To the Editor:
In a column published last week, Tina Yu criticized the News for publishing a xenophobic and bigoted op-ed on Tuesday. Her reasons are that, apart from being offensive, the piece does not contribute to meaningful dialogue.
I’m afraid I must take issue with you, Tina, on several counts. First, this does not compare with the Rumpus and Record to-do about racial and ethnic jokes. Contrary to these cases, editorials are submitted to the News by non-staffers, and opinions are not, to the best of my knowledge, edited for content – nor should they be. Su’s column was reasoned. If his arguments were ridiculous, it is for the reader, not the editors, to decide. (For the record, they were, and next time he wants to grace us with his opinions, he should try reading some political science and economics written after the 1850s – I’m looking at you, Thomas Malthus.)
Second, you say that his piece did not contribute to meaningful dialogue. I could not disagree more. Su’s column generated two more editorials and two letters to the editor in response, which, in my book, is dialogue. Most importantly, Su can get the public written smack-down he deserves. Which he did. Free speech wins again, and without anyone’s opinion being suppressed. You may have cause once the News starts publishing racist propaganda in the news section. Meanwhile, readers can decide for themselves what they agree with.
Camargo is a junior in Timothy Dwight College.