Views in brief
Hypocritical concern for Afghans
I'M SURPRISED that Phil Gasper, in his post to the Critical Reading blog on the "newly discovered" mineral wealth in Afghanistan ("Massive mineral wealth discovered in Afghanistan"), didn't comment on the hypocrisy of this passage:
Another complication is that because Afghanistan has never had much heavy industry before, it has little or no history of environmental protection either. "The big question is, can this be developed in a responsible way, in a way that is environmentally and socially responsible?" Mr. Brinkley said.
Compared to what? The socially and environmentally responsible mining industry in the U.S.? This is one of the most dangerous industries to work in, and clearly one of the most polluting and destructive to our habitat (mountaintop removal in Appalachia, anyone?).
This seems like a thinly veiled racist justification for U.S. companies to get their hands into the pie. "Only our socially and environmentally conscious American companies can safely and responsibly develop these mines, so we better get the contracts." Yeah, right.
I'm sure the well-being of the people and environment in Afghanistan is the Pentagon's highest concern for the new "Saudi Arabia of lithium." Their track record for the last few decades clearly shows otherwise.
Derek Wright, Oakland, Calif.
A thoughtful statement on Arizona
I JUST finished reading Jesse Hagopian's article "Arizona Teaches the Four Rs," and then e-mailing it to a number of my colleagues. I found it to be a very well-written and thoughtful statement on Arizona's poor policies. As an editorial board member for RedBrownandBlue.com, I'm always happy to find other voices online singing the same kind of song. Great piece.
Jake Negovan, from the Internet
Why not run for office?
THERE WAS an article on your Web site ("Looking for an alternative to capitalism") wherein you cited a poll that found 30 percent of people in America favor socialism.
If that is true, there are probably areas where socialists could win elected positions in this country. I understand that the ISO is a revolutionary socialist organization, in that it does not believe in participating in electoral politics. But when we have a chance of winning, why not run for office?
If nothing else, socialists in higher office could advocate for progressive change. Bernie Sanders is doing a great job of that. He advocated for a single-payer health care system, for example. I know he's more of a social democrat than a true democratic socialist, but isn't he better than the alternative?
The ISO could win, especially with trust of the two major parties at historic lows. Libertarians are taking advantage of this dissatisfaction. Why aren't we?
Andrew Boyd, from the Internet
Strange timing of Afghan "discovery"
I FIND it interesting that this information (in an article titled "Massive mineral wealth discovered in Afghanistan" posted on the Critical Reading blog) is widely released when the war in Afghanistan is going so badly for NATO forces.
This information now "justifies" the war, in that NATO forces and the Obama administration will say that they are trying to protect the mineral wealth of Afghanistan from being used by the Taliban. They will claim that the Hamid Karzai government and the Afghan people will be able to develop mineral industry as long as the Taliban are driven from the country.
Although this would help the Afghan people, in truth it could do the exact opposite. Instead of the Afghan government or people being allowed to control the mineral wealth, foreign companies from NATO countries will be allowed to develop the mining operations there and given control over the mines.
This discovery of mineral wealth could mean that the future of Afghanistan will be shadowed by the monster that is neo-imperialism. This is my fear for Afghanistan and its people. Let us hope that I am wrong.
Joshua Kinman, from the Internet
