Thomas Fleming’s “To Save One Child” (Beyond the Revolution, March) reminds me why everyone who still values a reasoned and ethical perspective on family values, and many other aspects of contemporary living in America, should read Chronicles.

After pointing out how easily a well-intentioned individual, professing a spiritual nature, confuses values with virtues, Fleming then goes on to show how government often provides only a seductive Hobson’s choice of “causes” for those lacking the skills of critical reasoning, resulting in a patchwork of assimilated values forming a confusing pastiche of ideas and principles.  For example, declaring loudly for the protection of the unborn while voicing no concern for a social worker who makes decisions that take away parents’ right to rear their children as they see fit—and sometimes removes an already vulnerable child, placing him or her in a home with adults with whom she shares no biological or existing emotional ties.  We are simply asked to believe, along with the government’s representative, that such detachment from the family is always in the child’s best interests.  But what are the qualifications that allow such a radical, and often permanent, decision?  What of first considering a third option, such as mandatory skilled counseling for the parent or family, which may be faith-based?

Chronicles takes on many of the shibboleths created by, and embedded in, contemporary education and government programs—often forcing its readers to consider how they came about, as well as presenting the compelling case that there are alternatives that are not often offered which may say more about that very elusive entity called truth.  To paraphrase Oliver Wendell Holmes, “A mind once expanded never returns to its original shape.”

—Gary Gillespie

Williamston, MI

Decrying Subhumans

“The Swiss Solution” (Under the Black Flag, January), by Taki Theodoracopulos, raised several important questions about U.S. immigration policies and referred to some absurd practices and policies that deserve criticism.  But when the author referred to one terrorism suspect as “subhuman—his surname is Mohamud, what else?” he lost my respect.  Perhaps he is so sheltered that he has never met one of the many good Muslims who have that common name.  Regardless, such comments fuel a dangerous prejudice that brings out the worst in all of us.

—Paul Conway

Oenota, NY

Taki Replies:

Paul Conway sounds like a good and decent man, but I use terms such as towelhead and subhuman for those Muslims who act in a subhuman manner, such as punishing a rape victim, or allowing girls to burn rather than save them, however improperly they were dressed.  I have lived in Muslim countries and have Muslim friends, and I meant the insults for the ignoramuses of Islam who, alas, seem to be in the majority nowadays.

 

Decrying Taki

[In “Our Dearest Frienemy” (Under the Black Flag, April), Taki writes, “The Israeli plan is a simple one: Nod and wink to the Americans, take billions from them each year, and keep building illegal settlements.  Israeli control of Palestinians’ water and other natural resources ensures that no future Palestinian state can exist.”  I have circled that passage and underlined a good deal more.]

This is crap!  Cancel my subscription!  Immediately.

You shouldn’t publish these Muslims.

—[Name Redacted]

Milwaukee, WI