Go beyond mere criticism
Larry Elliott’s comment article (7 September) provided an excellent analysis on the failed hopes that the financial crash would help bring about the needed flip away from capitalism’s hold on our lives. Important among the lessons he discussed is the need for progressives to win the battle of ideas, including taking back what sort of economics is taught. Elliott also highlighted the need for an overarching critique that works its way down to specific policies. Yet for all this sharp analysis, the article stopped limp in suggesting that progressives don’t deserve a second chance. Is this the best we can come up with: to give up?
To blame progressive parties for this failure is passing the buck. There is a role for other parts of the progressive movement, such as the Guardian, to look at alternative frameworks and educate readers.
While I would be the last to say, to paraphrase Elliott, that this should mean that the Guardian doesn’t “deserve a second chance”, I do suggest that a constructive laying out of alternative economic frameworks may be a more constructive path than continuing the stream of well-written articles that fail to go beyond mere critique.
Tony Camenzuli
Central Coast, NSW, Australia
Concern about immigration
It was with interest that I read Louise Osborne’s article about the demonstrations in Chemnitz, Germany (7 September). Any reasonable person would concede that there are relevant concerns about the number of refugees flowing into Europe, and that this should be rationally addressed, debated and discussed.
A government’s role is to serve its citizens. So I can understand why a growing number of Germans, Austrians, Italians and Swedes feel let down by their governments.
My country, New Zealand, only accepts 1,000 refugees per year, and as they are all vetted and receive ongoing support, there have not been concerns raised about their integration. Of course, 1,000 is a tiny number, but it could be argued that because of this, New Zealand is not seeing the disharmony that Europe is experiencing.
Citizens of any country should be able to debate the impact of refugees or immigration without being dismissed as alt-right, neo-Nazis, anti-immigrant or xenophobic.
Ray Calver
Auckland, New Zealand
Harari’s flawed argument
It is sad to see Yuval Noah Harari adopting such a superficial attitude (The myth of freedom, 15 September). Of course our freedom is not absolute. But Harari’s argument that we constantly click on false internet news sites and vote accordingly is absurd. I do my best to get reliable information and think carefully about it, and I know many people who do the same. Harari makes a dogmatic denial of free will and then, inconsistently, recommends political action.
His weak argument concludes by advising us to question the foundations of liberal democracy. He recommends a political project that is “better in line with the scientific realities … of the 21st century”. Since science is founded on deterministic attitudes, how is this going to help improve our human state, which has its roots in subjective reality? There is nothing wrong with a sensitive subjectivity in contrast to a materialistic scientism.
Christine Avery
Plymouth, UK
A better use of all that money
I deplore most of the Trump administration’s actions, and have every sympathy with the Palestinians (US to cut all funding to Palestinian refugee programme, 7 September). However, given the extraordinary wealth of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, would it not be more fitting for them to forego the next football team (From comedy to cheers at City, 7 September) and support their fellow Arabs, rather than relying on the west to make up most of the shortfall?
Chris Kennedy
Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
Serena is a sore loser
I was annoyed to find that you fell for Serena Williams’s pathetic ploy of presenting herself as a champion of women’s rights, precisely in the midst of her impending defeat at the US Open (14 September). Her trumped-up claim that “men get away with worse” in fact implies an acknowledgement that she misbehaved – and misbehave she did.
So why did Serena abuse the umpire verbally and break her racket? She could not stand being trounced by Naomi Osaka. She is simply a bad loser, and she chose to ruin Osaka’s day of glory rather than gracefully acknowledge defeat. Now that wasn’t fair.
Tijne Schols
The Hague, The Netherlands
Briefly
• Among the many words of wisdom in Stanisław Aronson’s article on repeating the mistakes of the Holocaust (14 September), he warns of the “destructive power of lies”, including fake news. Thanks to Aronson for calling a spade a spade and a lie a lie. Fake news is a morally corrupt expression that seeks to tone down what in fact is a lie.
Martin Skogsbeck
Mougins, France
• Why does the driverless bus shown in Trikala, Greece, need a windscreen wiper? (14 September).
Ralph Orwell
Sydney, Australia
Send letters to weekly.letters@theguardian.com. Please include a full postal address and a reference to the article. We may edit letters. Submission and publication of all letters is subject to our terms and conditions.
