To the Editor:
Re “America Is a Nation of Ideals, Not Bloodline,” by Vivek Ramaswamy (Opinion guest essay, Dec. 21):
Mr. Ramaswamy should be commended for taking a stand against racists within the conservative movement. However, if he is serious about confronting racism on the right, he needs to address his blind spots.
He wrote that it is “unacceptable to spew poison toward Jews, Indians or any other ethnic group,” but says nothing of how the most powerful and prominent conservative in the country, President Trump, recently called Somali immigrants “garbage.” He raises the specter of “anti-white discrimination over the last half-decade,” but gives no details.
He makes references to supposed Democratic liabilities that obscure more than illuminate. None of the examples of “woke excess” that Mr. Ramaswamy refers to are championed by congressional Democrats, popular leftist podcasters or masses of antiracist protesters. His framing of the critical discourse on racism, which shields it from being called out, seems to this reader to be based on partisan distortions and exaggerations rather than serious research. So do his claims of “anti-white” discrimination.
Mr. Ramaswamy sounds sincere about tackling the scourge of Trump-era racism. If his efforts are to succeed, he should consider how his party can push back on the racism emanating from the top and engage in good faith with the scholarship and activism of those who have been fighting racism all along.
Max Feld Brooklyn
To the Editor:
Some readers may see Vivek Ramaswamy’s essay as an exercise in political rehabilitation after the hard right turned on him. That interpretation isn’t wrong, but it’s incomplete.
What his piece really exposes is a deeper fracture on the American right: the difference between civic nationalism and an emerging blood-and-soil politics that ultimately has no room for people like him, no matter how aligned they are on policy.
It’s fair to ask why this reckoning came late. But it’s also worth recognizing that calling out ethnonationalism from within one’s own political camp carries real cost. If nothing else, the essay forces overdue questions: Is it shared ideals or inherited traits that define American identity? And who gets to decide?
Nageswara Madamanchi Ann Arbor, Mich.
To the Editor:
Re “Ramaswamy Challenges Activists to Condemn Intolerance” (news article, Dec. 23):
Vivek Ramaswamy’s recent acknowledgment of intolerance in the conservative movement is welcome, but it seems his concern sharpened only when prejudice reached the Indian American community. This is a familiar and troubling pattern; injustice is often ignored until it touches us directly.
The warning from Martin Niemöller, the German theologian, still resonates; when we stay silent about the persecution of others, we allow intolerance to grow unchecked, until there is no one left to defend us.
Bigotry, whether aimed at immigrants, religious minorities, racial groups or political opponents, corrodes the moral fabric of our society. It must be challenged at its first appearance, not only when it becomes personal.
If we wait our turn to speak out, we may find our turn comes too late.
Terry Barnes Franklin, Mich.
A ‘Shameful Enterprise’
To the Editor:
Re “‘Transplant Tourists’ Pay Richly for U.S. Organs” (front page, Dec. 21):
The improper allocation of organ transplants to the highest foreign bidders breaches all medical ethical standards. This will have negative repercussions throughout the transplant community. Already, potential organ donors are rethinking their generosity.
I am a retired transplant social worker. My former colleagues and I are appalled that some hospitals are favoring those with the most money, and often with lax standards of medical compliance. This is to the detriment of U.S. patients who may die because someone with vastly more financial resources jumped the line.
Those participating in this shameful enterprise must answer not only to their own patients, but also to the entire nation for this unconscionable breach of trust.
Heidi Rechteger Laguna Hills, Calif.
To the Editor:
Your article on transplant tourism highlighted an issue that should appall anyone who needs a transplant or is in a position to give a desperately needed organ.
My sister, Ellen, had two kidney transplants. One, in 1970, came from our mother and, against all odds, lasted 21 years. The second came from a young man who died in an automobile accident. It was a gift for which my family was profoundly grateful.
That even a minority of transplants might come with strings attached or are in any way connected to large donations insults the thousands on transplant waiting lists, let alone those of us who have “organ donor” displayed on our driver’s licenses.
Maura Casey Franklin, Conn. The writer is the author of “Saving Ellen: A Memoir of Hope and Recovery.”
The post Our Duty to Call Out Bigotry in America appeared first on New York Times.
