Letters Letters
GDP RAISES ALL BOATS Cambridge, Mass. The answer to Martha Nussbaum’s “What Makes Life Good?” [May 2] might have been different if she had presented some key facts, namely, that virtually every statistical test shows a strong relationship (“trickle down”) between growth in national income (GDP), which she disparages as a measure of well-being, and reduction in poverty. Why? Because increases in GDP raise paid employment—having a good paid job means not being poor for landless people like Vasanti, Nussbaum’s protagonist; it’s the default of poverty in today’s developing world. Even in African countries with large mining and agricultural estates and unequal income distribution, poverty has sharply fallen since 2005 because prices of minerals and cash crops have risen, and the incomes of miners and poor agricultural workers have improved. How to create good jobs (every survivor in a poor country works, but typically in self-employment at a subsistence level)? Nussbaum praises the Capabilities approach: making job seekers better clothed, housed, fed and educated (“a crucial avenue of opportunity”). But in developing countries, where educated unemployment is rife, investing in job seekers’ right to education doesn’t create remunerative work; usually better qualified job seekers simply join the unemployed, or the brain drain if they’re lucky. More jobs require pressure on government (local, state and national) to invest in job creation. Graffiti in one Indian village read, “We will give the Congress Party our vote if it gives us a job.” And it did, by promising 2 million government jobs to trigger more private sector employment. So “what makes life good” for Vasanti is not just reforming the household and bettering the village; it’s becoming a progressive national activist to influence decisions at the top of the power pyramid, not just decisions about education and security but also about capital investments and employment. ALICE AMSDEN Massachusetts Institute of Technology Nussbaum Replies Chicago I am very grateful to Professor Amsden for her thoughtful and provocative letter. Her defense of GDP omits, however, a crucial question: how should we define poverty? I argue that the right question to ask is, What are people actually able to do and be?—in a wide range of areas, including health, bodily integrity, education, political rights and liberties, employment opportunities and quite a few others. If we think of poverty as the absence of the Central Human Capabilities on my list, then it is simply not true that increased GDP by itself “trickles down” to relieve poverty. Field studies of the different Indian states, conducted by Jean Dreze and Amartya Sen, show that growth is poorly correlated with achievements in health and education: Kerala, whose economy has not grown well, has stunning educational achievements (99 percent male and female literacy in adolescent years, dramatically different from the national averages I reported) and equally impressive health achievements; states like Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh, which have focused on growth, lag behind in health and education (see Dreze and Sen, India Development: Selected Regional Perspectives, Oxford, 1997). Nor does the independence of health and education from GDP disappear when we turn to the more affluent countries: Kerala’s general health achievements are similar to those of Harlem in New York City, which is good for a poor state in a poor country but shameful in a rich nation like ours (see Sen, “The Economics of Life and Death,” Scientific American, May 1993). Now let us consider women’s vulnerability to violence, a key part of Vasanti’s story. Unfortunately, although good data are hard to come by, we can confidently conclude that our rich nation has a shamefully high rate of violence against women. The Violence Against Women survey published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics estimates that 18 percent of US women have experienced rape or attempted rape, usually from an intimate partner; the rate of other physical violence is approximately double that. Finally, let us consider political and religious liberty: does increased GDP per capita “trickle down” to produce these good things? People used to say so, predicting that China would soon change. Time has told a different story. In short: if we think of poverty and well-being broadly, as I argue we should, increased GDP alone proves incomplete, and GDP information will not tell us how people are faring in these other, also important, respects. I agree with Professor Amsden that job creation is extremely important: education is only part of what government should provide. So I endorse the Rural Employment Guarantee instituted by India’s Congress Party (for which much credit is due to Jean Dreze). Even if government were to give people not only education but also a basic minimum livelihood, this would be inferior to job creation from the point of view of agency and self-respect: jobs allow people to control their own destiny rather than making them passive dependents. MARTHA NUSSBAUM The Goldstone ‘Recant’ Mill Valley, Calif. My thanks to Adam Horowitz, Lizzy Ratner and Philip Weiss for exposing the distortions of what Judge Richard Goldstone actually wrote in his April 1 op-ed for the Washington Post [“The Goldstone Affair,” May 2]. The authors argued convincingly that Judge Goldstone did not “recant” the report, as supporters of Israel’s far-right government claim. But I wish they had questioned his use of the word “deliberate” when it came to Israel’s actions against Gaza civilians. What else accounted for Israel’s indiscriminate use of artillery, white phosphorus weapons and bombs in one of the world’s most densely populated areas, if not the deliberate targeting of civilians? Why did the Israelis level public buildings, a large food warehouse, small factories and sewage and water facilities, if not to punish civilians? And why, oh why, did they destroy a large chicken farm and kill 31,000 chickens? The word “deliberate” is often in the eye of the beholder. But I can see nothing accidental about Operation Cast Lead, especially since the casualty figures—1,400 Gazans and thirteen Israelis dead—indicate that Israeli soldiers were not acting in self-defense. RACHELLE MARSHALL North Haven, Conn. “The Goldstone Affair” may have created an unnecessary opacity in its account of Goldstone’s two after-statements on his report. It has him saying to the AP, after apparently renouncing the report, that “as presently advised I have no reason to believe any part of the report needs to be reconsidered at this time.” A bizarre case of asserting A and then Not A. However, his full statement, according to the AP story, was this: “As appears from the Washington Post article, information subsequent to publication of the report did meet with the view that one correction should be made with regard to intentionality on the part of Israel,” the judge said. “Further information as a result of domestic investigations could lead to further reconsideration, but as presently advised I have no reason to believe any part of the report needs to be reconsidered at this time.” He meant to make one correction (not minor but not definitive of the report’s total findings): on the charge of intentionality of government policy. Though “further information” might lead to “further reconsideration,” he has, at present, “no reason to believe that any [further] part of the report needs to be reconsidered at this time.” The authors’ shortened quotation makes him sound simply self-contradictory. Whatever his motives—judging by the op-ed and the AP correction alone—he was unexpectedly careless in the op-ed and reasonably careful in the interview. DAVID BROMWICH Palm Coast, Fla. Israel’s foreign minister accused Richard Goldstone of giving “legitimacy to terrorist organizations.” Israel already did that by electing two former terrorist leaders to be prime ministers. Menachem Begin of the Irgun proudly called himself Terrorist No. 1. My experience of the Middle East in the mid-’40s leads me to believe that Stern Gang leader Yitzhak Shamir deserves that title. HORACE HONE The Spider Woman Rita Hayworth Tango Pittsburgh Natasha Wimmer points out, in “The Cursi Affair” [May 9], Manuel Puig’s formidable contribution to the Latin American literature of cursi. But as Pamela Bacarisse has shown in her two studies of Puig’s novels (The Necessary Dream and Impossible Choices), Puig treated popular culture and high culture with equal seriousness. They both deal with the human need to make “the universe less hideous and time less heavy” (Baudelaire). Puig’s vision of life was essentially bleak, but it helped him understand the lives of quiet desperation of others. KEITH McDUFFIE Swans & Zombies & Book Clubs, Oh My! Montreal Our book club met in April to discuss The Black Swan. Some loved Nassim Taleb. Others hated him. But all would agree that Joshua Clover’s “Swans and Zombies” [April 25] gets Taleb all wrong. Indeed, anyone who skim-reads The Black Swan in Barnes & Noble could tell you that. Like the Fight Club, our book club has a few simple rules: first and foremost, if you wish to join us for a symposium, you must read the entire book. Unlike Clover, we think it unethical (and shameful) to talk about books you haven’t read. When reviewers play with ideas they haven’t earned, they signal disrespect for ideas and authors, as well as contempt for readers. JOHN FAITHFUL HAMER Clover Replies Ithaca, N.Y. I have been impressed with the fierce defenses marshaled by the faithful on behalf of Taleb’s book, which I have read with all the diligence it requires. It would be unfortunate if such spirited engagements, focusing their energies on what is a mere fillip in an extended review, ignored the books and issues that are its contents—i.e., catastrophic crisis as a characteristic of capitalism rather than as a consequence of one of its recent management styles, and thus not easily resolved by such conventional choices—when such attention is all one can ask from a serious reader. JOSHUA CLOVER
May 25, 2011 / Our Readers, Martha C. Nussbaum, and Joshua Clover
Letters Letters
Mud in Your Eye Hamtramck, Mich. In minor objection but with much appreciation for Elias Altman’s “Watered Whiskey” [May 2], it seems to me that this collection contains some of the strongest barrels of whiskey brewed by James Baldwin, and as one reads it, and feels the anger that emanates from this love-revering artist, one can understand why these writings, perhaps until now, remained uncollected; taken together, his truth is hard to swallow. Yes, he says, we have come so far, and no, he is not talking about race relations in society, and probably he is not talking about you or, for that matter, me. It burns our throat, and depending on where we came from, makes us feel dirty or makes us feel real. For those of us who are not made proud by his paintings of the great myth of America, but who sense that salvation will come not in loving the freedom but in freeing our love, I think we should ask ourselves: have we added water just to make it easier to go down? CAMERON KYLE-SIDELL Dreamt of in Your Philosophy Holden, Mass. Re Richard Wolin’s thoughtful review of James Miller’s Examined Lives [“Being in the World,” March 7/14]: I would like to see critics take seriously that Western philosophers do not represent all of philosophy. How rich are the traditions of Asia, which could have informed this book’s mode of inquiry. Soon the day will have passed when philosophers of Asia can be ignored without critical comment and when authors are not called out for this failure of global worldview. TODD LEWIS Shorewood, Wis. Richard Wolin properly gives a good part of his review to discussion of Socrates and Plato. Unfortunately, he describes Plato’s Forms as a concern of metaphysics but not of civic life. But Plato makes it clear that the Forms are about knowing what’s truly good, which is the key to any truly useful contribution to civic life. This is not a question that any responsible philosophy can ignore. It would have been helpful if Miller or Wolin had mentioned the valuable contributions to political thought of Locke, Hegel, Mill and Rawls, all of whom followed Plato’s lead in thinking that a clear picture of what’s good for humans is indispensable for thinking about civic life. Obviously philosophers aren’t politically or morally infallible, but they’ve done a good deal to clarify how we might best live together. ROBERT M. WALLACE Wolin Replies New York City In keeping with Todd Lewis’s suggestion, I am all in favor of histories of philosophy that are in tune with the contributions of Taoism, Confucianism and so forth. But I am not sure that such an approach would have worked well in the case of James Miller’s Examined Lives, which is focused on continuities and discontinuities within the post-Platonic philosophical tradition. I agree with Robert M. Wallace about the relationship between the Good, as philosophically defined, and human excellence. However, we disagree about the nature of Plato’s contribution to this discourse. In many ways, Plato’s distrust of the demos translated into a fear of politics and a mistrust of civic engagement. Hence, the draconian (and distasteful) nature of his political prescriptions: elite rule by Guardians and Philosopher Kings, the “myth of the metals” and the Noble Lie, which is designed to prevent hoi polloi, or unwashed masses, from trying to better themselves. Plato’s metaphysical starting point—the supersensible Forms—already displays a scorn for the phenomenal world, politics included. We would do better to take our bearings from Aristotle’s proto-democratic definition of politics as “ruling and being ruled in turn.” RICHARD WOLIN
May 18, 2011 / Our Readers
Letters Letters
Uncle Sam, Closet Socialist West Plains, Mo. John Nichols’s “How Socialists Built America” [May 2] is an instant classic and can’t-miss candidate for inclusion in the next annual Best American Essays. DAVID DUNLAP Woodbridge, Va. The fact that Vivian Gornick’s review of The Letters of Rosa Luxemburg, brimming with Luxemburg’s trenchant and subtle perceptions about the vagaries of socialism [“History and Heartbreak,” May 2], appears in the same issue as John Nichols’s piece reveals weakness of editorial judgment. Compared with Luxemburg’s, Nichols’s views of socialists and socialism are sophomoric. Luxemburg knew that socialist governments often evolved into harsh dictatorships. In Chile, as the president of a 135-year-old democracy, Salvador Allende introduced a new social compact that Luxemburg would have applauded. Allende’s approach paralyzed his government. His cabinet and advisers discussed every alternative course of action in grievous detail, intensively, intelligently and endlessly. No decisions were taken. Hugo Chávez came to power in Venezuela as a populist committed to socialism. He has avoided the trap of chronic indecision by moving resolutely toward dictatorship. It should be clear that America has not been built by socialists of either the Allende or Chávez variety. Norman Thomas realized that he would not gain such power. He employed indirect and pragmatic means to inculcate creative social-democratic innovations into mainstream policy. LAWRENCE J. O’BRIEN Auburn, Ala. John Nichols’s article was such a pleasure and relief to read. I am so weary of politicians tossing the term “socialism” around as a fearmongering epithet. They equate socialist ideas with Stalinism, and are not honest enough to admit that much of what makes America great is positive socialism. Not only do the programs Nichols cites (Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, school lunch and others) owe a great deal to socialist ideas; fire and police departments, public libraries and the Interstate system also reflect socialist tendencies. Even the revenue sharing of Major League Baseball is socialist. Not so long ago the word “communist” was hurled at anyone whose views threatened some people. Now the fearmongers hope to use the respectable word “socialist” as a term of derision. It must not happen. We must join Nichols in loud affirmation that there is such a thing as good socialism. O.C. BROWN Amherst, Mass. May I add to John Nichols’s welcome cast of socialist-leaning characters Benjamin Franklin, our senior and perhaps most important founding father, a rags-to-riches capitalist who first proposed (I believe) public fire departments, public libraries, public parks, public schools, public streetlights, etc. FAYTHE TURNER Reno, Nev. John Nichols mentions James Fulton as a GOP moderate who worked with Socialist Party members. I was Fulton’s Congressional aide from 1957 to 1959 while I was attending George Washington law school. Fulton was a “liberal” Republican from a steelworkers’ district in Pittsburgh. He served fourteen terms and died in office. Back in the ’50s Republicans believed in “Government.” They thought they could do a better job of managing it than the Democrats. Too bad the modern Republican Party doesn’t have any Jim Fultons in its ranks! ALAN HUTCHISON Homage to the Deadline Poet Washington, D.C. Whenever the Rs say “deficit” or “debt” to a man, The Ds should say, over and over again: Afghanistan. REPRESENTATIVE BOB FILNER (Calif-51)
May 11, 2011 / Our Readers
Letters Letters
W(h)ither Medicare New York City Contrary to your editorial “A Serious Man” [April 25], those of us over 55 would also be affected by Ryancare. Paul Ryan’s scheme to destroy Medicare is a prescription for intergenerational warfare. Americans under 55 and not eligible for Medicare will become resentful of Medicare beneficiaries. As those of us over 55 die off, the voting bloc for Medicare will become smaller and smaller, Medicare funding will decrease, services will be reduced and fewer doctors will accept Medicare payments. Newt Gingrich will have achieved his goal of having Medicare “wither on the vine.” I am 65. If I live to be 85, I doubt Medicare will be there for me, either. REBA SHIMANSKY Boise, Idaho The Medicare issue seems a smoke screen. What should really have citizens concerned is Paul Ryan’s proposal to lower the highest individual tax rate from 33 to 25 percent. Perhaps we should raise that rate from 33 to 50 percent (Reagan-era rates). Now that would be “serious.” ROBERT RYCHERT Plymouth, Mass. Paul Ryan’s plan for Medicare in three sentences: (1) eliminate Medicare for those under 55; (2) shift the cost of Medicare to future seniors by issuing vouchers that don’t keep up with healthcare inflation; (3) hope that today’s seniors are stupid/greedy/selfish enough to go along with this. Ryan’s plan follows the standard right-wing playbook—pit one group against another (private vs. public sector workers, nonunion vs. union, rich vs. poor, young vs. old) and privatize everything in sight. It’s a simple strategy—divide and conquer. Congressional Democrats, President Obama, progressive TV and radio talk-show hosts need to be out there with simple charts (à la Ross Perot) to explain this. We don’t have a minute to waste, because Medicare isn’t the only program in jeopardy. CYNTHIA CURRY Fundamentalist ‘Paleologic’ Narberth, Pa. In “Axis of Fundamentalism: Gainesville to Mazar-i-Sharif” [April 25] Patricia J. Williams shows us what can happen when words are infused with unreflective self-righteousness and wielded as weapons in confused and overheated rhetoric. Too often they become metaphors that fundamentalists hate, kill and die by. Psychiatrist Silvano Arieti wrote about aspects of the thinking of adult schizophrenics, also typically found in children 1 to 4, characterized by a primitive form of logic that Arieti called “paleologic.” Misconceptions based on it in the child may confuse him and amuse his parents, while those of the psychotic may be bizarre and idiosyncratic. But paleologic inspired by fundamentalist fervor in otherwise normal adults can be lethal. STEPHEN E. LEVICK Just Another Word for Nothin’ Left to Lose Los Angeles Corey Robin, in “Reclaiming the Politics of Freedom” [April 25], is right in seeing conservative ideology as successfully identifying freedom with the market and depicting government as the source of constraint. Of course, we need to reverse this falsehood by showing how the market enslaves while the government can enhance freedom. But he is dead wrong when he talks about “the age-old suspicions on the left that freedom is…inherently antagonistic to equality.” Since the origins of the terms “left” and “right” in 1789, the left has conjoined liberty with equality. Karl Mannheim’s classic Ideology and Utopia makes it clear that it is the rightists (ideologists) who see freedom as requiring inequality; the leftists (utopians) have consistently viewed equality as a requirement of liberty—as did, incidentally, the ancient Athenian democrats. ROGER CARASSO Schaumburg, Ill. I agree with Corey Robin’s argument about the need to “reclaim the politics of freedom,” but only to a point. The GOP—since Reagan, I think—has been adept at connecting “freedom” to a deep love of country, responsibility and order, despite advocating a radical agenda that diminishes those things. Democrats don’t need to talk more about “freedom”; they need to talk about doing what is right, as a matter of faith, patriotism and just plain human decency. Rather than “freedom” they should find religion—not a church but the source of their own deeply held convictions—and connect through that. And if there are no deeply held convictions, then there are more problems than just what terms we employ in our rhetoric. GENE GIANNOTTA Carrboro, N.C. Corey Robin argues for the left to adopt “the politics of freedom.” But “freedom” has little to say to our day-to-day concerns. Here in Carrboro we prefer “stewardship, caring and community.” These values have sustained a thirty-two-year-old farmers’ market, helped us join just four other Eastern cities as a silver-level bike community and led to ready acceptance of a growing immigrant population. A former mayor is now the most progressive member of the State Senate. Another was the state’s first openly gay elected mayor. We have five coffee shops, none of them chains, and a locally owned newspaper. We are the smallest town in the Southeast to receive stimulus funding for energy retrofits. Our citizens embrace advocacy on a host of issues from climate change to human rights to war and peace. In 2003 we declared Buy French month in response to the “freedom fries” nonsense in Washington. Stewardship, caring and community have served the left well because they truly speak to the experience of the people. DAN COLEMAN Buying the Wiesenthal Book New Smyrna Beach, Fla. D.D. Guttenplan has made a sale for Tom Segev [“On the Case,” April 25]: I will buy Segev’s book about Simon Wiesenthal because he approaches the man’s life with compassion. Yes, Wiesenthal often made inconsistent claims. Yes, Wiesenthal was vain, etc. But without his lifelong dedication to truth and justice the world would be less informed about Austria’s gleeful attachment to the Nazis. More important, many Nazi war criminals would have gone to their graves never having to publicly acknowledge their crimes against humanity. SAMUEL MCILRATH You Say Spartacist, I Say Sparticus Chicago In his April 25 letter Tom Tilitz states, “[Clara] Zetkin was a leader of the revolutionary wing of the Social Democratic Party of Germany…. Her opposition to World War I led her, along with her close friend Rosa Luxemburg, to split from that party and help found the German Spartacist League.” The party of Luxemburg, Zetkin and Karl Liebknecht was the Spartakusbund, or Spartacus League. The Spartacist League is a Trotskyist party founded in the United States in the 1960s. In German, Spartacist League would be Bund der Spartakisten.
May 5, 2011 / Our Readers
Letters Letters
Too Pig to Bail Bluff Point, N.Y. William Greider’s message in “Put the Banksters on Trial” [April 18] is right on the money! If a citizen robs a bank, he will go to jail. Why should corrupt bankers walk free when they’ve robbed an entire nation? And why is President Obama so afraid to let Elizabeth Warren off her leash? I say cut her loose, and let’s watch all the creepy Madoff wannabes pay for their crimes! MARK D. SMYTH Not So Smart, ALEC Eugene, Ore. The American Legislative Exchange Council’s aggressive pursuit of the e-mail records of university professors who have dared to offer some insight into ALEC’s considerable behind-the-scenes influence in crafting anti–public worker legislation is ripe with ironic hypocrisy [“Noted,” April 18]. As revealed by The Nation’s investigative reporting on the anti-immigration legislation passed in Arizona, ALEC is a central player in shadowy antidemocratic efforts to move a highly conservative and destructive agenda through statehouses across the country. Its carbon-copy legislative proposals have cropped up in legislatures across the country, complete with the same misspellings and typos. While ALEC is a private organization and therefore exempt from FOIA, it seems to me that there should be a greater effort made to investigate and expose the members of this cabal, given their obvious effort to influence legislation while avoiding responsibility for the consequences of their efforts. CLAIRE SYRETT Tax the Rich—Please! Prescott, Wisc. So, New York’s new Democratic governor wants to let the “millionaire’s tax” lapse [Katha Pollitt, “Women Under the Budget Knife,” April 18]. Perhaps rephrasing the rallying cry of our founding fathers would be appropriate: No representation without taxation. WILLIAM KRUBSACK Kudos to Melissa Boca Raton, Fla. Re “Are We All Black Americans Now?” [April 18]: Whenever I finish listening to Melissa Harris-Perry on MSNBC or when I finish one of her Nation columns, I always feel like my consciousness has been raised about the human condition and, more specifically, the black experience in America. This essay was carefully prepared, building step by step from the foundation up, with historical truth and insight in a breathtaking series of historical analogies between life for the African-American community and events taking place since the November elections. Bravo to Harris-Perry for seeing things that many of us miss and for the thought-provoking analysis in each of her wonderful columns. BOB WAXMAN Olney, Md. I admire and greatly appreciate Melissa Harris-Perry’s intelligence, mind and creative expressions. In an April 18 Nation Associates ad she says, “For a progressive political nerd like me, being asked to write a column for The Nation was equivalent to being drafted by the NBA (although admittedly with a much smaller salary).” Melissa, think bigger! You are much more valuable than any NBA player! MARY A. ALLMAN Stirling, N.J. Bravo! Melissa Harris-Perry hits the bull’s-eye again. We are all very pleased in my family that she is on board what my granddaughter calls Grampa’s favorite “grown-up magazine with no pictures.” Marriage must agree with her, since she seems smarter with every issue. But this is absolutely the last iteration of her periodically reinvented name I will tolerate—unless, of course, she marries me. L.E. ALBA Palestinians & Israelis Together Motza Ilit, Israel Joseph Dana and Noam Sheizaf, in “The New Israeli Left” [March 28], mention Combatants for Peace. Some Israelis are actively opposing the occupation and the settlements—they are literally destroying our country—and assisting Palestinians because we feel, as Jews, it is our moral obligation. We are a small minority, but that minority is doing great things. The Combatants for Peace movement was started jointly by Palestinians and Israelis who had taken part in violence: Israelis as soldiers and Palestinians in the struggle against the occupation, mainly during the second intifada. Until then we had seen one another only through gun sights and at detention centers. Now we have put weapons aside and fight for peace. We recognize that this is the only way to put an end to the violence and bloodshed and the oppression of the Palestinian people. We act only nonviolently and see dialogue and reconciliation as the only way to end the occupation and to halt the settlements. I recently spoke with a fellow who heads the Jerusalem–Bethlehem branch of the organization. He commanded “shock” forces (his term) in the Bethlehem area during the second intifada, and I don’t even want to think of the violence he’s been responsible for. He spent seven years in jail and was released as part of the Oslo Accords. He had never met an Israeli who was not in uniform until he participated in demonstrations at Bil’in. Here he encountered Israelis in the thick of things, opposing the path of the wall and the expropriation of land. It did not take long before he became active in Combatants for Peace. I volunteer in Humans Without Borders, an organization of about 200 members devoted to helping Palestinian families whose children require medical treatment available only in Israeli hospitals. Each week volunteers drive about fifty children and their families to and from hospitals in Israel, where we visit and comfort the children—especially the ones being treated for cancer. I drive children from the Bethlehem–Jerusalem border crossing to a hospital in West Jerusalem to undergo dialysis three times a week. Humans Without Borders also organizes summer camps for the kids; we bring whole families to the sea and zoos for fun days, and we do so much more. Ilan Shtayer is a remarkable man who almost single-handedly arranges for the weekly distribution of vegetables from Wadi Fukhin, a small Palestinian village being strangled by the ultra-Orthodox city-settlement of Betar Ilit. The village is famous for its organic agricultural produce—they raise the most amazing vegetables. But until Ilan and others took the marketing in hand, the villagers had no way to sell their vegetables. Each week he trucks the goods into Jerusalem and distributes large boxes of wonderfully fresh organic seasonal produce—we never know what the boxes will contain. The 150 families in Wadi Fukhin survive because Ilan and his friends distribute that produce. Anarchists Against the Wall, Combatants for Peace, Humans Without Borders and others desperately need funding. LARRY LESTER
Apr 27, 2011 / Our Readers
Letters Letters
How Do You Solve a Problem Like Libya? Visalia, Calif. In “The Libya Intervention” [April 11] you compare the NATO activity in Libya with the Iraq War. But the Iraq War was entered on a whim of the Dubya Dimwit administration, which justified its actions with a suite of blatant lies. A more appropriate comparison would be with the 1991 Gulf War, where we used military force to halt mass atrocities by armies of criminals acting out the petulant rage of a self-obsessed dictator. I don’t question our intervening in Libya, but I do question our competence. I fear we will be less successful in dealing with Qaddafi than with Saddam. DENNIS ANTHONY New York City I objected strongly to the Iraq invasion, but I felt proud to hear my president say that America had chosen to intervene in Libya because of who we are. I call that restoring our moral standing. ANNA THEOFILOPOULOU Tulsa, Okla. When I read the Wall Street Journal I know I will find soundly researched, reasonably objective news stories, but if I turn to the editorial pages (which I never do) reason and objectivity will be replaced by an ideology worthy of the Middle Ages. Sadly, I find The Nation to be equally praiseworthy, and guilty—with the opposite ideology. An example is your stance on Libya. Not all military interventions are equal. Kosovo cannot be equated with Iraq. BRAD BYERS Be Sure Green Is Green Beverly, Mass. Amen to Mark Hertsgaard’s final comment in “Obama ♥ Nukes” [April 11]: “Let’s make sure that [alternative energy] is truly green.” There are a lot of wolves in sheep’s clothing out there. Something green must return more energy than went into building, maintaining and decommissioning it at the end of its life. This is known as energy balance. A wind farm or solar panel in the wrong place can fail this criterion if a large infrastructure is required to distribute the energy, or if geographic considerations result in the need for heroic civil engineering. Where are energy balance studies? JOHN BELL The Lies of Old Men Beaverton, Ore. William Mitchell, in “Beyond Austerity” [April 4], debunks neoliberal economic myths used to justify destructive government policies. It is courageous for a professional economist to do so. He writes, “The analogy between national and household budgets is false—government can spend more than its revenue because it creates currency.” Mitchell concludes, however, that government budget deficits are needed to fund “increased public spending to directly target job creation.” If the government can “print” all the “currency” it needs, why should there be a budget deficit? When the government prints and directly spends legal tender, it competes with private banks, which also create money. Banks charge interest on their new money, which vanishes when the loan is repaid. Newly printed and spent government money is free of debt and permanently increases the money supply. When “targeted jobs” build interstates and bridges, or a high-speed rail system, they do not compete for resources with home builders or automobile manufacturers. Infrastructure construction and maintenance is uniquely a government responsibility, and paying for it with debt-free new “currency” will promote private investment and economic growth. Dennis Kucinich will reintroduce the National Employment Emergency Defense Act, which authorizes debt-free money creation and spending by the government (see kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/NEED_ACT.pdf). ROBERT W. ZIMMERER Zacatecas, Mexico William Mitchell claims that progressive economists “with some well-known exceptions (Joseph Stiglitz, Paul Krugman and William Greider)” now advocate “fiscal constraint” rather than increasing overall deficit spending. Stiglitz and Krugman are impeccable neoclassical economists who apparently believe in the “special case” argument for massive Keynesian-style deficits during downturns. Otherwise, they are in basic accord with the general laissez-faire consensus of mainstream economics, which generally stands apart from the zany ideas of the Chicago School monetarists and rational expectationists, the supply-siders and libertarians driving the current wave of government-smashing austerity policies. Greider is a journalist. There are, however, a few thousand professionally trained economists who have earned the term “progressive”—often known as “radical,” institutionalists, post-Keynesian, neo-Marxist or Marxist— economists. None of these practitioners are advocating “fiscal constraint” at present. Furthermore, most of these progressive economists would question Mitchell’s standard-issue Keynesian solutions, since while “Japan has been running large deficits since…the early 1990s,” as Mitchell champions, it has also languished in a morass of deflation and stagnation. JAMES MARTÍN CYPHER Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas Madison, Va. I have no argument with William Mitchell’s logic; it’s his argumentative skills that need repair. After a long historical introduction, Mitchell lists five so-called neoliberal lies. He then proceeds to clarify the lies by repeating them in more or less commonsensical terms, pounding them even more clearly into his readers’ minds. Those lies have curb appeal. If they are to be refuted, the language must be equally appealing. As Mitchell points out, the public has been hornswoggled by smooth-talking blue-eyed devils on Fox and other media outlets. If he had simply stated that demand is a function of money in consumers’ pockets and supply is a function of demand, turning supply-side economics on its numskull head, he could have proceeded to destroy the neoliberal lies in plain, organized words instead of deluging his readers with opaque jargon. FRANKLIN LONZO DIXON JR. Correction Katha Pollitt’s May 2 “Subject to Debate” column said that Planned Parenthood received $317 million in Title X funding. Actually, Title X received $317 million in 2010, part of which went to PP.
Apr 20, 2011 / Our Readers
Letters Letters
¡Baja Libre! for the Real Arizonans Thank you for noting our Baja Arizona movement [“Noted,” April 4]. One small quibble: since the term “secession” has some unpalatable history, we prefer “separation.” Our model is West Virginia, which separated in order to stay in the Union when Virginia seceded. We have a drink too, the Baja Libre. It’s tequila and Squirt. Don’t waste the boutique stuff in these; any cheap tequila blanca will do. ¡Salud! BILL MILLER The Insanity of the Nuclear Age Mineola, N.Y. As Japan reels from the cataclysm of earthquakes and the tsunami—and the greatest nuclear disaster since Chernobyl—Jonathan Schell’s linkage of the horrors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with the folly of Fukushima should serve as a cautionary tale about militarism, the nature of war and the dangers of nuclear proliferation [“From Hiroshima to Fukushima,” April 4]. Although more than six decades have elapsed since President Truman ordered the atomic bombardment of two densely populated Japanese cities in World War II, we are still haunted by this mass incineration of civilians. When Italian physicist Enrico Fermi produced the world’s first controlled, self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction on December 2, 1942, the objective was the disruption and elimination of Nazi Germany’s war machine—not the wholesale eradication of noncombatants. Nuclear energy is a fact of life in the Land of the Rising Sun, and Japan has borne the brunt of yet another atomic tragedy. ROSARIO A. IACONIS West Kingston, R.I. Jonathan Schell’s conclusions on the nature of nuclear crises are biblical. This is what we get for fooling with nature. We humans are tropical animals, akin to monkeys and chimps. It is not a great step from fireplaces to steam engines to nuclear power. Each of these methods of creating heat and fuel is severely flawed and unsustainable. If we are doomed for fooling with nature and taking on necessities too complex to handle, then we were doomed 1 million years ago when we conquered fire. The control of fire ultimately resulted in our taking over the planet. I suppose one could argue about whether that was a good thing, especially for the other living things on the earth. But the alternative was to remain in the tropics as just another group of quarreling smart apes. I think of the human species in classical Greek terms. Our nature contains our strengths, beauty and incredible creativity; also the seeds of our destruction through arrogance and greed. We can do nothing but appreciate this fact and try to overcome as we watch and suffer and feel sorrow for our fateful limitations. MARQUISA LaVELLE The Legacy of the Triangle Fire Brooklyn, N.Y. Joshua Freeman, in “Remembering the Triangle Fire” [April 4], did not mention a major change in worker protection inspired by the fire. The day before the fire the New York Court of Appeals declared the state’s first workers’ compensation law unconstitutional. It took until July 1, 1914, three years after the fire, before a new law would come into effect, after amending the New York State Constitution. RONALD BALTER New York City My grandfather, Benjamin Schlesinger, was president of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union in 1903, when he was only 27, then president in 1914–23 and again in 1928–32. At the time of the Triangle fire he was manager of the Jewish daily Forward. My mother often quoted him: “Live a life of social significance!” When his wife complained that they were living in a fourth-floor walk-up in the Bronx and she had to shlep carriages, etc. for three small children, Grandpa would say, “When all the workers live in an elevator building, we will live in one too.” So much has been written about the Triangle fire. Less known is the role of women in the history of the ILGWU. By and large, these very young women, girls as young as 14, came from Eastern Europe. Most were Jewish and lived on Manhattan’s Lower East Side. Through these shared experiences the women developed a loyalty to one another, and, as Joshua Freeman notes, a passion to work together. One of them, Clara Lemlich, who had been beaten up on the picket line, called for a general strike. The “Uprising of the Twenty Thousand” followed. The kind of unity that developed among these women workers is, I believe, unique. Yes, today’s feminists work together and have accomplished much. And there are women today serving as mentors to younger women just beginning their careers. But we come from all over, speak different languages, have various levels of education—these differences make it difficult for me to imagine a feminist leader calling for a strike today that would be followed by a walkout of 20,000 women. Now and then, I wish I had lived at the time of Clara Lemlich, especially now when “labor” is a bad word and belonging to a union is treated as if it were a crime. “Labor” was a bad word then, too, and belonging to a union was a crime. But the women went on strike, and bit by bit the unions and the nation grew stronger. JUDITH S. ANTROBUS New York City My mother, Rhoda Rothman Gladstone, lived through the Triangle fire, 100 years ago, by hiding in a closet. MORTON GLADSTONE The F-word Highland, N.Y. I’m a retired teacher and after I finish reading your wonderful publication, I donate it to my former high school’s library. So that is the reason for this request; not for censorship. You do not use the F-word gratuitously, and I am not offended by it. But I fear a parent may complain and your valuable publication would be taken away from those youngsters, who would benefit from the progressive point of view. Perhaps you could print that word like this: f**k. JOE DiBLANCA We understand your dilemma, and also that well-intentioned but unenlightened parents sometimes call for censorship. But we also see “f**k” as censorship, a euphemism that weakens language and is a tool of hypocrisy. We’d like the kids to see this word used “properly.” If the parents remove the magazine, the kids will lose. But either way they lose. —The Editors No More Bottom of the Bird Cage Northglenn, Colo. How to recycle your Nation magazine: 1. Remove your name and address label to protect your privacy. 2. Place a sticker on the front instructing others to also recycle by passing the magazine along. 3. Make sure the subscription address and phone number are prominent. 4. Leave copies at the airport, and in your doctor’s, dentist’s and other waiting rooms so others can learn about The Nation. GARY COXA ‘Death to PBS and Planned Parenthood!’ St. James, Mo. While we supposedly fight to eradicate the Taliban and their oppressive Sharia law in Afghanistan, the “Tea-liban” and their oppressive law take over our country! DON THOMANN
Apr 13, 2011 / Our Readers
Letters Letters
‘Class Warfare!’ Our Rallying Cry! Hillsborough, N.C. Finally! Eric Alterman writes of the only issue that subsumes all the rest: class warfare [“The Liberal Media,” March 28]. When the right talks of class warfare, the left acts as if this distasteful topic should never be talked about. It won’t even use the term, as if it delegitimizes anything that follows. Ronald Reagan initiated the relentless organized assault on the middle class and the poor, carried on by every president since, with support from a paid-for Congress, the right’s think tanks and the usual demagogues. If Frank Luntz can construct frames that advance right-wing class warfare, it is time for the left to use this term as our rallying cry. We must illustrate with specifics what has been done to the middle class and the poor. I used to wonder how a decimated middle class would be able to buy goods when finally tapped out. Now I understand that business no longer cares about the domestic market, which after all is only 300 million. There’s a whole world of billions out there desperate to consume. We are marked down for clearance. Alterman laments that no one in the media challenged Rick Santelli’s disgusting comparison of public pensions and the slaughter of 9/11. Such a challenge will never happen, because our media are the problem. Consider the evening “news,” as formulaic as infotainment can be. Headlines, followed by the disease of the day and whatever “human interest” stories (Charlie Sheen? Baby in a well?) can be squeezed between the drug and car ads. If they can divert us with this garbage, no one will notice that we’ve finished second in today’s ferocious class warfare. M. DAVID PRESTON Clara Zetkin & International Women’s Day Jackson Heights, N.Y. In a March 28 “Noted” item, Kate Murphy uses the occasion of the hundredth anniversary of International Women’s Day and the release of a report from the White House Council on Women to assess the economic inequalities women still face. She acknowledges the role of Clara Zetkin in initiating the celebration of International Women’s Day. But her description of Zetkin as a “German activist and politician” is too brief. Zetkin was a leader of the revolutionary wing of the Social Democratic Party of Germany for nearly four decades spanning the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Her opposition to World War I led her, along with her close friend Rosa Luxemburg, to split from that party and help found the German Spartacist League. She became a founding leader of the German Communist Party and a Reichstag delegate representing that party. Zetkin died in exile in the Soviet Union shortly after the Nazis came to power. She is interred in the Kremlin wall. It is rare today in the United States for revolutionary voices like Zetkin’s to gain a hearing. But the role of revolutionary socialists in the growth of the international labor movement is an essential part of its history. Zetkin wrote, “The main task is, indeed, to awaken the women’s class consciousness and to incorporate them into the class struggle.” Perhaps such words deserve a hearing today, as attacks on the American labor movement intensify in a manner that will surely have a disproportionate ill effect on women. TOM TILITZ Get the L Out—APA, Not ALPA Denver Steve Early wrote in “Vermont’s Struggle for Single-Payer” [March 28] that Brian Dubie is a member of ALPA, the Air Line Pilots Association. Dubie’s union is the APA, Allied Pilots Association, not ALPA. As a liberal I am irritated that any union member would support the Republican agenda, and I do not want my proud union, ALPA, associated with him. By the way, many ALPA members came from across the country to protest with and support the people of Wisconsin. JAKE SANDERS
Apr 6, 2011 / Our Readers
Letters Letters
On Wisconsin! Ashland, Wis. I am resubscribing to The Nation because of your excellent coverage of the Wisconsin labor rallies. I am passionate about fighting Scott Walker’s dictatorial agenda and his desire to eliminate public unions in this state. I appreciate very much how you have supported this state that I love, and I feel it is important to support you in return. Progressives should stick together, and I will stick by you. TIM ZIEGENHAGEN Gig Harbor, Wash. I enjoyed John Nichols’s “The Spirit of Wisconsin” [March 21] as well as his appearances on Ed Schultz’s show. With all that has transpired there, I am amazed that the old custom of tarring and feathering has not been suggested for the governor and the Republican legislators. They need to be reminded of something that stuck in my mind after hearing it in the movie V: “People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.” WENDY WEIDMAN Appleton, Wis. Walker the Stalker Takes from the poor, gives to the rich This lying, cheating, son-of-a-_ _ _ _ _. Walker the Stalker An odious man who attempts to invoke The will of his masters, the brothers Koch. Walker the Stalker His abuse of power we cannot condone It’s time this tyrant was pulled off his throne! THE SCARLET PIMPERNEL Does Abortion Make Us Brown? Pleasantville, N.Y. Bravo to Melissa Harris-Perry [“Sister Citizen,” March 21] for bringing up an important issue that has not been mentioned on either side of the abortion debate. Her discussion of the misogynistic and racial concern that white women are not having babies while women of color are harks back to the mid-nineteenth century, when abortion first became a contentious issue in the United States. There were a number of activists on the antiabortion side (including women’s rights activists, but that’s for another day). One group of key players were physicians, led by Dr. Horatio Storer, who wanted to outlaw abortion, except when recommended by a physician. Obviously they had a financial motive: in those days anyone could hang up a shingle and be an abortion provider. Dr. Storer had another concern, however, which echoes Harris-Perry’s allusion to today’s antiabortionists’ fear that our country will become more brown. Dr. Storer famously asked in 1868 whether the West would “be filled by our own children or by those of aliens.” He said, “This is a question our women must answer; upon their loins depends the future destiny of the nation.” Sound familiar? CAROL ROYE Secaucus, N.J. As an actress, I tour nationally with a 1912 script by suffragist Marie Jenney Howe, called Someone Must Wash the Dishes: An Anti-Suffrage Satire. Howe used a term now so obscure my audiences rarely even request a definition: “race suicide.” Having read Melissa Harris-Perry’s column “The War on Women’s Futures,” I plan to volunteer that definition at each future performance. I knew the early-twentieth-century white majority feared that women’s suffrage would reduce the number of “real” Americans in proportion to the more propagative immigrants. I hadn’t realized how frighteningly that fear is reflected in the rhetoric of today’s Tea Party members of the House. MICHELE LaRUE People or Gadgets? Los Angeles The March 21 issue presented two useful visions of how Internet freedom will or will not create more openness: Micah Sifry’s “The End of Secrecy” and Chris Lehmann’s “An Accelerated Grimace.” I am closer to Lehmann’s view. The Internet, however ubiquitous and sophisticated, is a widget. It is people, not gadgets, who create a free society and the culture and institutions that go with it. Missing from the articles, as well as most discussions of the WikiLeaks disclosures, is the role of freedom of information laws. Strengthening these laws seems more likely to result in a greater level of government transparency in the long run than hacktivism. NICK McNAUGHTON Copy That Glen Ridge, N.J. The Nation arrived and I looked, as always, to see if Stuart Klawans was in it. Yes!—reviewing Certified Copy [“A Signature Copy,” March 21]. I agreed with his analysis, especially that it’s “futile” to try to decide whether the two characters have just met or really go back. But unlike him, I didn’t like the film. I don’t think Kiarostami likes his two characters. I suspect he may not like his audience either. I’ve seen several Kiarostami features; this is the only one that’s so cold. The others have puzzles too. But in the Koker trilogy and all the others I’ve seen, he is interested in and respectful of his characters. A partial exception is the cellphone guy in The Wind Will Carry Us—an interesting exception, because that guy is portrayed as Westernized, almost rootless, like the Western, cosmopolitan leads in Certified Copy. When I leave the theater after a Kiarostami film, even Taste of Cherry, I feel good. Not this time. It all seemed like a game, one I didn’t care about. STEVE GOLIN Klawans Replies New York City Thanks to Steve Golin for such a thoughtful and kind dissent, and such a reassuring one. It seems he would have gone to see Certified Copy no matter what I wrote, so I won’t have to refund the price of his ticket. He is definitely onto something when he compares William Shimell’s character here to the character of the so-called engineer in The Wind Will Carry Us. But I don’t know where in Kiarostami’s previous work we could find an analogue to Juliette Binoche in this movie. Only in Ten—and really, not even there—has Kiarostami put on film a woman who is so emphatically present. To me, his attitude to the character is not cold at all, and goes beyond mere like or dislike. He’s enthralled by this woman, with her continually shifting desires, dissatisfactions, hopes and hurts, her strangely opaque outpourings and amusingly transparent little lies. That’s how I felt, anyway—and in saying it, I recognize that Golin and I may have an unbridgeable difference of sensibility here. So I’m grateful to him for registering another response, and also for giving me an opportunity to confess what I see as my biggest failure in writing about Certified Copy. I never mentioned that it’s often very funny. STUART KLAWANS Correction Ian Thomson’s “Scotland Yard” [March 28] made it appear that Haitian independence was declared in 1805. It was 1804.
Mar 30, 2011 / Our Readers and Stuart Klawans
Letters Letters
Get Mad as Hell! Tehachapi, Calif. After reading “Indignez-vous!” by Stéphane Hessel [March 7/14], I was compelled to order his French original online. Looking at his photograph, I would never have guessed at his incredible depth and understanding of the world’s unceasing shortcomings. He looks embittered and hardened by his life’s experiences. Obviously, looks are deceiving. His life’s experiences have propelled the man to surpass himself time and time again. The “fight” has not gone out of him at the ripe old age of 93, which makes him practically a superhero. He should be the kind of man youth read about in comic books, admirable in his very tenacity to continue the fight for the universally oppressed. Thank you for making me aware that hope is still alive. MAXINE de VILLEFRANCHE Mayville, Mich. I was happy for, and envious of, the French, who have a person with the stature of Stéphane Hessel to call for outrage over the present course of government and to hark back to the Resistance and its members’ vision for society. Where are the American statesmen—in government and public service—who truly have the common good as their vision? Where are the large figures who will denounce our elected officials who serve the corporations and banks? Our middle-class and poorer citizens are bearing the brunt of taxes; who is there to represent us? Where are our statesmen who will sound the cry “No taxation without representation!”? It certainly applies today as much if not more than 235 years ago. JOHN R. WYSKIEL We Shall Overcome Mount Pleasant, S.C. Contrary to Gary Younge’s “Selling History Short in Mississippi,” the fiftieth anniversary reunion of the Freedom Riders is neither about Governor Haley Barbour nor about people with similar mindsets—those who would rewrite history, losing the truth in the editing [“Beneath the Radar,” March 7/14]. It is about a group of people and their supporters who set in motion, against all odds, a movement that changed the country. When the Freedom Rides began in 1961, Ross Barnett was the governor of Mississippi and John Patterson, the governor of Alabama. Both championed an oppressive way of life for people of color; we confronted them directly on their turf. Freedom Riders (the term was used interchangeably with “Freedom Fighters” by locals) were divided into two groups—those who rode the buses and the citizens of Alabama, New Orleans, Mississippi and other places who supported, trained and protected the riders. It was the latter group who did whatever they could to assist the riders viciously beaten in Birmingham and Montgomery. People by the hundreds faced angry mobs in Montgomery the night before and the day the riders left for Jackson. It was this latter group who sent riders from Nashville and New Orleans to join the rides in Montgomery. It was this latter group, in New Orleans, who provided training and support for about 40 percent of the riders who went to jail in Jackson. In addition to celebrating the event, the reunion of the Freedom Riders should also be about telling the whole story of the Freedom Rides. I understand why people might not agree to attend a reception sponsored by Mississippi’s Governor Barbour; however, I do think we should celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the Freedom Rides in Jackson. We need to bring the focus back to Mississippi and let the local people who played a role in the Freedom Rides (and their children) speak. Our actions in 1961 motivated further actions that exposed and brought down many racial barriers and promoted the emergence of new leaders; they also resulted in great suffering and the deaths of many, such as Medgar Evers, James Chaney, Andrew Goodman, Mickey Schwerner and George Raymond, to name a few. I owe it to them to return to Mississippi for this reunion. I owe it to many whose names your readers will recognize who continued the struggle—Fannie Lou Hamer, Annie Devine, Victoria Gray, Amzie Moore, C.C. Bryant, the Rev. Clinton Collier, C.O. Chinn, the Castles of New Orleans, again to name a few. More than that, I owe it to all those people and their children and grandchildren in Mississippi, Alabama and New Orleans who provided support and protection to those who continued the work in Mississippi through the 1964 Freedom Summer and continue the work to this day. I owe it to these people to go back to Mississippi to say to their families, Thank you. I need to let them and the world know that there would not have been a successful Freedom Ride or a successful Freedom Summer without their support and sacrifice. I also want to stand with them and say to the world that the fight is not over. We fought it yesterday, we are fighting it today and we will fight it tomorrow. Failing to support the fiftieth anniversary reunion of Freedom Riders in Mississippi and giving the local people their place in history would most certainly be “Selling History Short in Mississippi”! DAVE DENNIS (See ms50thfreedomridersreunion.org) A Friend to Public Sector Workers Las Vegas Jane McAlevey’s “Labor’s Last Stand” [March 7/14] misrepresents my actions as former Clark County [Nevada] manager and my sentiments toward public sector unions. Specifically, she states that in 2003, I “aligned with the Chamber of Commerce and the Nevada Taxpayers Union” to blast “public workers for earning more than their private sector counterparts. With a Democrat as the messenger, liberals were confused.” Here are the facts: I never endorsed any report by the Chamber or the Taxpayers Union, and I never “blasted” public employees for making more than the private sector or questioned their collective-bargaining rights. Rather, my position was that by refusing to compromise on wages and benefits when Clark County’s population and service needs were increasing sharply, union leaders jeopardized the county’s ability to fulfill its core mandate: delivering essential services. In 2003 our employees were receiving pay increases double the rate of inflation and far ahead of growth in the CPI, making them among the highest paid in the nation, though we ranked at the bottom in number of public employees per capita. We were falling below acceptable levels for critical services. Since labor made up most of our spending, and we lacked authority to raise revenues, payroll reductions were unavoidable. But the unions’ unwillingness to make any concessions led to service cutbacks and, ultimately, to layoffs. I believe the majority of unionized public sector employees understand the need to compromise. Their leaders, unfortunately, are often less practical even when revenues are down, debt is up and demand for services is unrelenting. This hardnosed tack puts their own membership and vulnerable populations at risk and has cost the unions the broad public support they used to enjoy. Rather than dig in their heels, I would suggest—as I have for years—that they learn to be more flexible. THOM REILLY McAlevey Replies New York City Thom Reilly’s “facts” don’t add up. When I arrived in Nevada in early 2004, the Democratic county manager was almost daily attacking the wages of the workers. In the many news articles from that time in which Reilly is quoted blasting public employee wages for being out of line with those of the private sector, he never chose to distance himself from the attacks officially launched by the Chamber of Commerce, the Nevada Taxpayers Union or the bruising Review Journal cartoons that ridiculed the Clark County workers. In the April 5, 2005, issue of In Business Las Vegas, Reilly states, “There isn’t any justification for government workers getting higher cost-of-living increases than what everyone else gets out there.” In the May 12, 2004, coverage of the county executive making his case to gut workers’ wages and benefits, the reporter states, “Reilly and Finance Director George Stevens returned to well-traveled ground while describing the long-term financial situation of the county to the commission. The pair have argued that the growth in rank-and-file salaries has exceeded the wage growth in the private sector and inflation, and has undermined the ability to create new positions to serve the rapidly growing county population.” Reilly’s letter to the editor underscores many of the points I make in my article about the attack on government workers. Far from jeopardizing the county’s “ability to deliver essential services,” as Reilly claims, the government workers in Nevada in fact offered up many ideas of ways to alter the revenue stream and dedicated hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend against potentially devastating cuts to needed government services. Perhaps most insidious, Reilly raises the false choice of “needed services versus workers.” The problem with Reilly’s narrative, then and now, is that liberals have accepted this antiworker logic rather than outright rejecting the idea that we have only two choices: either destroy some of the few remaining decent middle-class jobs left in America—especially for African-Americans and women, who hold a disproportionately high number of government jobs—or defend needed services. It’s a choice invented by corporate America and its neoliberal allies, who seek to distract us from the many real choices we have as a nation—starting with taxing the rich and corporations. JANE McALEVEY
Mar 23, 2011 / Our Readers and Jane McAlevey