Political neglect
Moral foundation of war crumbling
Along the Turkish and Iranian borders, 2 million Kurds sit
in freezing mud, waiting for a place to live, and even
more important right now, something to eat.
And when the food does come, it drops from the skies at
high speeds, crushing starving civilians; a picture that more than any
other exemplifies the age-old U.S. problem of helping the oppressed
of the world to death.
Ad nauseam we heard that the Persian Gulf war was a moral one.
f Saddam Hussein had gassed his own people — the Kurds — and had
invaded and subjugated a weak neighbor. There was nothing about
power vacuums or oil. It was simply good versus evil.
When victory came as defined by U.N. resolutions, it seemed
America had lost its Vietnam complex and had regained its moral
and political stance in front of the world.
But the moral foundation of this war built by George Bush has
i begun to crumble under the weight of his own neglect. While Kurds
lay in mud recovering from new wounds, Bush sat in his fishing
; boat, saying that just because he had asked for a rebellion didn’t
mean he would militarily support it. Even the humanitarian aid for
those who fought the tyrant was slow in coming. It took world
condemnation before aid packages began to fall.
But behind the president’s resting habits, the neglect he has
shown toward the Iraqi people is gtxxl politics for two reasons. U.S.
f intervention in Iraq’s civil war could have spawned the prolonged
commitment that no one wanted.
The U.N. resolutions called only for the liberation of Kuwait, not
for the overthrow of Saddam. Also, without Saddam and some
semblance of an army, Iraq is a void to be filled in the power
structure of the Middle East. Waiting in the wings are Syria and
Iran, both of which have no love for the West.
To save its moral stance in the Persian Gulf, the United States
must quickly step up massive humanitarian aid to the Kurds. Also,
borders must be opened, including that of the United States, and the
| issue of the phantom Kurdistan addressed.
Bush’s promise of a new world order more and more is looking
| like old Realpolitic. Maybe promises to those oppressed by Saddam
| can’t be kept. The least we can do, however, is not kill with aid
those we promised to save.
— B.N.
4
- LETTERS tt° EDITOR
Allow homosexuals in military
Frankly, I agree that homosexuals
should be allowed into the military
services and in ROTC. Women make
up a substantial proportion of our
forces. And although there are strict
rules regarding “fraternization” be
tween male and female soldiers, it is
a constant discipline problem in “coed”
units.
The presence of homosexuals in
military units should not present any
greater problem. To be fair to homo
sexuals, they should be allowed to
join.
I do not trust, however, all those
former draft dodgers, flag burners
and “Ho Ho Ho Chi Minh” chanters
in the UNL faculty to have our na
tional security or even homosexuals’
rights at heart.
Let us see the efforts of these 1960s
retreads for what they are. They are
bitter, they are vengeful; in spite of
their desperate efforts, we crushed a
brutal tyrant’s war machine.
The rights of homosexuals are
definitely the last thing on their minds.
Stanford L. Sipple
Lincoln
Journalist’s ethics questioned
The front-page story April 12 by
Dionne Searcey concerning the “pro
test” of the University of Nebraska
College Rodeo was the pinnacle of
journalistic irresponsibility.
Whether the “protest” itself was
newsworthy is questionable. The fact
that Ms. Searcey saw fit to write the
article with comments and opinions
from only one side is at odds with any
notion of journalistic integrity. Had
she seen fit to talk to me, to one of the
members of the University of Ne
braska Rodeo Associations, or to our
rodeo’s veterinarian, perhaps she might
have written a more balanced and
factual article.
She might even have learned that
rodeo animals are not brutalized,
abused, drugged or mutilated as the
protesters allege. In fact, had she seen
fit to attend the rodeo and observe the
treatment of the animals, she might
have seen for herself how well the
animals are treated.
Perhaps journalistic integrity and
a spirit of fairness is too much to ask
from a student newspaper, but I be
lieve that Ms. Searcey and the Daily
Nebraskan owes the University of
Nebraska Rodeo Association an apol
ogy for such one-sided and irrespon
sible reporting. Perhaps a course in
journalistic ethics might be an appro
priate course selection for next se
mester, Ms. Searcey.
George H. Pfeiffer
associate professor
U.N.R.A. faculty advisor
-LETTER POLICY
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes
brief letters to ^6'*' editor from all
readers. Letters will be selected for
publication on the basis of clarity,
originality, timeliness and space
availability. The Daily Nebraskan
retains the right to edit letters.
Letters should be typewritten and
less than 500 words.
Anonymous submissions will not
be published. Letters should include
the author’s name, address, phone
number, year in school and group af
filiation, if any.
Submit material to the Daily Ne
braskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R
St., Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448.
HE't.WCE SHIRT.,
NEW FROM
THIS TERM...?
\ _
‘tEMA, 40URS NEVJ
-TOO HUH TOM ... ? HSSSU
GOT THE LOW INCOME
FILERS THIS HEAR.
,HUH...?
rfSEfcr^ / — ,
8' am.. APRIL K>* MIKE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE.
ERIC PFANNER
Shibboleths merit a closer look
Dinesh D’Souza must like the
word “shibboleth.” It means
“password” or “custom” but
has a traditional, intellectual
sound.
D’Souza uses the word often in his
recently published book. And all of a
sudden, perhaps because of his big
words, he is a controversial figure on
college campuses.
Because D’Souza uses big words
like shibboleth, he must be logocen
tric. Logocentrism, he says in an ar
ticle for The Washington Post, means
white society’s use of big words.
Because he is logocentric, he must
also be Eurocentric, which means he
must be a racist.
D’Souza’s family is from India, so
he is an unlikely candidate in white
America for that label.
But since graduating about a dozen
years ago from Dartmouth College,
where he was editor of the conserva
tive Dartmouth Review, D’Souza
steadily as edged closer to being called
a racist. He has worked for the con
servative Heritage Foundation and as
a policy analyst for the Reagan ad
ministration. Several weeks ago, he
spoke at the University of Nebraska
in support of his book, “Illiberal
Education; The Politics of Race and
Sex on Campus.”
l, unlike u bouza, am oi German
and English descent.
But in past columns, I also have
used big words, such as Weltan
schauung and Schadenfreude. Both
are German words, although they
appear in Webster’s Dictionary, if
you care what they mean.
Because I used those words in a
column, I am also logocentric. Be
cause I am logocentric, and espe
cially, because I was logocentric us
ing German words, I must be Euro
centric. Because I am Eurocentric, I
am racist. Because I am a racist of
half-German descent, I must be a
Nazi. In truth, Hiller was only a mild
bigot compared to me.
It is that kind of knee-jerk, chain
reaction labeling that D’Souza ar
gues against; and that is why he has
been called a racist, repressive de
fender of white male America.
To be honest, I don’t agree with
some of D’Souza’s arguments any
more than I agree with his opponents.
He is a strong critic of Affirmative
Action and his background is not rooted
in sensitivity to other cultures. He’s
probably also responsible for torch
ing the Brazilian rainforest.
But his critique, if not his sugges
it is that, kind. o£
knee-ierk. chain
reaction labeling
that D’Souza ar
eues against: and
that is why he has
been called a rac
ist. repressive de
fender of white
mate America.
tions for change, is on target. D’Souza
accurately points out that many col
leges ha ve created a “social etiquette”
that prevents criticism of any non
Westem idea or minority. More than
200 colleges have now adopted some
sort of harassment or “fighung words”
policy, according to a Chronicle of
Higher Education tally.
D’Souza doesn’t urge that minor
ity students and faculty members be
criticized; merely that criticism of
minorities not automatically be con
sidered racist without regard for its
content.
university leaders nave created a
sham community where serious and
honest discussion is frequently
drowned out by a combination of
sloganeering, posturing and intimi
dation,” he wrote to the Post.
When D’Souza came to the Uni
versity of Nebraska College of Law,
he was subjected to exactly such
behavior, as protesters snorted and
squawked while he tried to speak.
How clever. The implication was that
D’Souza was a pig. Fill in racist,
sexist or any other prefix that Fits.
The cacophony over D’Souza’s
sow-like character hides a deeper
debate, one that has been going on
longer than the recent politically correct
movement.
D’Souza writes that U.S. colleges
have gotten lost in lip-service to
buzzwords such as multiculluralism
and cultural diversity, a movement
that has made a casualty of the sound,
traditional curriculum.
That argument is not very differ
ent from that of some other recent
education critics, although D’Souza
distances himself from Allan Bloom,
one of the most prominent.
Another critic, E.D. Hirsch Jr.,
argued in a 1987 book, “Cultural
Literacy: What Every American Needs
To Know,” that schools need to leach
more basic, traditional knowledge.
Like D’Souza’s book, ‘‘Cultural
Literacy” was endorsed by former
U.S. Education Secretary William
Bennett. That, for the politically cor
rect, is the kiss of death.
Hirsch’s point is not that we all
need to know the meaning of “shib
boleth” in order to be productive citi
zens. But a certain amount of shared
information — Hirsch includes an
appendix, “What Literate Americans
Know” — is necessary for basic
communication.
The current decline in such knowl
edge, if projected to an extreme, means
that this column would be unreadable
by anyone without doctor’s degrees
in history and geography. I would
have to explain, in lowest common
denominator terms, that Germany is a
country in north-central Europe and
that the Nazis were bad people. Hitler
was their leader, the swastika their
shibboleth.
Hirsch, like D’Souza, should not
be honked off the podium for his
views. The decline in cultural liter
acy can be seen in the decrease in
newspaper readership and the poor
quality of American cars.
u also contritmtes to tne iacK ui
communication between generations
and between racial and ethnic groups
on campus.
The lack of knowledge, in turn,
leads to confusion over terms such as
“ethnic pride.”
Campus unions for minorities and
minority student governments are one
legitimate and much-needed implem
entation of this pride.
But without cultural literacy — a
deep understanding of the culture one
lives in and how it is different — that
pride becomes merely superficial
segregation on the basis of skin color.
And that is racism.
The demand for fighting words
policies indicates that relations be
tween the races on campus have not
deepened or improved because of
politically correct curriculums.
To D’Souza, that is a dangerous
sign:
“If the university model is repli
cated in society at large, far from
bringing ethnic harmony, it will re
produce and magnify in the broader
culture the lurid bigotry, intolerance
and balkanization of campus life."
Let’s hope his vision is not a shib
boleth for the future.
Planner is a senior news-editorial major
and editor In chief of the Daily Nebraskan.
