new internationalist
issue 187 - September 1988
The New Internationalist welcomes your
letters. But please keep them short.
They may be edited for purposes of space or clarity.
Include a home telephone number if possible and send your letters
to the nearest editorial office or e-mail to : ni@newint.org
Double standards
There
are too many myths surrounding native peoples living in harmony with nature
(NI 186). In the past Australian Aborigines
and New Zealand Maoris decimated their environments, and still continue to do
so. Today Australian Aborigines hunt endangered animals which other people would
be jailed for killing. They resist all attempts to hunt rabbits - Australia's
greatest desert-creating pest, for the same reason that politicians ignore environmental
problems: the abused earth of tomorrow is someone else's problem.
Let's bury the noble savage image. Destruction of the environment is as old as mankind (sic). Justifying or ignoring the damage caused by Australia and New Zealand's oldest inhabitants is hypocritical. No Aborigine or Maori would starve today if the hunting ceased: yet still the slaughter of endangered species continues.
David Kemp
Lightening
Ridge, Australia
Passing the buck
Although I applaud your decision to highlight the devastation of the
world's forests (NI 184), the article
by Sue Shaw confuses what needs clarifying.
The scientific management of forests is based on the concept of sustained yield: a long-established principle. It means removing from the forest a quantity of material equal to that which can be replaced by natural growth in a short period. This way forest resources do not become run down. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with forestry providing sustained yield is adhered to. The fact that in many cases it is not, and that commercial benefits which result from forest operations are not fed back to those groups of people with a right to them, is vilification of exploitative political systems, not of commercial forestry generally. Trained foresters take environmental issues very seriously. It is the 'cowboy' loggers seeking a fast buck that are the real problem.
Peter Branney
Shendi, Sudan
Similarity breeds contempt
In your recent Trees issue (NI 184),
an article by Peter Cox drew an analogy between the clearance of a rainforest
and rape. The accompanying picture of clearance in progress was also captioned
('Rape of a forest . . .'). While we do not wish to understate the importance
of the rainforest issue, we feel this analogy is insensitive. Rape is a horrific
act of violence and too many women and children are subjected to it. To compare
the felling of trees with such an appalling crime is to trivialize this obscene
act in a way that we find highly offensive.
Name and address not supplied
Paper tiger
A pox on your desire to have quality photographs! I know that you want
to make ecological knowledge widespread by enticing the posers rather than by
preaching to the converted, but by not giving a moral lead, your magazine merely
gives ammunition to the scoffers. Use re-cycled paper. Show that it can be done
- before we all suffocate for ever under piles of brand-new, silicone-coated,
C02-generating pap.
Paul McKenna
London, UK
Editor: We are still investigating the possibility of using recycled paper.
Bin ban
Very pleased to see your issue on trees (NI
184). I advise you to continue printing the magazine on quality paper. At
least it is read and probably kept by most people. Most newspapers are thrown
straight in the bin.
Malcolm Samuel
Portstewart, UK
Blinded by science
I was interested to read S Gould's letter
under the title 'Muddled thinking' (NI
184). The author says 'Science is a technique for explaining the world,
the most efficient technique we have yet found.' I understand how S Gould
explains 'the physical world' and 'the human race' through science. But is
this really how she explains her own existence? Science certainly isn't muddled
thinking but it is very straight and narrow and misses a great deal along
the way.
Wayne Beldome
Adelaide, Australia
Photo flit
There were glaring omissions in the Photography edition (NI
185). Where was the picture of the plump white hand holding the emaciated
black child's hand - controversial because of its implicit donor-receiver racism?
What happened to the photo of the pack of photographers surrounding a starving
Ethiopian child, waiting for it to die? And why didn't you publish the image
of the young Vietnamese girl running towards the camera with her back ablaze
with napalm? These three photos bring in stereotyping, ethics and the power
of images: without them any magazine on photography and world development appears
badly researched.
Ian Chandler
Bath, UK
Cartoon: Cath Jackson
Israel's shame
We are told that shame
is self-hatred
and that we must not feel it.
We are told that shame
belongs only
to other religions.
We are told that shame
means weakness
and we can be blackmailed.
We are told that shame
leads to madness
which we cannot afford.
But I am ashamed of the men
of my people
and their brutal minds.
I'm ashamed that I didn't
try then to stop
what I'm seeing now.
I'm ashamed that my son
is the same
as the others around him.
And I'm ashamed of the fear
for ourselves
that makes us not care.
Nancy Nachum
Jerusalem, Israel
Tough stuff
J D Simnett (Letters NI
185) complains that using the term macho to imply 'male sexist' is
racist I cannot agree. As a Uruguayan translator I come across the word in many
contexts. In its neutral sense macho indeed means male, though it is
generally applied to animals. However it can also mean a tough guy or someone
admired (in certain quarters) for his sexual exploits. Male sexist or chauvinist
may not be an entirely accurate translation but neither is it too far-fetched.
Let us stop quibbling over this word and concentrate on the real issues. There
are plenty of them.
Ana Ransom
London, UK
Burning issue
Richard Butchin's Update on Israeli Tactics (NI
182) is very misleading. Israel is fighting a war of survival against Islamic
aggression: a war in which Palestinians are the unfortunate victims. The country
is doing everything possible to resettle and improve the lot of the Palestinians.
But Islamic/Arab nations want to keep the Palestinians as impoverished refugees,
to use them as pawns in a political propaganda war. It is also worth noting
that stones thrown by rioters kill people and petrol bombs bum people to death.
Israel has been forced to use controversial measures to save lives and keep
the peace.
Phil Lumley
Surrey, UK
Counting costs
The Bolivian Ministry of Education has released alarming statistics
on educational levels in Bolivia. Of every 1,000 children that enter school
in urban areas, only 493 ever complete primary school, 393 finish middle school
and 211 realize the full 12 years of education. The figures for rural areas
are even more tragic. Of every 1,000 children entering school, only 140 finish
primary school, 13 complete middle school and 5 manage the full 12 year term.
Can you wonder why Bolivia is the poorest country in South America?
Bruce Harris,
Director, Save the Children Fund,
La Paz, Bolivia
Crossed wires
Your Housework issue (NI 181)
did a brilliant job of conveying the extraordinary complexity of the 'entity'
so foolishly referred to by many social scientists as 'the status of women'.
You avoided this trap by presenting the expectations placed upon Western women
in historical context, and by debunking the myth of the oppressed, down-trodden
women in poor countries as compared to the liberated ones in rich countries.
Given such sensitivity, how can you continue to express the Position of Women
on a simple, five-step scale in your Country Profiles? Doesn't this deny such
complexity its richness and context?
Michael Billig
Lancaster, US
Sticky fingers
Vanessa Baird exemplifies sensationalism and parochialism in 'Our Future
in Their Hands' (NI 182). She fails to
distinguish between science and its application. I think it is irresponsible
to criticize science per se; surely even Ms Baird wishes to stay off the path
of misology (hatred of reasoning). To look at the socially disruptive aspects
in science, of which there are plenty, one should point a finger not at science
itself but at the deleterious pair that habitually have their dirty hands in
the cookie jar of enlightenment: government and big business. Ms Baird touches
only lightly on this connection, preferring instead to take science as her scapegoat.
Tim Colvin
California, US
 |
The views
expressed in these letters are not necessarily those of the New Internationalist
|
 |
|||
|
|||
 |
|||
Jumping
the queue 
