Bill de Blasio on the Crisis of Inequality and the Blind Spots of the Democratic Party Bill de Blasio on the Crisis of Inequality and the Blind Spots of the Democratic Party
An interview with the New York City mayor as he launches a new “Progressive Agenda to Combat Inequality.”
May 14, 2015 / Eric Alterman
News We Can’t Lose News We Can’t Lose
As prospects for traditional media decline, alternatives are emerging.
May 13, 2015 / Column / Eric Alterman
Letters Letters
No Nukes Are Good Nukes Michael T. Klare wants to support the agreement between the US government and the Iranian state [“For the Iran Nuke Deal,” May 4]. I am against Iran having nuclear bombs or nuclear-energy plants, because I am against any government having nuclear bombs or nuclear-energy plants. But who is the United States—armed to the eyebrows with nuclear weaponry and allied with the only nuclear state in the region—to tell Iran what to do? Suppose the Iranians demanded that the US dismantle its nuclear bombs, close down its nuclear-energy plants, withdraw from its approximately 135 overseas military bases, and cut off all aid to Israel? Suppose they then organized an international boycott of US trade, especially of petroleum, to enforce their demands. Would not US politicians and pundits cry bloody murder, denouncing this as an act of aggression against US sovereignty? It is shameful that the US debate should be limited to the “bomb Iran” crowd and the “bully Iran” crowd. The Nation should have a broader view. Wayne Price the bronx, ny Michael T. Klare Replies I agree with Wayne Price that the universal elimination of nuclear weapons should be our ultimate goal. The pact with Iran is not about the United States telling Iran what to do, but rather ensuring that it abides by its legal obligation, as a signatory of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, to refrain from the manufacture of nuclear weapons. If that can be accomplished in a peaceful manner, we all benefit. Michael T. Klare northampton, mass. In Defense of Incivility Thank you for Joan W. Scott’s article “The New Thought Police” [May 4]. It raises important but very subtle and tricky issues. On the one hand, I think it is incumbent upon all of us in academe to do our best not to be jerks through the kind of gratuitous incivility that helps to stereotype academicians as entitled, socially challenged brats. On the other hand, our dialogue does not have to be devoid of human emotion and passion. Honest disagreements sometimes go through stages of incivility—with harsh, even angry words exchanged—on the path toward healthier engagement. On an institutional level, civility codes can be used to silence or even bully dissenters. When one disagrees with the mainstream view, or a position imposed from on high, it can arouse passion, and sometimes emotions flare. As this piece suggests, university civility codes can easily be turned against people who are criticizing and protesting injustice, wrongful behavior, and bad decisions. Universities that impose civility codes are usually those that cannot manage by thoughtful, inclusive, quality leadership. Instead, they must mandate manners and punish those who venture beyond superficial politeness. David Yamada In “The New Thought Police,” Scott mentions the case of Leo Koch, a biology professor at the University of Illinois who lost his job for suggesting in the student newspaper that there should be “greater freedom in the conduct of sexual relations.” I knew Koch back in 1963. His letters published in the student newspaper did not result in a ruckus as long as they were simply signed “Leo Koch.” The ruckus started only when the editors violated Koch’s trust by identifying him as a faculty member. Edd Doerr silver spring, md. Did We Learn From Vietnam? George Black’s article for The Nation on the legacy of the Vietnam War [March 16] and Jon Wiener’s article on the 50th-anniversary commemoration of the Vietnam Peace Movement in Washington, DC [May 4], are commendable. But one would expect some commentary on the US wars since Vietnam—Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, etc.—to say nothing of Obama’s drone wars. We seem not to have learned anything from Vietnam, since we’re repeating earlier mistakes in the name of national security—unfortunately, this time without a critical peace movement. Laura Nader berkeley, calif. Stormy Weather, Redux Eric Alterman is a journalist, but certainly not a historian [“Days of Crazy,” May 4]. As a member of that profession, I am obliged to tell him that contempt is not a tool in the writing of history. Yet that is what emerges from his remarks about the Weathermen and similar movements of the 1960s and ’70s. His retroactive use of categories like “fanatics” and “terrorists,” very much in the public mind in 2015, does nothing to increase our understanding of those times, but does show how a self-described “liberal” likes to conflate the left and the right, the better to promote his own version of the “center” as the only form of viable politics today. As a young faculty member at Columbia during the events of 1968, I knew many of those among the students who later turned to violence. Granted, their analyses were wrongheaded and their actions counter-productive, but they were not contemptible. As Alterman himself says, one cannot understand their motivations without reference to the Vietnam War and the general politics of the time. Finally, Alterman misleads us and obscures the reality of the period by labeling all the groups he mentions—notably the Black Panthers—idiots and murderers, so as to consign them to the dustbin of history. I can also tell him that the lawlessness of the Nixon administration and the FBI was not a reaction to the violence he indicts: The government had long been using illegal methods of surveillance and disruption of left-wing activity. Indeed, the knowledge that this was so may well have been one of the reasons for the next generation’s turn to violence. Jeffry Kaplow paris Eric Alterman Replies Actually, Eric Alterman is a historian, and has PhD parchment from Stanford University to prove it. The rest of Jeffry Kaplow’s silly missive is similarly fact-challenged and sloppily argued. It would take at least another column to refute all of it, but I would simply point out—again, purely as a factual matter—that nowhere in my column did I call “all the groups…mention[ed]— notably the Black Panthers—idiots and murderers, so as to consign them to the dustbin of history.” (Indeed, I hardly think of history as a “dustbin.” Does Mr. Kaplow?) If his is the best case that can be made for the actions of the actual idiots and murderers I discussed in my column, then it is a sorry one indeed. Eric Alterman brooklyn, ny
May 12, 2015 / Our Readers, Michael T. Klare, and Eric Alterman
Letters Letters
Stormy Weather I am writing in response to Eric Alterman’s column “Days of Crazy” [May 4]. I was a youthful member/advocate of the Students for a Democratic Society during that period, from 1969 to 1971. I was never a part and never a supporter of the Weatherman faction of SDS. In fact, I argued against tactics that could cause human harm. The split that created Weatherman was largely about the appropriateness of violence and the acceptability of collateral damage (harm to humans) from actions against the war machine. But let us look back. US interference in Vietnam goes back to Eisenhower’s blocking free elections in 1958 because it was clear that Ho Chi Minh would win. This was followed by an ever-escalating war by the US government against the Vietnamese people. More than a decade later, Johnson had expanded the war, and Nixon was bombing Cambodia. We had been marching to get the United States out of Vietnam for years. If the purpose was to end the war, chanting “Bring the troops home” was not working. “Bring the war home” changed the picture. The idea that a few casualties here might spare thousands in Vietnam was compelling. Young Americans came to the view that, if we had to have a war, we might as well have it here. This helped scare the country to its senses. It changed the conversation. The actions of the Weathermen that the author describes as “idiotic” helped to bring the war on Vietnam to an end. Jonathan Spero grants pass, ore. Eric Alterman Replies In the words of that immortal moral philosopher Ricky Ricardo, “I don thin so…” Eric Alterman brooklyn, ny Dose of Reality In her article “The Truth About the Measles” [March 23/30], Annie Sparrow declares that “the vaccine is safe.” This is not true. People suffer complications from vaccines quite often, and the US government has a program called VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) that has collected nearly 500,000 cases. There is also a federal vaccine-injury compensation program that has paid out $3 billion. It’s true that some people have been using VAERS data inappropriately, claiming that the measles vaccine has caused hundreds of deaths. Yes, VAERS records do show over 300 reports of death following receipt of measles-containing shots. But the truth is more complicated. First, the measles vaccine is almost always administered with the vaccines for mumps and rubella; second, this MMR vaccine is often given along with many other childhood vaccinations during the same office visit. So it is impossible to state which shot or combination of shots caused a death. Also, VAERS does not have enough data to make conclusive scientific pronouncements about cause and effect. VAERS is merely an “indicator” of vaccine-injury trends that public-health officials and researchers can then explore in more detail. Nevertheless, people do die or are seriously injured after getting measles vaccines. In fact, the US Supreme Court has stated that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe.” That is one reason why Congress gave vaccine manufacturers indemnification from lawsuits. The United States is experiencing a form of mass hysteria that calls for forced vaccination, when there should continue to be legal options for controlling what drugs we use. Parents, especially Nation readers, should be concerned about losing the right to make informed vaccination decisions, especially if their children have already had serious reactions. Steven Rubin, PhD portola valley, calif. Annie Sparrow Replies As Steven Rubin concedes, passive-surveillance programs like VAERS demonstrate only that two events coincide—a vaccination and an “adverse event”—not that the one caused the other. By contrast, decades of active surveillance and rigorous follow-up provide overwhelming evidence that the measles vaccine, whether alone or in combination as the MMR vaccine, is safe. It is important to look carefully at Rubin’s statement that “People suffer complications from vaccines quite often” and to examine his vague reference to “complications.” Minor side effects such as local swelling and redness at the injection site are indeed common, occurring at a rate of 17 to 30 per 100 doses of vaccine. Other mild reactions, such as a low-grade fever or swollen glands, are also common (5 to 10 per 100 doses) but, again, temporary and not serious. Serious side effects, such as high temperatures that sometimes lead to brief convulsions, are not common. On rare occasions, a skin rash of small, bruiselike spots may appear up to six weeks after vaccination. As a mother and a pediatrician, I understand how worrying these developments are for parents, but the child is fine afterward. Exhaustive studies show neither an increased risk for future illness nor any reason not to proceed with future vaccinations. Anaphylaxis, the only life-threatening complication, is extremely rare (approximately one per 1 million vaccinations) and readily treated: In the United Kingdom between 1997 and 2003, there was a total of 130 reports of anaphylaxis following all vaccinations in that time period (about 117 million). All of these people survived. In contrast, for unvaccinated children, serious complications from measles are common, can be permanent, and include death. One in 10 children who catch measles suffers an ear infection. One in 20 gets pneumonia, the most common cause of death. One in 1,000 gets acute-onset encephalitis, an illness that leaves at least half with permanent brain damage. Vaccines are never 100 percent risk-free, but vaccinating children is much less risky than not vaccinating them. This is why I strongly encourage vaccination. The lack of understanding about these relative risks is what leads the public to be confused and certain misinformed groups to discourage vaccination. Unfortunately, it is children who suffer the fallout: those whose parents choose not to immunize them, babies too young to be immunized, and those who cannot be vaccinated due to a compromised immune system. A recent analysis of the available data published in The Journal of the American Medical Association indicates that “substandard vaccine compliance is likely to blame for the 2015 measles outbreak.” As for the measles and MMR vaccines, there is no evidence, after four decades and millions of shots, linking them to permanent disability—whether autism or any other—or to death. To the contrary, these vaccines have saved millions of lives—over 15 million in this century alone—and prevented serious complications and permanent disability in millions more. Annie Sparrow new york
May 6, 2015 / Our Readers, Eric Alterman, and Annie Sparrow
How Long Can Genius Last? How Long Can Genius Last?
In this week’s Altercation Eric honors artists and writers whose careers have stood the test of time.
May 5, 2015 / Eric Alterman
Why Do Political Reporters Refuse to Show Us the Money? Why Do Political Reporters Refuse to Show Us the Money?
Fairytales about the health of our democracy disguise the corrupting influence of top donors.
Apr 29, 2015 / Column / Eric Alterman
I’m Your Puppet I’m Your Puppet
This week's Altercation includes reviews of the Jazz at Lincoln Center Orchestra's tributes to music icons and the darkly comedic Broadway hit Hand To God.
Apr 23, 2015 / Eric Alterman
Remembering the Left-Wing Terrorism of the 1970s Remembering the Left-Wing Terrorism of the 1970s
Bryan Burrough’s new book should lead us to ask why extremists are so frequently able to hijack movements fighting for social justice.
Apr 14, 2015 / Column / Eric Alterman
Grim Reaper Edition Grim Reaper Edition
The best live shows, audiobooks and Eric's funeral playlist: it's all inside today's Altercation.
Apr 14, 2015 / Books & the Arts / Eric Alterman
Race Matters (but Not To Conservatives) Race Matters (but Not To Conservatives)
Minorities confront prejudice and barriers to success in almost every aspect of their lives, but right-wing pundits prefer to blame the victims and the welfare state.
Apr 2, 2015 / Eric Alterman