Forced, false connections weaken argument
At numerous points throughout her submission, “Cost of war
does domestic harm” (May 12), Karen Brodkin makes some very
uninformed connections between current domestic problems, state
problems and the war.
She begins by relating the monetary costs of war to the
state’s budget crises. Unfortunately, she doesn’t look
to the fact that most of these state budget crises are brought
about by mismanagement by state legislatures, something that is
perhaps most visible here in California, where Governor Davis has
taken us from our largest budget surplus to our largest deficit in
a span of four years.
It doesn’t seem to me that this has any relation to the
war at all, and should be a tenuous link at most. It may also come
as a shock that the government was not going to bail out the states
before the coming of the war either, which further depletes her
argument.
Brodkin goes on to say that war is paid for disproportionately
by the lower-income sectors of the economy. In so doing, she
forgets that the wealthiest of Americans pay over a third of their
income to the federal government, and when you look at percentage
of the overall tax pool, they also pay the majority of the
nation’s budget. She also ties low-income demographic groups
to those of color, something that is completely unrelated to the
rest of the article. Her use of such tactics (i.e. throwing race
into a non-racial argument) does nothing but muddle her attempts at
making a lucid, believable argument.
My last grievance with her article comes from her rhetoric,
involving the fear of speaking out for the possibility of being
called unpatriotic. On the UCLA campus the silent majority
supporting the war were afraid to speak during events like the
March walkout, where the protesters actively tried to silence the
pro-war contingent.
I suggest Brodkin take a good look at the basics of situations
and not immediately dive into the regurgitation of leftist rhetoric
before becoming informed on the issue first.
If you are going to make an argument, stick to it and argue one
thing and not a whole agenda.
Chris Riha
Third-year, economics
Angry man not censored at United4Freedom
panel
Last week the panel I am the moderator for, United4Freedom,
spoke at UCLA for Bruins for Israel. There was a statement made in
the article regarding the event (“Panel discusses peace in
Middle East,” News, May 12) that a man, who was angrily
denouncing Israel, was escorted out of the auditorium.
Disagreement is always welcome as a way for all of us to listen
and learn from people that oppose our views. However, this man was
not only out of control, but hysterical. And not only was he in
opposition to Israel’s existence, he was saying California,
Arizona and New Mexico were stolen from the Mexicans, and that we
were all thieves.
After many repeated attempts asking him to politely to sit down
and let others speak, he refused. I then had to leave the podium
and confront him, which, without any security, was a bit
frightening, as I did not know if he was armed or dangerous.
However, in order to keep the evening on track I did manage to have
a few gentlemen help escort him nicely out of the auditorium.
This was not the usual anti-Israel protester, but a man, as his
friend who later came up to me stated, who was clearly
psychotic. I think this is an important distinction, because the
article made it look like we were restricting the question and
answer period, however; this is never done with my panel, nor would
I allow censorship. That is something I leave to the other
side.
Allyson Rowen Taylor
Moderator, United4Freedom
Feminists should combat historical sexist
customs
As I read Jenna Sutton’s column, “Feminist
stereotypes veil important issues” (May 16), I was reminded
of feminism’s battle cry, “the personal is
political.”
Sutton said “Feminism should not be about petty control
over the intricacies of male/female relationships.” It seems
curious to me that Sutton does not recognize that the same societal
tendencies and hegemonies informing the current regime’s
willingness to eliminate funding for rape-crisis and domestic
violence centers in Massachusetts are also at work within the
“intricacies of male/female relationships.”
This is not to say that door-opening or seat-offering is
necessarily and always oppressive, but it’s important to not
forget that these social customs evolved out of an ideology that
purposefully and systematically devalued women. In my mind, as a
feminist, you should not simply accept these gestures unthinkingly,
but instead should recognize them as social products from our
history.
Although unmentioned by Sutton, it’s also important to
note that male-male relationships, female-female relationships, and
gender identity constructs are also well within the realm of
feminism, and that to embrace the true fight of sexism, one must
also target heterosexism and transphobia.
These are highly connected societal issues that can’t be
separated from social policy, in the same way the personal is
inextricably linked to the political.
Brian Hurley
UCLA alumnus
Palestinians not following Bush’s road
map
This weekend’s three suicide bombings in Israel prove that
in spite of intense efforts by the Bush administration to work for
peace, the Palestinians will continue their path of violence. It
was the Palestinian administration that only two months ago
complained that the violence continues because of a lack of U.S.
involvement due to its preoccupation with invading Iraq. But now
that President Bush has devoted a lot of time and effort to the
situation in the Middle East in response to their pleas, they
literally blow his plan up in his face.
Newly appointed Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas claims to have
unequivocally denounced terror and has pledged his full support to
the proposed “road map” for peace regardless of the
fact that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has yet to fully
accept it. The most immediate demand the road map makes on Abu
Mazen is that he use his security forces, over 40,000 strong, to
dismantle the terrorist organizations operating in the Palestinian
Territories, namely Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Yasser
Arafat-backed Al-Aqsa Martyr’s Brigade.
Three suicide bombings in less than 48 hours prove that Abu
Mazen, much like his predecessor Yasser Arafat, is either unwilling
or incapable of reigning in the terrorists. Many may argue that Abu
Mazen must be given more time to accomplish this, but in the
meantime people are dying and Abu Mazen hasn’t even begun to
challenge the terrorist organizations.
Gal Sitty
Second-year, international economics