Readers React to First Amendment Issues on Campus; GAP, Horowitz Controversies Bring Differing Views to Public Discourse at UNC

Like many African-Americans, I have had the displeasure of hearing David Horowitz defend his views on Black Entertainment Television last week.

After hearing him state that Americans realize the horrors of slavery because of movies like "Roots" and "Beloved," I immediately dismissed him as a total idiot with a lot of money and time on his hands.

After conversing with some friends about this very controversial topic, I've come to a conclusion. The reason why I feel so many black students are upset (and I do not speak for the entire black community) is because Horowitz's arguments are alarming.

What scares me the most is that this man's opinion is being fostered as factual information. Newspapers use discretionary measures all of the time, why run his ads?

Anyone who has taken an AFAM 40 class can dispute any one of his claims, but what about those who haven't?

Of course, I'm not a survivor of a slave, however, slavery has beget many children, one being segregation and Jim Crow.

My parents and grandparents are survivors of that period in our glorious American history, and so am I.

As we live in a period of racial profiling (another child of slavery), we as African-Americans are affected daily by this crime against humanity, a crime that has killed more blacks than the Holocaust.

Horowitz's comments are alarming in the fact that many Americans (white and black) feel the way he does, and these people are heads of corporations, managers and police officers.

In response to Matt Dees's column, I have only one question.

If welfare and affirmative action were initiated to level the playing field for blacks in this country due to slavery, what about the millions of whites, Hispanics, Asians and women who have benefited from these same programs?

Veronica Peagler
Senior
Dramatic Arts

TO THE EDITOR:

After reading Matt Dees' "Disagree, Debate, but Don't Kill the Messenger" (April 2), we can see a certain editor could benefit from a class in African-American history.

If Matt Dees resents anyone who would call him a racist for seeing David Horowitz's side of things, what would his feeling be to those who call him ignorant?

Dees thinks Horowitz "makes some pretty good points" in his editorial.

What would those be?

The point that descendants of Africans earn more here than they do in Africa?

Comparing black Americans to black Africans is pointless.

European Americans earn more than Europeans.

This is America; we do OK here.

The figures Horowitz should have quoted are the ones that compare how well African-Americans fare economically against white Americans.

Quoting Matt Dees, "There are still injustices that face black Americans, but reparations are not the answer."

Well, what is the answer?

Dees agrees that these injustices, the "aftershocks of slavery," need to be fixed.

His suggested list of repairs include: working to end racial profiling, reforming our justice system and raising the quality of public education.

Guess what, those are all reparations.

Reparations do not necessarily have to be monetary, though it would be difficult to achieve them with only smiles and good faith.

Matt Dees, the fact that you champion Horowitz's right to voice his opinion does not make you racist, but the fact that you find his argument "cogent" (which means compelling and convincing) makes you shamefully ignorant.

Someone needs to sign up for an AFAM 40 class.

Leah Irvin
Junior
Economics
Carmen Scott
Junior
Journalism and Mass Communication
Editor's note: Matt Dees did take AFAM 41 and received a B. Thanks to the wondeful Professor Reginald Hildebrand.

TO THE EDITOR:

I am writing in praise of the University for allowing the Genocide Awareness Project to put up its display on the quad Monday and Tuesday.

Whether or not you agreed with the information presented, it is refreshing to know that we live in a country where anyone can present his or her case and not be persecuted for it.

At the same time yesterday, there was a presentation in the pit of people who could not even peacefully practice Falun Gong meditation in China without being beaten and tortured.

Don't ever say that we should disallow people who are not like us to practice what they please (within lawful bounds) in public.

I'm not homosexual, nor do I support it, but I love the fact that others are allowed to, if they want. That's what freedom is.

If you don't want to look, don't look.

But don't try to kick them out.

That's what oppression is.

Ben Meredith

Junior

Religious studies