For longer than most undergraduate students have been alive, Mexico has been a nation driven by conflict. The Mexican military first formalized their intervention in 2006 with the beginning of the Guerra contra el narcotráfico en México (the Mexican War on Drugs). Violence resulting from the drug trade and its associates has become more tangible in recent years. Since the intervention in 2006, 150,000 deaths have been attributed to organized crime in Mexico.

The attacks on the morning of September 11, 2001, forever changed the American outlook. Before the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, the perception of the American homeland was that American soil is insulated from attacks. That sense of security was destroyed by mass civilian casualties in the wake of the 9/11 attacks spawning a new period of domestic and international policy. This renewed period of interventionist foreign policy in the Middle East would come to be known as the War on Terror.

This week, Political Union will be debating whether or not “and is in our DNA” culture at Northwestern is good for students.

This week, Political Union will be debating whether the future of the Republican Party is Trumpism. Ultimately our understanding of this resolution hinges on our definition of the term “Trumpism,” and we thought that it would be good to include several sources in this weekly debate primer that engage with this concept before we get into the thick of the debate.

When issues such as government surveillance arise, it is revealed how ill-equipped the current state of our Constitution is to deal with the growing challenges of modernity.

This week, Political Union will be debating whether social media is corrosive to democracy.

This week, Political Union will be debating whether industrialization has been good for humanity.

This week, Political Union will be debating whether the United States ought to provide a Universal Basic Income ahead of Northwestern College Democrat’s visit from Andrew Yang.

This week, Political Union will be debating whether the United States should guarantee military support to Taiwan in case of war.

This week, Political Union will be debating whether journalism should prioritize objectivity over advocacy.

This week, in the place of our planned debate we will be holding a dialogue--not a debate--on everything that’s been on students’ minds recently, and we want to hear your criticisms of and suggestions for the university. This blog post won’t be the same kind of debate primer that you’ve seen each weekend; instead, we thought it would be most helpful to piece together a timeline of the major developments in the campus-wide conversation over Greek life and administrative response.

This week, Political Union will be debating whether the United States should let billionaires exist.

Since the Cambridge Analytica data scandal in 2016, people have been looking far more closely at the influence held by social media companies due to their ownership and usage of data. People across the political spectrum have been criticizing the immense power held by these companies to not only amplify certain voices but quell and dispose of dissenting views. Whether you agree with their right to do so, it is impossible to deny the immense power very few companies have over the public discourse of the entire planet.

Western politicians frequently talk a big game about democracy, but when push comes to shove, most will almost always prioritize self-interest over principle. This is perhaps most evident to my predominantly left-American audience when the Republicans do things like block DC statehood, which if enacted would help alleviate the Senate’s undemocratic Republican lean (the median state is 6.6 points redder than the median voter). However, I have no doubt the Democrats would’ve done the exact same thing had the two parties’ roles been reversed, as center-left parties pull these stunts all the time.

Over the past few decades technology has advanced at an astonishing rate; from floppy disks to early progress in artificial intelligence, things have changed the world around us. Many have seen this advance in technology as a good opportunity to address a problem that has stuck with us since the beginning of time: crime. With advanced facial recognition technology, surveillance cameras on street corners, and an enormous database to store every individual’s information, law enforcement can easily identify and track down those breaking the law with a simple search.

On Dec. 23 1991, Cameron Todd Willingham was found guilty of an act of arson that resulted in his three children being burned alive. He was forced to pay the ultimate price for his crime: death.

This week, Political Union will be debating whether the United States should legalize the sale of organs.

Over the past few decades technology has advanced at an astonishing rate; from floppy disks to early progress in artificial intelligence, things have changed the world around us. Many have seen this advance in technology as a good opportunity to address a problem that has stuck with us since the beginning of time: crime.

Over the last decade, voters have voiced concerns on the increasing role of money in politics. The claim of campaign finance disparities and their potential to subvert our democracy propelled the issue to the forefront political discourse. Leading politicians such as Bernie Sanders to speak out against the issue, warning that “wealthy contributors can literally buy politicians and elections by spending hundreds of millions of dollars in support of the candidates of their choice.” The U.S. has regulations governing campaign finance and the stringency of these rules vary widely over the years. What has contributed to the growing importance and attention dedicated to campaign finance law?

The Washington, D.C. statehood movement is gaining momentum. On Thursday April 22, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C. Admission Act, by a vote of 216 to 208 with all votes following party lines; the Democrats supported statehood, and Republicans opposed it. Despite the thin margin of victory, supporters of the statehood movement have good reason to be satisfied: this marks just the second time a statehood bill has been passed by the House and only the third time such a bill has reached a vote since 1990.