty.

They came here much later in their life at the fall of the Soviet Union, with no Social Security, pension or any type of supporting income for retirement.

Marsha Pearl, the executive director of the Blue Card, lists many factors as the reasons why the Shoah survivors are struggling.

They tend to be very isolated, losing their families during the war and then either did not or could not have children. Many started working in menial jobs because they did not have the language skills. Today they are in their eighties and nineties, and it is beyond difficult to make ends meet.

The victims’ troubles are not only caused by their advanced age and language barriers but medical experiments that put them at higher risk for diseases such as cancer.

Sami Steigmann spent his early childhood years in a Nazi labor camp. He was told by his father, years later, that he was subjected to various medical experiments which still cause him pain today at age seventy-eight.

I’m a proud person, I never wanted to reach out for help.

After years of struggle and “getting involved with the wrong people,” he found himself homeless. That was when he finally agreed to be recognized as a survivor and mentally disabled, receive reparations from Germany, and move into subsidized housing.

Marsha Pearl recognizes this unwillingness to step forward and accept help due to embarrassment, even when there is nothing embarrassing about it.

Many are embarrassed to be in this situation, feeling as if they’ve failed twice—not being able to save their family and now having to turn for help. People with food stamps in the grocery store are trembling and afraid that someone will see them. Many of them wait to come forward because they are too ashamed.

Today, Sami Steigmann lives in a tiny studio apartment in New York, but he now must leave his home for twenty years because the building has recently been sold. Steigmann fears he will no longer be able to volunteer as a tutor to teach students about the Holocaust.

The Blue Card, which serves 2,500 survivors nationwide, experienced a 20% increase in requests for assistance in 2016. Of those they service (77% female), 67% cannot leave their homes without aid, and 78% have trouble performing everyday activities such as getting dressed, washing, and cooking.

Selfhelp has 1,400 residents in ten affordable housing sites throughout the New York area and a waiting list of 4,000. Two-hundred fifty survivors are sitting on a waiting list in Brooklyn to be assigned to a social worker with about three to four new clients registering daily.

Hanan Simhon reminds us of one critical fact that nobody thinks about.

These are limited resources for a limited time—there won’t be new Holocaust survivors taking their place.

Personal stories and quotes: CNN

Stop Pretending That Hanukkah is so Important

Image: My Jewish Learning

Let me start with this: I am a Jew (with a bar mitzvah and all). Now that I have put it on the record, I am safe from hate and people automatically jumping to the conclusion that I am anti-Semitic before they even reach the next paragraph (or even past the title). Of course, it is possible for a Jew to be anti-Semitic just any other self-loathing person, but then again, I am on the board of my congregation, the president of my congregation’s youth group, a new member of NFTY, and I just got back from the URJ Biennial in Boston last weekend. I think that just about sums it up.

While many people continue to compare Hanukkah and Christmas from organizations like Jews for Jesus (an extremely offensive pretense to convert Jews to Christianity without them even knowing it), Affinity Magazine, FOX News, Independent, The Religion News, it is ignorant to jump to the conclusion that they are alike just because they fall within the same month (typically). The Independent went as far as to say:

Hanukkah is often known as Jewish Christmas.

I am really only here to vent my frustrations with this common belief. It is not.

I am not one of those people who will get mad when somebody tells me “Merry Christmas,” because I assume that they probably just do not know I am Jewish (How would they with a name like “Romero?”). I take it just as any Christian would: a compliment. That is what it is meant to be after all. While I may correct them if I know them well enough, I would almost never get offended—unless it was intentional, knowing that I am Jewish, to show disdain over the fact that I just do not celebrate Christmas. On the other hand, I do get angry about people who go ballistic whenever they hear “Happy holidays,” because it is the same principle. It is just a compliment, so just take the compliment for crying out loud! Hats off to the person who said it for making an effort to be more inclusive as well!

What you need to understand about Hanukkah is that it is not even a holiday— it is a festival. That is right, and to add to it, Hanukkah is not even the most important of the festivals—Pesach is. You might be shocked, but it is true.

First, let’s go over the history behind Hanukkah.

During the period of the second Temple, Israel was controlled by the Greeks. The Greeks were cruel, robbed Jews of their property, and set up idols in Beit HaMikdash. They accepted the Torah, the first five books of the Old Testament, as a book of wisdom, but not as something holy that connects us to God. In turn, they made Torah learning illegal, and outlawed Mitzvot (good deeds) like Shabbat (the Sabbath), Rosh Chodesh (first day of every Jewish month), Brit Milah (baby-naming ceremony), and the holiness of Jewish marriage. The Maccabees, the ancient Jewish army, revolted against the Greeks to keep the Torah and Judaism alive and won.

When the Greeks had stormed their land, they had ruined everything in Beit HaMikdash—including the oil—and making it impure. Miraculously, the Maccabees found one last jar that had been overlooked, but it only had enough oil for one day. Again, God performed another miracle and made the oil last for eight whole days—not just one! That is the reason why the chanukiah (not a menorah) has eight candles on it and one shemash.

Not one of the things in the story of Hanukkah is ever mentioned in the Torah. The name, “Hanukkah,” is not even said once—proving its unimportance again. Instead, the story comes from the books of the First and Second Maccabees.

You will probably meet Jews that will tell you that I am wrong and that Hanukkah is “the Jewish Christmas,” but I really consider myself to be well-versed in my religion—educated enough to, as I mentioned earlier, be on the board of my congregation at age fifteen, be the president of my congregation’s youth group, and very active in my Jewish community. I must be doing something right. Yet again, you could just as quickly say that I don’t know what I am talking about and turn off your computer right now, but I trust you take what I say at face-value (or at least after checking my resources and doing the research yourself as I did).

When you think of Hanukkah, what else do you think (things that have not been mentioned yet)? Presents? Latkes?

When it comes to food, from my understanding of the Catholic tradition, people have big Thanksgiving-like feasts for dinner on Christmas. Hanukkah, against what you might believe, is a pretty forgetful time for most Jews (I cannot speak for everybody.). At least for my family, we eat dinner as usual, we go to work as usual, we go to school as usual, and much more. None of those things apply to Christmas (for most families), where people have big get-togethers with their extended family.

For Jews, that big get-together happens during the High Holidays. The High Holidays are the two most important holidays in Judaism (hence the name), Rosh Hashanah (Jewish new year) and Yom Kippur (day of atonement). It is kind of funny that nobody talks about the most popular holidays of the religion.

As for presents, I can tell you that Jews do exchange small gifts for Hanukkah, but never to the extent of what is exchanged on Christmas. Jews will exchange smaller presents on the holidays, and the gift-giving is even somewhat outgrown once children get older. In fact, the entire origin of gift-giving is extremely modern.

It was always customary for Jews to exchange small gifts on Pesach, Jonathan Sarna, a professor of American Jewish history at Brandeis University, explained that gift-giving among American Jews shifted from Pesach to Hanukkah in the late nineteenth century. Christmas itself became enlarged in the late nineteenth century when it became a national holiday in America, and the Jewish custom just shifted in imitation of Christmas, as the Christian holiday’s consumerism grew.

Gifts and gift-giving are not the measures of a holiday, and just because Jews exchange small gifts on Hanukkah as Christians give gifts on Christmas, it does not mean that they are equivalent in terms of importance.

While it would make our lives so much easier to have every major religion’s biggest holidays at the same time, we cannot pretend that is the case at hand. Christmas is in December; Easter is in April; Ramadan is in May/June; Rosh Hashanah is in September/October; Yom Kippur is ten days after Rosh Hashanah; Vesak is in May; Diwali is in October; The Asian Lunar New Year is in February. If you couldn’t tell, the biggest holidays/festivals in most religions do not fall at the same time.

I say that we should never stop trying to be inclusive, and I love hearing people tell me “Happy holidays!” It shows me that people are making a conscious effort to be inclusive of everybody, and it is greatly appreciated. My goal is to just educate everybody so that they understand that Hanukkah is not “the Jewish Christmas,” not so they think that they should ignore Hanukkah.

For what it is worth, anything people say about Jews is almost unanimously bad, but the fact that people are changing their traditions to be more accepting towards any aspect of Judaism, even if not the one that we would like could be considered a win in the sense that it may help popularize the fact that Jews are just human beings like you and—well—you. Who knows? Maybe this can help end the anti-Semitism that sadly engulfed Europe during the Bubonic Plague, Spain during the Spanish Inquisition, Nazi Germany during the Shoah, and what looks like could even be America in the near future.

Why Call it the Shoah?

Image: World Atlas

The event that resulted in the death of six-million Jews and mentally handicapped, physically disabled, Romani, homosexuals, prisoners of war, and countless other groups of people simply because of the color of their skin, the way they prayed, or their sexual orientation is commonly referred to, in the English language, as “The Holocaust,” but many Jews, including myself, prefer the term “The Shoah.”

The word “holocaust” is the Anglicization of a Greek word, ολοκαύτωμα, meaning ‘complete combustion.’ That same word, “holocaust,” is used in translation of the Hebrew word עלה, meaning ‘offering that will be completely burnt’ and can even be found in many Catholic Bibles such as the Douay-Rheims Catholic Translation. This word had been used to describe the offering to God in Genesis 22:7.

Isaac said to his father: My father. And he answered: What wilt thou, son? Behold, saith he, fire and wood: where is the victim for the holocaust?

In the same verse published by the Jewish Publication Society, they replaced the word ‘holocaust’ with ‘burnt-offering.’

Isaac then said to Abraham his father, “Father!” He answered: “Here I am, my son.” And Isaac said, “Here is the firestone and the wood, but where is the lamb for the burnt-offering?”

The word, “holocaust,” was adopted by English writers to mean “complete destruction by fire.” It was first used in modern times in reference to the treatment of the Jews in a British newspaper, the News Chronicle of December 5, 1942. The usage spread, and has finally become the most commonly used name of the tragic event that happened in the early 1940s.

What’s the big deal? Why can’t I just call it the Holocaust?

“Holocaust” was first used in the English language as a term for a sacrifice, specifically for the sacrifices asked of the Jews by God. That still is a primary meaning of the word for those who have used the Douay-Rheims Bible. This definition implies that the murder of the Jews was a sacrifice for God, and therefore God accepted the sacrifice of the Jews.

I always try my hardest to use the word, “Shoah,” unless I am speaking with someone who is likely to not know the word. Even though “Holocaust” is generally in use as a term for the Nazi “Final Solution,” it still has the power to suggest that there was something acceptable to God in those events, even though most people who use the word do not mean it this way.

Now, I would never judge anyone for calling it “The Holocaust” because I know that they would probably not be implying that the murder of the Jews is acceptable to God, but I feel that educating people on the meaning of the word (most timely on Yom HaShoah) can help people know what they are really saying and possibly think about it in the future.

Topic inspired by Coffee Shop Rabbi

What Goes Around Comes Around

We are living in turbulent times. Over the past year, it has become increasingly clear that we are a divided country. Hate crimes and antisemitism are on the rise and unfortunately, white nationalist and racist groups feel emboldened and supported to speak out publicly. This is only exacerbated with the ability to express these views through social media, in the comfort of your own home, without having to see the people you are harming face to face. This is a dangerous road to go down as it starts to normalize these thoughts, beliefs and actions. This can never be accepted or normalized. The only way to maintain our way of life and our democracy is through mutual respect, the free and open exchange of ideas based in fact and mutual respect. We need to acknowledge where we disagree and identify areas where we agree and can come together. Sadly, not all forums that promote themselves as a forum for free expression or open-mindedness have proven through their actions to fulfill this promise.

Living in the digital age, as we do today, you have to be careful about what you say, post, search and re-post on social media. When we are young, naive and/or impulsive, we have to remember that the things we write and post, on sites like Facebook, Instagram and Twitter, that at times give us a false sense of anonymity, never go away. They reach real people, and when we least expect it, can come back to haunt you, at times with devastating consequences.

To help job-seekers better understand the role of social media in their job search, CareerBuilder.com conducted a survey in 2016 that asked hiring managers and human resource professionals how, and why they incorporate social media into their hiring process. Their survey found that 60% of employers use social networks to screen potential job candidates, up from 52% last year and 11% in 2006. With 49% of those hiring reporting that information found online had a negative impact on their hiring decision.

Our online persona does not only have an effect on hiring decisions, but according to the same survey, more than a quarter of employers found information online that caused them to reprimand or fire an employee. As one of the 89% of job-seekers on social media or, or one of those already employed, you will want to make sure that you are careful online. Rosemary Haefner, the vice president of human resources at Career Builder says:

Social media is a primary vehicle of communication today, and because much of that communication is public, it’s no surprise some recruiters and hiring managers are tuning in.

This, of course, does not only apply to those looking and applying for jobs. This could affect anybody. It has been widely reported that a review of social media is frequently completed by College admissions boards as part of the admissions process. We have heard countless news stories of the chaos created over the Presidents infamous tweets. Now, several days ago this hit much closer to home.

Just days ago, several insensitive tweets resurfaced from the founder and Editor-in-Chief of Affinity Magazine. These were tweets she had posted (+/-) 5 years ago. She had been my past employer, when I was a writer and Political Editor at Affinity Magazine. I previously parted ways with the magazine due to differing opinions and discrimination I suffered during my tenure. It was made clear that my articles would not be published as they were in opposition with the beliefs of the Editor-in-Chief, nor would she allow me to publish them anywhere else, despite this being part of the magazine policy. When I learned of her behavior and her tweets, I was saddened by the horrific comments, ashamed to have been connected to the impertinent things she said, but unfortunately was not surprised.

I, personally, was disheartened to see these sort of awful things from a magazine that brands itself as “the first social justice platform that directly caters to teens, while also addressing many significant issues that are often overlooked.” It is devastating to read some of the offensive and hurtful old tweets that have resurfaced at a time when we are in great need of a social justice magazine that accepts all races, cultures, nationalities, religions, genders, sexual orientations, and points of view. The last thing we need is to perpetuate division and hatred. A place where all can be accepted, share information and exchange ideas based in fact and mutual respect is what we so desperately need.

Having friends who are going through issues of uncertainty related to gender identity, coupled with the recent policy changes making it more difficult for transgender people, and the fact that Affinity Magazine attempts to cater to this community, having an LGBT+ category on their website. The tweet defaming the LGBT+ community is particularly repulsive and ironic.

I was surprised to see how she went after just about every minority or group of people different from herself in these abhorrent tweets.

Using derogatory slurs and stereotypes, there were rude tweets about Asians.

Amongst this mess, there were insulting tweets about Mexicans, calling them poor, illegal, and “durty,” and

hurtful tweets about over weight people, body-shaming and using demeaning words to describe them with disdain.

As one who was silenced when I tried to publish an article defending my Jewish identity, some of the most hurtful comments to me were the anti-Semitic tweets.

I am not sharing these tweets to promote her horrific words, or with the goal of blaming the entire staff. I must state, that it does not appear that the views expressed in these tweets represent those of the writers as a whole, nor was it my personal experience while working there. These appear to be the thoughts and beliefs of the individual or individuals who wrote them. Unfortunately, the writer(s) of the tweets were the one(s) who were in control and yielded power over the publication. As one who worked at Affinity, these tweets never represented my views, and I feel sorry for those who were working for a magazine where there is now such scrutiny when they may have had no involvement in the horrible things that were said.

Late in the day, on the third of March, the editor-in-chief of Affinity Magazine, Evelyn A. Woodsen (AKA Evelyn Atieno & Evelyn V. Woodsen), released a public statement on Twitter concerning the crude tweets:

Many old tweets have come to light recently. I understand the outrage and I am very sorry and sickened by the tweets I made when I was around the age of 14. Age is no excuse at all. I was not educated at the time about many issues in the world, and that’s what inspired me to start Affinity. I turned my old personal Twitter to the Affinity Twitter. Since then, I have done community work advocating for both men and women. Those old tweets don’t reflect the person I am now, Affinity, or Affinity’s writers. They were disgusting and I am. They were from over 6 years ago. Life is about learning from the past and working to better yourself. I have bettered myself and that’s shown through all of the work I have done now. I hope you all forgive my immaturity that I displayed when I was younger. I am ashamed of the person I was, but I assure you that’s not who I am anymore. Affinity was started so I could better myself and learn about the word [sic] and not be as ignorant as I was before. Thank you.

Personally, I believe that this apology does not duly address the countless offensive things said. I believe that, though she claimed age was no excuse, there was no reason to mention her age unless it was to help vindicate her actions. While she may have evolved in some of her views, it is clear through her continued actions and behaviors that her disdain for those different from her or with opposing views remains firmly in place. I would love to believe that she is genuinely regretful and apologetic, but based on her behavior—such as laughing at her anti-Semitic comments only three hours after her public statement, her repetitive stifling of ideas with which she does not agree, and dismissing those writer from the magazine for made up reasons—it is impossible to believe that she feels badly about anything other than getting caught.

The day after the discriminatory tweets were exposed, two articles were published about the “tweets” published and Affinity Magazine in an attempt to save the publication and resurrect their reputation. One article was written by a new member of their staff. The second article was by Evelyn.

The article by the new staff member of the Affinity team, describes his first couple days at Affinity, and why he believes the writers at Affinity should not be judged for any of the tweets. I understand that sentiment: and for the most part agree that the writers are not responsible for what was said and therefore should not be blamed. I have sympathy for them, having to answer for things over which they had no control.

Evelyn Atieno does not represent us, and her tweets do not represent the values that we hold on the Affinity Team.

Moving on to Evelyn’s article, she began by describing her goals when she started Affinity magazine.

My goal for this magazine was for it to be a platform for other teens, not just myself.

She goes on to explain how being raised in a conservative town influenced the way she saw the world. She said she believes that her recognition of her past mistakes shows character development and how much she has changed. She discussed her activism and how much she gives back to her community.

The day after those two articles were published, one more article was published about the good things that Affinity Magazine has to offer.

Affinity is a new wave of journalism that has given a voice to teenagers.

This article talks about how Affinity is a group of writers with many different views, and therefore, they believe you should not generalize things written by one person to the views of another. She talks about how Affinity gives teens a place to be heard would not have one otherwise.

Sites like Affinity offer a voice to people who otherwise would not have one.

She talks about the need for a free press and other points of view. She says its okay to disagree, but not to insult or demean somebody because of it.

A democracy cannot exist without free press. The news needs to exist even if you disagree with the way it is presented. This is why we must stop demeaning our journalists, even amateur ones like on Affinity. It is okay to disagree, but it is not okay to insult or demean someone simply because you don’t like their opinions.

All of the quotes from this article make great points and in theory are true. We are in great need of a free press and a place for teens to express their thoughts and views free from anger and judgment. This free exchange of thoughts and ideas needs to be based in fact and done with respect. This is how we learn, grow and come together as a society. This helps us educate ourselves on all aspects of an issue, find areas of agreement and ways we can work together for the betterment of society. This is democracy in action. Unfortunately, all of this is in direct contradiction to the culture and policy at Affinity Magazine and my experience while working there. In fact, these quotes—about the need for a free press and how Affinity is full of people with different points of view, and gives everybody a voice—directly contradict the explanations I was given on why I could not publish my article and why I had to leave the magazine.

It is disheartening to see this publication try and highlight an image of all the best qualities of their publication, yet, the image they are presenting is not based in reality and, to be frank, are utterly false. There is an old saying I have heard many times: when people show you who they are, believe them. This is the case here: when Evelyn thought no one was looking, she apparently felt free to be “herself.” She never gave it a second thought that she was doing this in the public forum of social media. Tweet after tweet, she showed us who she is. We must believe her. Affinity Magazine is sadly just an extension of the closed minded, prejudice that is so prevalent in our society. It is not the platform of social justice it claims and is so badly needed for teens today.

Please contact me if any of the facts are wrong. I simply presented the facts as they were laid out before me.

A New Journey: The Free and Open Exchange of Ideas

Image: Life Hacker

Now, more than ever, the importance of a free, fair, and open press is essential to a functioning democracy. We cannot provide ammunition to anyone’s goal that is to silence a critical or free press, especially when it comes from a publication promoting itself as a magazine that is “The first social justice platform that directly caters to teens, while also addressing many significant issues that are often overlooked” and “The new cool way for teens to not only read about important news but also have their own thoughts heard loud and clear.”

Imagine my excitement when I, at the age of fourteen, was offered a position as not only a writer but the political editor at Affinity Magazine. I, of course, accepted this offer and worked very hard to perform all tasks and responsibilities to the best of my ability. Of course, I may have made mistakes here and there, missing a grammatical error or a spelling error, but who hasn’t? Either way, to say that I was elated about to be a part of this affiliation would be an understatement. That was until I had a disturbing interaction with the editor-in-chief, Evelyn that deflated my idealization of their publication. Despite conversations with two other editors and a plan to publish my article, Why I Have Recently Chosen to Disavow the Black Lives Matter Movement, I was informed by Evelyn that she would not publish my article. She rejected the article herself, stating that it was not my place to disavow this movement.

Believing that this was possibly the result of being an editor, I initially respected her opinion and asked if there could be a compromise. I asked if I could change the title and “tweak” the article so as not to vehemently “insult” anyone, although to be clear, this was never my intention. My only goal was to express my view backed by facts and encourage introspection and discussion with my peers. Nevertheless, I was told that I could not publish it as the magazine’s official stance is “anti-Zionist.” Immediately, this made me uncomfortable. Not only do I consider myself a proud Jew, but living in a region of the country where I am in a significant minority, I believe it is essential that I stand up for my beliefs. As John Milton said:

Truth will rise to the top through a free and open exchange in the marketplace of ideas.

At first, I attempted to rationalize the decision and tried to move on, but I just could not get this uncomfortable feeling to go away. As a result of the way I was raised by my parents, and in part from the underpinnings of the tenants of my religion which promotes questioning, argument, and discussion in the context of the learning process, I attempted to find a resolution. I asked if I could submit the article under the Op-ed category, thereby, presenting the article as an editorial in opposition to the magazine’s official stance, in hopes of facilitating education and discussion. Unfortunately, this suggestion did not go anywhere. Again, it was rejected, stating that it would just not “fit the magazine.” I continued to try and make sense of this response but struggled with the internal and ethical conflict I now felt about the affiliation. I didn’t understand why it wouldn’t be published if their very own website said, “We accept all ideas!” I found this to conflict with not only many ethical standards that I hold for myself but even their own handbook.

My views are different from the other writers I don’t know if I can write mine [sic]

Okay, still write it [sic]

Even their Write For Us page had been contradicted in the most blatant way imaginable:

You can write about anything you want!

I was now faced with an ethical struggle. I wanted to keep writing and editing, but I felt conflicted about working for a publication that did not allow for expression of all points of view. This became even more challenging as I continued to edit and publish anti-Zionist articles. I knew that I would not be able to do this for long without another outlet where I could express my thoughts and views that differed from those of the magazine. I had been unfair to myself by putting myself in an environment where I was targeted. I wanted to stay, but I felt like I had disavowed the Black Lives Matter Movement for being anti-Zionist, though I was not holding my place of work to the same standard.

At first, I was devastated but quickly realized this conflict provided me a great opportunity. In the rejection of my article, they had actually provided me with an excellent gift. As a result, I was able to reflect on the situation and realize that there was a need for space for young adults to have an open, free, and respectful exchange of ideas. I reached out to members of my temple’s youth group to discuss the idea. We felt there was a great need for a publication where different ideas and views could be published, a space where all points of view on any issue could be expressed and debated.

This lead to the birth of WTP Magazine. At WTP Magazine, we do not have specific stances on issues. It is a format for the open discussion and exchange of ideas for politically active, socially minded millennials. The opportunity to have an open debate and opposing views backed by facts is essential to healing the political divide and educating ourselves on issues.

Did you find an article on our site with which you disagree? Write your side of it! We want to hear it! https://t.co/9Kp19mg7ti

— WTP Magazine (@WTPMagazine) November 28, 2016

As Max Andrews says:

We need to have substantive dialogue and allow reasonable room for dissent. There is no room for monologue in a genuine pursuit for the truth. We need to have our beliefs be accounted for by others. We need to have a desire for the truth and not be so dogmatic that what we currently believe is all there is. In the words of Augustine, we must “hear the other side.”

Unfortunately, not even twenty-four hours passed before I was contacted and told that this was a conflict of interest. I explained that I did not believe that there was a conflict of interest as the goal of WTP is to present and be open to hearing a point of view that is different from their own. They just did not see what I saw in WTP.

As a result of my experience, I have been able to identify a significant need for teens and young adults who are often overlooked when it comes to expressing their political, social, or cultural views. Free expression and open debate are methods that we can and should use to pursue the truth. Academic freedom and discussion are of the utmost importance in our education as well as social media, and they are the means by which we will achieve social justice and find common ground with others.

Our goal is to develop a space for public discourse, dialogue, and debate, based on a foundation of mutual respect leading towards civic knowledge, responsibility, and the common good. Unfortunately, the structures of contemporary society frequently limit and even prevent discourse of this nature. The “sound-bite” world of the media, the need for immediate gratification and the rapid flow of information on the Internet, are calibrated for immediacy, not sustained conversation. The emergence of Google, Twitter, Facebook, and the “blogosphere” have sadly lead to intellectual cocooning or narrowcasting that tailors much of the information we receive from our own interests. Our individualist tendencies to turn inward, while comfortable at times, prevent us from engaging different perspectives, learning and connecting with others. Wael Ghonim, one of the fathers of the Arab spring, dubbed the social media revolution, now says:

The same medium that so effectively transmits a howling message of change also appears to undermine the ability to make it. Social media amplifies the human tendency to bind with one’s own kind. It tends to reduce complex social challenges to mobilizing slogans that reverberate in echo chambers of the like-minded rather than engage in persuasion, dialogue, and the reach for consensus. Hate speech and untruths appear alongside good intentions and truths.

Democracy demands active and thoughtful participation and a willingness to engage with each other. Meaningful social relationships built on trust that results from this kind of discourse are essential to education, personal growth, and developing and sustaining a healthy society, economy, and democratic polarity.

As we move forward with dignity and respect, we will find ways to discuss with and actually hear each other. We can respectfully disagree, presenting differences without killing each other. We will engage in the free and open exchange of ideas in search of social justice and common ground. I am genuinely excited about this new journey and welcome all who want to come along.

[What Goes Around Comes Around]