On ’ Big Ideas, Bright Stars ’ : “Michelle Rhee is doing exactly what students need, not just in D.C. but in many inner-city public schools. If we don’t demand more from supervisors and teachers, how can we demand more from students?” Darian Weaver, Freeport, N.Y.
A Changing China In “Mao To Now” (Dec. 31/Jan. 7), Melinda Liu paints a masterful picture of China, but what isn’t said is as telling as what is. The amorality with which China has pursued development and its callous indifference to human rights has had deleterious effects across China and around the world. China is a principal obstacle to a solution that could end the genocide in Darfur and an impediment to preventing Iran’s genocidal mullahs from acquiring nuclear weapons. It’s great that millions of Chinese are making money, but money isn’t everything. Alexander Chester Cambridge, Mass.
In “The Rise of a Fierce Yet Fragile Superpower” (Dec. 31/Jan. 7), Fareed Zakaria cites China’s overwhelming economic growth, yet decentralization is becoming more of an issue. This lateral relationship between the provinces and the central government is preventing China from reaching its full potential. It needs to make an effort to reverse this process and establish a more authoritative relationship if it wants to move up the global totem pole. With luck, the upcoming Olympics will help create a stronger sense of national unity. Aaron Rosenthal New York, N.Y.
I lived in Shanghai for 43 years before immigrating to the United States in 1993. Melinda Liu’s vivid descriptions of China in the ’70s and ’80s reminded me of my experience, and provided Americans with a greater understanding of China. However, the explanation of the term “sea turtles” isn’t quite right. Liu describes “sea turtles” as those Chinese “migrat[ing] back and forth across the ocean.” The Chinese words hai gui mean “overseas returned students” and are a pun for “sea turtles.” In the late ’90s, many Chinese students returned home to find jobs after the dotcom bubble burst in the United States. William Shih Hayward, Calif.
Illegal Immigrants and Cheap Labor Jorge Bustamante’s contention that “illegal immigration is a result of the demand for cheaper labor in the U.S.” is a distortion of reality (“The View From Both Sides,” Periscope, Dec. 31/Jan 7). Illegal immigrants did not originally come here to fill any need except their own. U.S. businesses capitalized on immigrants’ financial needs and the fact that they can’t demand fair wages. This makes even the substandard wages American businesses pay apparently worth breaking the law to obtain. Because U.S. businesses can’t maintain profits without taking unfair advantage of illegal immigrants, a need exists, but this dependency (a more accurate term than “demand”) on “cheaper labor” does not justify breaking the law. It is a crime the world over to cross into a country and take up residence without that country’s permission. Monty Martin Calimesa, Calif.
I agree with Jorge Bustamante that in order for pertinent decisions to be made in the immigration debate, we need to look at the issue from Mexico’s perspective as well as our own. He is correct that building a wall separating the two countries is not a decision that should be left solely to Americans. People need to look at the issue and the facts from both sides and re-evaluate their opinions before there is any more talk about building a wall. Daniel Lee Levittown, N.Y.
This Is a Voter’s Brain on Fear Your article about the unfortunate use of “fearmongering” in American politics brought to mind the communist witch hunts of the 1950s, when people were scared of anything different from themselves (“The Roots of Fear,” Dec. 24). It is upsetting that people buy into the hype that there are millions of people “out there” who want to kill us simply because we’re American. It’s sad that our nation now governs by keeping us petrified. Hannah Denny New Richmond, Wis.
Sharon Begley’s article tumbles hard into the trap that legal scholar Stephen Morse calls the “brain overclaim syndrome”—the trendy tendency to “explain” human behavior by pointing to brain circuits that light up while we’re behaving. But brain activity doesn’t explain human behavior; it’s just more activity to be explained. The minimal brain research Begley cites sheds no light on why people vote the way they do. Yes, fear can sometimes trump reason, but that was known long before brain scanning was invented. And contrary to Begley’s assertions, reason frequently overcomes fear. In fact, whether we even feel fear has much to do with how we interpret what’s happening around us. I might fear a shady character in a New York subway, but a visitor from Idaho might not know enough to be afraid. Politicians do try to play on fears to get votes, but it’s virtually always both candidates doing this. In any case, no one has ever shown that a candidate’s TV ads actually produce a significant fear reaction in a viewer. Violence-saturated Americans are more likely to yawn than cower when Rudy Giuliani reminds them, yet again, about 9/11. Robert Epstein, Ph.d. Contributing Editor, Scientific American Mind Vista, Calif.
Correction “A Few Faces of the Faithful” (Dec. 24) misstated the number of Russian Orthodox followers. The Orthodox Church in general has 240 million, but the Russian Orthodox Church numbers about 80 million. NEWSWEEK regrets the error.
