WRC ignores economic causes
This is in response to Friday’s sweatshop article (“Sweatshop debate seen in new light,” ODE, Oct. 13). The WRC and those interviewed have valid points. However, they are looking at the symptoms rather than the cause. Of course, many of “third-world” citizens choose to work in factories — they have no alternative. Why is this the case? The answer is globalization and our economic system.
Due to globalization, many indigenous societies aren’t allowed their sustainable ways of life. They are forced off their lands or their lands are destroyed. Once they are unable to live off the land, they must join the Western way of life. Without a Western education, though, their only choice is to work in factories.
For proof, one just needs to learn about the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and other Western-world projects in developing countries. Millions of Chinese are being “translocated” from their homelands for the Three Gorges Dam project. Also, the Ogoni people of Nigeria live on some of the most oil-rich land in the world, but the proceeds from the oil go to the militaristic Nigerian government and the oil companies that support it. Closer to home, the Dine’h Indians of Arizona are being forced off their land because it sits on a large source of coal.
The true goal of Western “development” is not to solve poverty, but to extract resources and colonize people into the Western way of life. Until this addressed, human rights problems will continue.
John W. Herberg
environmental studies
Sweatshop workers deserve better
I am horrified by the defense of appalling labor practices that appeared in the Emerald (“Sweatshop debate seen in new light,” ODE, Oct. 13). I wonder, of those students who made those arguments, how many of them have family on the streets or in the sweatshops, or have lived there themselves?
Am I supposed to be impressed because the sweatshop laborers are offered horrible conditions as an alternative to starvation when the goods they make are sold at such prices that good conditions could easily be assured?
This is not “new light,” as the article’s headline promises. This is very old light. Listen:
“The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially, & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race.” — Robert E. Lee, letter to his wife, 1856
“Must I argue the wrongfulness of slavery? … There is not a man beneath the canopy of heaven who does not know that slavery is wrong for him.” — Fredrick Douglass, July 4, 1852.
Randolph Fritz
graduate architecture student
Minority hiring story slanted
Kudos to the Emerald for another challenging piece of experimental journalism (“Minority hirings are a step in the right direction,” ODE, Oct. 12). Taking the notion that “there’s no true objectivity” to its logical extreme, you have bravely shot down yet another stale newspaper convention.
What am I talking about? Nothing less than the first-ever op-ed piece to run above the fold on the front page of a newspaper.
Aww, don’t get all modest and try to claim that’s just a news story. From the headline on down, that’s pure op-ed. C’mon, with phrases such as “an important goal,” “making strides toward true diversity,” and judgments such as “concerned with intolerance and racism” and “a sexist comment” tossed about by the writer with no attribution to any source whatsoever?
No, don’t get modest! You’re tearing down the walls of the ivory tower, making way for a kinder, more personal journalism, and one that’s much easier to write. Thanks to this breakthrough, we will no longer have to go out and get people to say what we want to quote them saying. We can just say it ourselves! Kudos, Emerald, and thank you.
Dan Atkinson
senior
journalism and history
Mothers against underage drinking
This is in response to your drinking article (“Some drinking guidelines for the under-21 sect,” ODE, Sept. 18).
First, there is no reason for drinking guidelines for people under 21 — underage drinking is illegal in Oregon and throughout the United States. Research clearly shows that the longer a person’s use of alcohol is delayed, the likelihood of them becoming a lifetime problem drinker (and drunk driver) is significantly lessened.
On a positive note, the reporter states there is absolutely no excuse to drink and drive. But if people under 21 are going to drink, which is illegal, why would they choose to obey the law and not drink and drive? Drinking and driving kills and injures innocent victims every day. Drunk driving is the nation’s most frequently committed violent crime, and approximately three in five Americans will be affected by an alcohol-related crash during their lives.
In the article, Ilona Koleszar, an attorney with ASUO Legal Services, says “it is a non-criminal violation… .” Drinking can become a very dangerous criminal offense. Drinking and driving killed 15,786 people in the United States in 1999. Alcohol poisoning from binge drinking can kill, and many criminal offenses can occur when someone is intoxicated. About 10 million drinkers were under 21 in 1995. Of those, 4.4 million were binge drinkers, including 1.7 million heavy drinkers.
The mission of Mothers Against Drunk Driving is to stop drunk driving, assist victims of this violent crime and prevent underage drinking.
Danita Derr
president
Mothers Against Drunk Driving
