4
Tuesday, October 13, 1992
OPINION UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
IN OUR OPINION
Columbus debate misses the main point of event
Arthur Schlesinger Jr. reports asking Fidel Castro recently how Castro felt about the 500th anniversary of Columbus' arrival.
"We are critical," Castro said. "Columbus brought many bad things."
When Schlesinger noted that without Columbus, Castro himself would not be in Cuba, Castro replied "Well, Columbus brought good things as well as bad."
This conversation illustrates the ambivalence that prevails in the Americas about Columbus. Was Columbus, as some have said, the instrument of reason, bringing the benefits of enlightenment to the New World? Or was he instead the despoiler of a paradise that existed in the New World before his arrival? The way one answers this question in large part depends on one's own political agenda. To defenders of the status quo and its detractors alike, Christopher Columbus has become a symbol of all that is right and all that is wrong in the New World. Both sides seek to answer the question of whether Columbus' landing was good or bad.
Both sides in this debate, however, are missing the point. The only constant we can be sure of in history is change. To argue whether Columbus' arrival was good or bad is moot. Sooner or later, the Old World and the New World were bound to come in contact with each other, and history has shown that when two different cultures meet, conflict is usually the result.
Christopher Columbus and the Old World most certainly had bad points; just as certainly, the natives of the New World had theirs. To argue that one was better than the other is an ultimately fruitless pursuit that solves nothing.
As Castro said, Columbus brought both good and bad to the New World. What we should remember is that the New World as it is today is the product of this clash between cultures, an often bloody and glorious clash that produced a new culture the likes of which the world had never seen. And that is enough to lift the head of the lowliest of us with pride and bow the head of the greatest of us in shame.
MARK COATNEY FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
Latin American problems are foreign to outsiders
The determination of its leaders and especially the generous financial aid it received in Europe helped to strengthen the Shining Path guerrilla movement in Peru and to make its repression very difficult.
The satisfied and rich European society, although having the means to gather accurate information about matters of interest to it, shows an astonishing lack of knowledge about Latin America.
It is true that the level of poverty in our societies is very high if compared with that in Europe. But that cannot justify the fact that many people in Europe think that the solution of the Latin American problems requires a revolutionary and bloody change.
The huge financial aid collected abroad by the extremism has only served to generate pain and death in Peru and because of the damage to private and public property — estimated at around $20 billion — to worsen poverty.
The delicate subject of human rights should certainly be examined considering the existence of the terrorists of Shining Path, who are machines of death.
El Mercurio Santiago, Chile
KANSAN STAFF
ERIC NELSON
Editor
SCOTT HANNA
Business manager
GREG FARMER
Managing editor
BILL LEBIBEGOOD
Retail sales manager
TOM EIBLEN
General manager, news adviser
JEANNIE HINES
Sales and marketing adviser
BILL SKEET Technology coordinator
Asst. Managing...Aimee Braindan
News...Alexander Bloemhoft
Editorial...Stephen Martino
Campus...Gayle Osterberg
Sports...Shelly Solon
Photo...Justin Knupp
Features...Cody Hunt
Graphics...Sean Tevis
Business Staff
BEST SCHOOLS
Campus sales mgr . Angela Cleverman
Regional sales mgr . Mellisa Terrapin
National sales mgr . Brian Willes
Co-op sales mgr . Amy Stumbo
Production mgrs . Brad Branson
Kim Clxton
Marketing director . Anthony Dugger
Valerie Spicher
Classified mgrs . Judith Standley
Letters should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 200 words. They must include the name of the person to whom the letter is addressed, the name of the Kauser must include class and hometown, or faculty or staff position. Guest letters should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 750 words. The writer will be asked to return the right to respect or edit letters, guest columns and cartoons. They must include the name of the person to whom the letter is addressed, the name of the Kauser must include class and hometown, or faculty or staff position.
"Yep, look's like it's about to bust any minute!!!!"
Children cannot understand issues they are protesting
I saw an abortion protester the other day. Standing on 23d Street in a line with about 100 others, she held a sign that said "Abortion Kills Children." She smiled and waved to me as I drove by, and I wanted to stop and talk to her about her feelings about this issue and what her sign meant. Because she couldn't have been more than 5-years old, however, I doubted that she could read it.
STAFF COLUMNIST
This column is not about bashing abortion protesters, pro- or anti-, for protesting, or for that matter, about bashing any protestors. The ability to protest is one of the most valuable forms of expression in our democracy. What this is about is exploitation, using one's children to help advance one's opinion on an issue that a child, in all likelihood, is not capable of forming an opinion.
Could the several children who were holding signs in the demonstration I saw have given me a good discussion about the abortion law they
MARK COATNEY
picture is more likely to get in the paper — a 45-year-old housewife holding a sign that says "Abortion Kills Children" or a 5-year-old girl holding the same sign?
were busy protesting? Could any one of them tell me why I should support the view of their group? Could the little girl I saw give me any reason for why she was there other than that her parents brought her?
Those children were there not because they necessarily believed in the cause and wanted to be there but because they are extremely useful tools in attracting the attention of passersby and media alike. Which
Whether the protest is about abortion, nuclear disarmament or racial injustice, children are used to symbolize hope and a future that will be better for these children if you will just agree with the point of view of the protesters. "Look," the children's presence says, "I didn't have an abortion, and now I have a beautiful, wonderful child." "Look, if you blow up the world this beautiful child will be dead." "Look, if racial injustice continues, this beautiful child will grow up in a hateful, horrible world." "This is not to say that the protesters don't have a legitimate argument, but only that it is wrong to use people who don't understand a message to promote it.
It can be argued that parents are simply teaching their values to their
children, but there is an important distinction between teaching and demonstrating values and asking your children to publicly help you promote those values when your children are not of an age to make their own decisions. We have all kinds of laws, such as child labor and child pornography laws, that exist because children are judged incompetent to make some decisions on their own and thus need to be protected.
This is not to say that we need a child protest law to protect kids from their well-meaning parents, but merely a plea for these parents to let their children remain children and not involve them in their political agendas. On an absolutely perfect fall afternoon, a little girl should be playing with her friends, not holding a sign on 23rd Street. There will be time enough later for all of that.
Mark Coatney is a Linwood graduate student majoring in political science.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Campus preachers are not worthy of students' contempt
be punished and banished to hell.
The man was preaching to the students surrounding him. I surprised myself and actually stopped to listen. Usually, I walk right by, but that day I was interested in the way this man was gathering listeners. He did two things; first insult whomever happened to be walking by, and second make them mad enough to get them to stop and argue with him.
This was a successful technique, and that is why he continued throughout the day, with a crowd around him constantly. I watched, and became angry with him because he was telling the crowd that our parents never loved us, and that we all going to
You all saw him, standing on top of benches by Wescoe Hall attracting a crowd. He caught my attention and like many other students who were walking on campus, I too decided to stop and see what was happening.
be punished and banished to hell.
I went from mad to disappointed because of the students that gathered around him. What made me sad was that people around me were yelling profanities and telling him to stick his head into different parts of his anatomy I was not familiar with.
It was obvious that this man speaking the word was not rational. He was not listening to anyone, nor was anyone getting a word in. It became painfully clear to me that it is impossible to tell an irrational person anything. Yet, some students felt it necessary to insult the man.
I understand that this man provoked the situation. But to insult him back really is pathetic. Why let this joker bother you? Just ignore him, ask reasonable questions, or maybe even listen. It's clear that he makes no sense, but yelling at this guy is not going to make him stop. That was why he continued to speak. I was so saddened that everyone knew he was out of control, but yet kept insulting him.
I was mad at that preacher who insisted that I was going to be con-
denned. But I felt sorry for him that he had to be subjected to the awful things that were said. It's depressing when someone that low down on the food chain, actually gets attention, but even more depressing when my peers get lower.
Andrew Gilman
Opinions must be supported by facts
Kevin Bartel's article in the Sept. 30 *Kansan* is another superb example of some inexperienced hot-shot college graduate's attempt to impress his audience by ineptly expounding his unsubstantiated political views. You would think a graduate English student would have learned by now that an opinion, is worthless without something concrete to back it up.
During Bartels' adolescent years the Carter Administration almost destroyed the economy. Without personally experiencing the hardship of tax burden and excessive government regulation in the real world, Bar
tels is blind to realities. The "Let us take care of you" cry of the Democrats hure the theory-stuffed-inexperienced pup into the worm-out trap of economic ruin. With time the pup's eyes are open to economic understanding and he sees that the free enterprise system works best when free from the monkey wrench of government regulation and that what Americans truly want is the freedom and opportunity to "take care of themselves." They have learned that nobody will take care of you the way you will.
Youthful inexperience and misguided opinions are part of growing up. Unsubstantiated opinions are part of growing up. Unsubstantiated opinions indicate poor scholarship. Different viewpoints are welcome, especially when easily discredited statements containing terms such as "every, everyone, and everything" are discarded and replaced by substantiated logic.
Alan Jarvis Stockton, Mo., senior
Grace
By David Rosenfield