Dear Editor:
It is difficult, if not impossible, to respond to ad hominem attacks, but I'll try.
Seth Johnson, in his Feb. 21 column titled "NAACP without a clue," argues that the NAACP is wrong in its approach to President Bush's Social Security privatization schemes because more black than white couples are dependent on Social Security for retirement income. Changing the system from a guarantee to a gamble threatens people of color more.
The heavy black reliance on Social Security argues for addressing the issues that create this stark racial imbalance, not for fixing something that's demonstrably not broken. The respected, nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office argues that the president's predictions of the system's imminent collapse are ill-founded.
In any case, no one - not even the president - argues that privatization will cure the system's ills, real or imagined.
Johnson argues that Social Security's returns are lower than market rates. But this was never intended to be a competitor with or substitute for private retirement plans - its called Social Security, not broker security.
And by the way - I graduated from a private high school.
Julian Bond Chairman, NAACP Associate Professor, American University
Dear Editor:
Kevin Wunder's Feb. 24 editorial, "Poor Eagle's Nest quality is the fault of AU," was misdirected, to say the least. Though Mr. Wunder's complaints with the administration were justifiable, he should have taken them to the administration instead of maligning the genuinely hardworking, honest people he worked with before he was fired, twice.
If you don't like "standing in the mile-long line at the front register," don't contribute to the problem by charging a $1.09 cup of coffee or waiting until you're at the register to begin the taxing process of choosing a packet of gum. If you have a problem with the "ridiculously overpriced items," think twice before you leave without paying for your coffee, leave opened products around the store or eat a quarter pound of bulk candy before the cashiers weigh it. If you take issue with "cruel" employees, try treating them with a little common courtesy. Please, don't talk on your cell phone when ordering at Subway or paying, and if you do, don't get angry when employees put pickles instead of peppers on your sandwich. Please don't act as though you have a right to be rude and arrogant because you happen to attend an expensive school.
Mr. Wunder, your editorial offended me with its offensive comments and blatant disregard for an entire side of the problems. But that's just my opinion. As an employee of the Eagle's Nest, I will greet you with a smile, offer you a bag and wish you a great day the next time you come into our store.
Because I know that the customer, even when he or she steals, is rude or lies, is always right.
Claire Maude Freshman, SOC Assistant Campus Editor, The Eagle
Dear Editor:
I am writing in regard to Alexander Bruce's Feb. 24 opinion article, in which the title states that Black History Month and similar months "marginalize" minorities, but the content advocates the elimination of racial classifications.
Despite the fact that his immediate "I'm not racist" defense makes him suspect, he is calling for a good action for all the wrong reasons.
Each minority has, indeed, made countless contributions to American history, and each contribution is very much as American as the rest. However, each contribution retains a certain character that is unique to the culture it originated from. This is why America and its history are very much a tapestry of many colored threads as one.
To lump the contributions of minorities into certain "months" is indeed racist, as it is the equivalent of giving each minority a tiny twelfth of a pie while denying the rest. It promotes intellectual laziness when it comes to racial history, since all of the contributions made by members of a certain culture could simply be dumped within the month and forgotten the rest of the time. Let us not forget the egregious crime of giving Blacks "The Shortest Month."
However, we must not forget the unique character of the contributions of minorities. Therefore, Black-American history, as well as Asian-American, Hispanic-American, Irish-American and other American histories, should be taught within the entire curriculum, but as the history of its own people in addition to the history of all the United States.
Bruce advocates the elimination of minority history months because it somehow advocates racism by way of race conciousness. This I could not disagree with more. Racial conciousness is extremely important in our history as well as today, especially considering that real racism (in its well-known form, rather than the abstract one Bruce says it is) still exists. To erase this would be a craven whitewashing of history. The history of minorities in America must still be taught as their own histories, but in the correct form.
Barnaby Yeh Freshman, SPA
