First of all, hats off to you as the editor of your publication for defending the First Amendment and what it stands for: we are free to express our thoughts and ideals in accordance with our constitution, so long as we are also willing to accept the consequences of what we say and do. Many years ago, as a student at the University of Houston, I, too, was an opinion columnist and had an editorial staff that occasionally had to stand up for me when I drifted towards the controversial in my own columns. I am white and took up a staunchly conservative viewpoint in a paper generally full of opposing views during a time of great cultural upheaval in our country: the time between 9/11 and George W. Bush’s initiation and prosecution of the Iraq War.
In the article referenced above, a great many statements made by the author mirror so many of the publications which appeared long ago in the propaganda machine of Nazi Germany. Jews, Slavs, the Romani, the mentally challenged and the physically disabled were labeled by a political movement as “life unworthy of life.” Statements like “I hate you because you shouldn’t exist” and “White death means liberation for us all,” require only minimal changes to be made to reflect ideals which have been regarded as revolting and inhuman for generations. The dangers of enslaving, segregating, persecuting or exterminating human beings on the basis of their race have been well-explored throughout history and inevitably creates as much suffering and unhappiness for the offenders as the victims.
After reading the article several times through, I gather the author misunderstands the solution to the problem he sees. To paraphrase Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the color of one’s skin does not define the content of one’s character. Calling for the obliteration of a culture based on nothing more than skin color, or language, or one’s religion harkens back to the sins of the past. Advocating this belief is the opposite of progress.
University of Houston
Class of 2003