Black reparations necessary for social justice
In reference to “Pay one group, pay all” (ODE, March 3): Wealth is largely generational and accumulative. I’m not saying that it’s impossible to break that cycle. Oprah Winfrey did it. Colin Powell did it. Everybody should be able to do it. But society has taken steps to make sure that blacks are systematically denied these opportunities. A major example is the disproportionate number of blacks being denied access to the suburbs with redlining and blockbusting.
Salena De La Cruz’s argument takes an individualist approach to reparations with remarks such as, “Why should I have to pay a fine for something I had no part in?” Instead, reparation is directed toward the system. Reparation calls for the federal government to address the past and take steps to eliminate the effects that still remain today. Reparation is not the federal government handing out fat checks to descendants of slaves, as De La Cruz stated.
Another miseducated point De La Cruz makes is that the “Union soldiers who died during the Civil War (were) trying to free these slaves.” The Civil War was over the difference in economy between the North and the South. Slavery was intertwined with the economies of both the North and the South. If the Union army was truly fighting to end slavery, then it wouldn’t have taken the Civil Rights movement a hundred years later to finally end disenfranchisement. We must think about reparations in terms of schools, social services and equal access to the American freedom, democracy and justice we love to preach.

Jasmin Thana

sophomore

history and ethnic studies

Iraqi conflict targets

defiance, not oil
Professor Remington’s letter to the editor (“Bush rhetoric hides oily motivations,” ODE, Mar. 3) unabashedly regurgitates the popular “It’s all about oil” conspiracy theory regarding war in Iraq, an idea adhered to by such mental marvels as those who believe the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, were achieved by remote-control airliners and a mysterious satellite death ray to administer the final coup de grace on the Twin Towers.
If we merely desired Iraqi oil, we could have taken it all 12 years ago, when similar theories last circulated around campus. We could have had it any time since, by working with France, Russia and China to weaken and circumvent the sanctions on Iraq. There are far less expensive ways to obtain oil from Iraq than a war. Were he allowed, Saddam Hussein would gleefully sell us every drop.
Could it be that Hussein’s documented addiction to weapons of mass destruction and his 12 years of U.N. defiance really are relevant facts here? Could the discussion of military action for more than a decade be because it’s long overdue? Recall that for eight of those years, an individual more interested in “freeing Willy” than foreign policy occupied the Oval Office.
Dr. Remington: I found your letter rather disappointing coming from a fellow physicist whose past correspondence to the Emerald encouraged free thought unencumbered by the chains of blind ideology. On Sept. 11, 2001, a band of religious fanatics judged our country while encumbered by theirs. I politely suggest you not judge our current government based
on yours.

David Mason

seventh-year graduate

physics