>>March 30, 2001
Enough talk of racism
To the Editor:
In response to the article written by Keith Southam, "Intolerance can be left behind," (Argonaut, March 13th) I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm getting a little tired of hearing what a bunch of racist, redneck, uncultured, non-diversified heathens we all are up here in the sticks.
It seems to me that everyone focuses on the negatives and columnists are no exception. Nobody ever talks about the thousands acts of kindness and humanitarianism that occur every day in our little corner of the world.
I see people converse, exchange ideas, and talk about the weather, despite their differences of ethnicity, every day. But, the one time some lone soul writes a degrading, racist remark on the bathroom stall, we all here about it. What about what's going on in the rest of the world?
Horrific crimes are committed every day (race generated) in other parts of the country, yet we are all racist up here.
Quite frankly, I'm ecstatic to live in an area where some of the worst examples of racism are sketches on a bathroom wall. I feel fortunate to live in a place where I feel safe traveling to and from campus on foot. There are many places in the big cities where I wouldn't dare venture, because of my skin color.
In no way do I condone racism. I think it's a terrible and degrading thing for its victims. You can't let a few vocal people speak for the rest of us, and immediately assume racism thrives everywhere.
It's sad that Idaho has this reputation when the Aryan Nation boasts a whopping 30 members (to date) and the rest of us are forced to live under this stereotype. There will always be a few ignorant, vocal individuals, but don't encourage them with publicity.
Dallas Jones
Article about Aryan's misses the point
To the Editor:
Mandy Puckett quoted, "I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend with my life your right to say it." Does defending with your life include marching into the face of an angry screaming mob? Her words "carrying loaded guns does not imply a peaceful march" don't reconcile with her view of armed-police "keep the peace" or with history. Police used attack dogs and guns to keep less powerful people in their place by breaking up "peaceful civil rights marches" in the South. Both groups believed they were right 40 years ago.
The truly wise say the Constitution was written for the least among us. Why do "Aryans" want to be armed? More publicity is a thought, but these least among us have a belief system morally unacceptable to the majority. The powerful always oppress the weak.
People scream emotional "hate speech" in response to "Aryan" rhetoric. Are the "Aryans" afraid? Is it unreasonable that a small group with "hated" beliefs might be assaulted by the diverse community protesting them? What happens if the police fail or hesitate in their response? Civil rights marchers were not "surprised" when police acted in the interest of the powerful majority. Is an attempt to take steps to increase personal safety unreasonable? Would you lead their parade with a first amendment banner?
Perhaps they remind us the Constitution has more than one amendment and 40 years ago "Aryans" would have been cheered in Selma. Shamefully, we try to forget, and we shouldn't.
Don Lazzarini
Gospel Message at UI
Dear Editor:
Idahoans are basically decent, despite the Aryans and the recent political rejection of frontier-day remnants about the Native-Americans.
Yet there are some who spout camouflaged venom about other religious traditions. And such hate mongering happened recently at the UI Administration Auditorium. On March 8, one of the local fundamentalists, Doug Wilson, pretending to be an "authentic scholar," discussed "Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam and New Age: Are they the same? Confused about differences?" (Why leave out Judaism?) Sponsored by three campus religious groups, the flyers showed catchy symbols:
"Christian, believes/interacts with God," "Hinduism, too many gods," "Buddhism, god non-existent," "Islam, God too distant," and "New Agers, gods themselves." The scholar "explored" five questions: God, man, sin, salvation and revelation; nothing on such fundamentals: Who am I? Why am I here? Where am I going? Is it just eat, drink and be merry?
Focusing especially on Islam, his explanation of the "distant" God of the "heretics," as he suggested, reflected his crusade mindset, well conditioned by centuries of "knowledge" ("learned ignorance?"), unaware of the works of such scholars as Huston Smith, Karen Armstrong, Norman Daniels and others. And, of course, Islam had nothing to do with Western Renaissance.
To be fair, however, Wilson unabashedly declared himself as an "evangelist-missionary ... presenting the gospel ... according to his eyeballs." One suspects some in the mostly young audience wondered about his "hate" agenda, when about everything else points to accentuating the positives - tolerance, understanding, acceptance. But, more fundamentally, why such evangelism was allowed at a public university?
For years, Wilson has proselytized at campus fringes. Since differences and hate for other traditions are what his message is all about, he belongs within the confines of his own church. Yet, one can even tolerate Wilson's "brand," if it can generate some social glue so that the massacres of our children are no more.
S.M. Ghazanfar
news | opinion | arts | sports&leisure contact us | ui | front | archives
