The real threat to democracy
One wonders where Natalie Nougayrède has been hiding all her life, after reading her piece Russian cyberwarfare threatens democracy itself (10 November).
After reading for decades about US support for coups around the world, the training of murderous dictators at the US-based School of the Americas, the handing of lists of thousands of communist sympathisers and civil rights activists to Indonesian murderers for execution in the 1960s, and working to ensure the demise of democratically elected rulers it dislikes, such as Chile’s Salvador Allende, she claims some Russian ads on Facebook and the revelation of Hillary Clinton’s emails may have huge “ramifications … The US and the UK … may have had their political integrity compromised by hostile foreign meddling … If that turns out to be true, then we are looking at an entirely new world.”
The “new world” that she envisions is simply one where a few sneaky computer manipulations, which at the most hoped to “sow discord and confusion”, lead to horrific outrage, while our support for and training of murderous campaigns and the destruction of civic society is seen as a paragon of democratic integrity.
I wonder what term George Orwell would use to describe this?
Richard Abram
Sydney, Australia
• Natalie Nouygayrède’s commentary on the Russians using social media to influence not only the US election but also the Brexit referendum matches Andrew Simms’s back-page essay (10 November) on using folktales and myths to “guide us out of the dark woods” that such clandestine sleights of hand can lead us into. Simms mentions in this regard “the charismatic trickster”, a familiar figure in shamanic mythology who has the power to manipulate and fool others to achieve his own sinister ends.
Sound familiar?
Richard Orlando
Westmount, Quebec, Canada
Let’s talk about immigration
Both Carlos Lozada’s review (3 November) and the book he was reviewing, Sasha Polakow-Suransky’s Go Back to Where You Came From, perfectly, if unwittingly, show us why many voters are now turning to xenophobic far-right parties. These voters are overwhelmingly ordinary people who are not themselves xenophobic or rightwing but are fearful for themselves, their families, their communities and often their jobs. And where else can they go but to those extreme parties, when no one in positions of power on the centre or centre-left will take their fears seriously?
Not for a moment, in either the review or the book, is the possibility seriously considered that they might have a point. That immigration might need to be controlled for the good of those who are already in the UK and to help prevent the decline of general conditions – welfare, employment, infrastructure and (not least) the environment – not only for natives but for immigrants too. That there is a genuine discussion to be had about all this, whose conclusions are not already foregone, as they clearly are for Lozada and Polakow-Suransky.
Merely pretending to listen, as the latter recommends, isn’t going to fool anyone. So if xenophobia does become mainstream, step forward, self-satisfied upholders of enlightened correctitude! You will have done your bit.
Patrick Curry
London, UK
Briefly
• It is surprising that none of the articles in the Guardian Weekly that discuss the Catalan referendum (3 November) refer to that classic of the Spanish civil war, Homage to Catalonia by George Orwell. Relevant to today’s issues, the hospitality of the Catalan people should be noted, as well as the rigours and pointlessness of the battle.
Louise Joy
Heathcote, Victoria, Australia
• The excellent article by Fintan O’Toole on disparities in wealth (27 October) reminds me of a quote from Plutarch, “An imbalance between rich and poor is the oldest and most fatal ailment of all republics.”
The level of inequality between the “haves” and “have nots” seems to be increasing at an exponential rate, in terms of income and wealth. How fitting that this article should appear just days before the release of the Paradise Papers.
It would seem too many of our republics are suffering from this ailment. But will it prove fatal?
George Hanna
Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand
• I do not consider the commemoration of two world wars via Remembrance Day to be wallowing in the past and meaning it is time to move on, as Simon Jenkins suggests (17 November). We are also remembering those who continue to be maimed, killed and starved in ongoing wars.
We can stop wallowing in the past when our present stops killing men, women and children and when millions of refugees no longer have to flee for their lives.
Susan Watson
Jurbise, Belgium
• Regarding Theresa May’s political woes, first Michael Fallon went, then Priti Patel had to also go (17 November). I feel Oscar Wilde might have observed that “to lose one cabinet minister may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessness”.
Alan Williams-Key
Madrid, Spain
• Email letters for publication to weekly.letters@theguardian.com
