Letters to the Editor.

The Texas Prison System Is a Time Bomb

The books reviewed in "The Craze of Incarceration" (Silja J. A. Talvi, May issue) sound like required reading for people interested in where their tax dollars are going.

Unfortunately, I am writing from my prison cell at the infamous Connally Unit in Kenedy, Texas. Kenedy is located only minutes from Beeville, Texas, one of the prison towns mentioned in the article.

Author Joseph Hallinan certainly hit the nail on the head. I do not even have to read his book Going up the River. Texas is all about the prison industry and creating jobs. Not only do you have fathers and sons working in these units, you have mothers, daughters, and aunts, also. Nepotism is the rule, not the exception. Towns like Beeville and Kenedy would have folded up years ago if it weren't for the Texas prison industry.

That is as good as it gets for these people. The Texas Department of Criminal Justice is the final stop for many of its inmates. It is also the final stop for most of its employees. As long as the Texas Department of Criminal Justice is in business, Texas will always have an enormous market for unskilled labor.

The kicker in all of this is: Texas has no state income tax. Who pays to keep the 100-plus prison units in operation? The whole system is a time bomb waiting to explode.

Vincent P. Macri Jr., #843525 Connally Unit Kenedy, Texas

Reed Errs on Vietnam

Adolph L. Reed Jr. mars what could have been an excellent article with overly broad generalizations and factual errors ("Bob Kerrey, An American Shame," June issue).

Reed writes that Gerhard Klann had no ax to grind with Bob Kerrey, but that is clearly disputed by other accounts, including an allegation that Klann was upset that Kerrey had not assisted him in a Medal of Honor application.

In addition, while Reed writes that two Vietnamese women corroborated Klann's account, he fails to mention their communist ties and the presence of Vietnamese officials who were conveniently nearby while they were giving their version of the events that took place.

Also, while Reed insists that Ngo Dinh Diem was assassinated with the endorsement of John Kennedy, those close to the former President, including Theodore Sorensen, Kenneth O'Donnell, David Powers, and Arthur Schlesinger Jr., have all written that while Kennedy favored the removal of the dictatorial and corrupt Diem, he did not want him murdered, preferring a nonviolent removal from office or exile.

The most glaring error is Reed's statement that William Calley took the rap for Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger. Since the massacre at My Lai occurred on March 16, 1968, even an ordinary high school history teacher like myself knows that at the time of the massacre, Lyndon Johnson was President and Clark Clifford was Secretary of Defense. Unfortunately, errors such as these weaken other assertions of fact presented by Reed.

Larry Vigon Chicago, Illinois

Arundhati Roy's Big Joke

I enjoyed David Barsamian's interview with Arundhati Roy (April issue), who has become one of India's most vocal critics of mega dam projects and of globalization. More power to writers like her who are true "organic intellectuals" in the Gramscian sense.

But let me add a couple of important caveats: The critique that Roy makes of Kerala and its hyper-patriarchal society is true mainly (ironically enough) of the state's Christian population, especially the particular community to which she belongs. As a Keralite myself, I can testify that this is certainly not the part of the country where the worst thing to be is "thin, black, and clever." On the contrary, it is the state that has the highest literacy in the country, including female literacy, the lowest birth rate, the best health infrastructure, and so on. And all that is thanks to the communist government there that she is so quick to run down!

Sure, it is far from perfect, but it has done a better job than many other systems in the country. The fact that some of the leaders of the party have been Brahmins is beside the point. Both the state's first chief minister, the late E.M.S Namboodiripaad, and the current leader, Nayanar, come from wealthy families and could have led privileged lives, but they opted out. Namboodiripaad, for example, sold his family's extensive land holdings upon receiving his inheritance in 1940 for the then-enormous sum of 70,000 rupees and donated the money to the workers' movement. As anybody in Kerala can tell you, he led an austere life right up to his death.

So let us, to use the old cliche, not throw the baby out along with the bath water!

As for Roy's comment that in Kerala if you do not have a father you have no lineage, here again, that depends. In the community I come from, you have no lineage if you do not have a mother--the father is not as important as the mother. Also, despite being practically a single mother for much of her life, Arundhati Roy's mother is a highly respected figure in the state, as Roy admits. In fact, women are increasingly a strong presence in many parts of the country, be it in politics or the major professions. There are very strong feminist groups working all over the country to eradicate various social evils, and they have made great strides in combating major problems and bringing in new legislation. There are many women who are greatly respected in the country: writers, teachers, activists, etc. The leader of the Narmada Bachao Andolan is herself a woman, the courageous Medha Patkar, whom I as a journalist have interviewed. It is a true grassroots movement where tribal women and city women walk arm in arm to fight the good fight against a common enemy. Arundhati Roy herself has a huge following in the country.

For Roy to say Indian society does not appreciate women intellectuals is a big joke. Religious fundamentalists are certainly not the majority in the country, Inshallah! (God willing!).

So let me say, kudos to your magazine and to David Barsamian for his excellent interview of a major writer and activist who has had the courage to take a stand against globalization and the multinational corporations that are poised to hijack the country. But please keep in mind, too, that some of her critiques are sweeping generalizations.

Shoba S. Rajgopal Boulder, Colorado 

Oversights on McGovern

Amitabh Pal's review of George McGovern's The Third Freedom ("Bountiful Fields, Empty Stomachs," April issue), while fair minded in both tone and substance, nevertheless contains a number of important oversights.

To name only a few: Pal identifies McGovern as the 1972 Democratic Presidential nominee but neglects to mention that McGovern ran on the most principled and progressive platform of any major candidate in this nation's history--a chapter from our recent past that is all too often forgotten.

Pal correctly characterizes McGovern as believing in free trade and free markets but fails to capture his strong reservations about the world trading system as it currently exists. In fact, McGovern has called for wages and environmental standards to be "raised to a fair level" and has warned against "free market fundamentalism that ignores the positive role that governments and international standards can also play."

Lastly, Pal mentions only in passing McGovern's concrete plan to end world hunger--which is the reason he wrote this passionate book to begin with. McGovern is calling on the United States to annually contribute a mere $1.2 billion to a $5 billion global program that he argues can end hunger on our planet within thirty years' time.

While most leftists and anti-globalization activists will not share all of McGovern's views, surely we can all lend our enthusiastic support to this most worthwhile endeavor.

Ken Brociner Somerville, Massachusetts

The editors welcome correspondence from readers on all topics, but prefer to publish letters that comment directly on material previously published in The Progressive. All letters may be edited for clarity and conciseness. Letters may be e-mailed to: [e-mail]. Please include your city and state.