Letter to the Editor

Perhaps, hidden deep inside Jonathan Zhao’s recent column, he is expressing a desire to debate actual public policy. That we know how to do, and we could expound upon the many matters about which he is mistaken.

He speaks about welfare as if there is much to receive, while the reality is quite the opposite—there is not that extensive of a social safety net in America today. Further, minimum wage policies do not disincentivize work and welfare recipients are required to work in exchange for assistance. Charter schools and voucher programs have been shown to not improve student achievement and are in fact detrimental to regular public school systems and can lead to school resegregation. Finally, studies of marriage do not come close to supporting Zhao’s conclusions.

But how are we to ever engage in these discussions if his argument is composed of so many hurtful and recklessly generalizing disparagements about a group of people?

It was reckless of Zhao to tackle a topic so vast and also so personal for many in this community without duly considering the social, political and historical factors that inform our present dialogue. We hope that the new procedures outlined in the Editor’s note ensure this does not happen again. Of course free speech is important, but it must be accompanied by a commitment to quality column-writing if it is to appear within these pages. This desire for quality should not be conflated with censorship, however. High standards will not diminish Zhao’s ability to express his viewpoint.

If he wished to articulate a policy debate, he needed to have taken the time to do more diligent research. If he wished to convey his lack of education on race relations and even more thinly-veiled lack of empathy towards his fellow American, then he succeeded.

We hope that he can be a fair and impartial Editorial Page Editor. Our campus demands and deserves no less.