To the Editor:
Paul Krugman (“Climate of Hate,” column, Jan. 10) is on the mark, but he does not go far enough. It is not merely “eliminationist rhetoric” that is poisoning our atmosphere. It is the concerted, consistent effort by the right wing to delegitimize those it sees as political adversaries.
When a political movement preaches that government itself is the enemy; when it argues that the president of the United States may not be a citizen; when it brands political adversaries as “un-American” and serving a “socialist agenda”; when it asserts that citizens may take up “Second Amendment remedies” against a “tyrannical” government, and so forth, we have gone far past the point of heated political debate.
When this rhetoric is condoned and embraced by candidates and officeholders of a mainstream political party (and its media allies), it gets a national platform and an aura of legitimacy. We ought to worry about the possible consequences.
We certainly don’t know what motivated the obviously disturbed individual facing charges in Arizona. But we ought not to be shocked if it turns out that somewhere, at some time, some lunatic takes this rhetoric seriously and acts on it in some unthinkable way.
Jonathan F. Horn
New York, Jan. 10, 2011
To the Editor:
Paul Krugman suggests that Republicans contributed to the murders in Tucson by tolerating rhetoric that creates a climate of hate.
When a film was made envisioning the assassination of President George W. Bush, did Mr. Krugman protest its possible effect on diseased minds? Did he object when Al Gore effectively accused President Bush of treason, bellowing that he had “betrayed this country”? How about when left-wing protesters depicted Mr. Bush as a Nazi?
The Internet ravings of the accused gunman, Jared L. Loughner, have nothing to do with politics as understood by sane people, but rather focus on obsessions such as mind control through the teaching of grammar. Tying his actions to Republicans is baseless calumny.
Nothing will afford us absolute protection against the acts of madmen. But when tragedies occur, it would be nice if we could take the occasion to reflect on the fragility of life and to resolve to treat our fellows with greater kindness and respect, rather than leaping to bash our political opponents.
Howard F. Jaeckel
New York, Jan. 10, 2011
Note from KBJ: Paul Krugman is the most intellectually dishonest person I have ever encountered. Others come close, but he takes the cake.
Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D. 