Letters & Comments... continued A win for free speech? It was with a degree of sadness that I read the article in the Special Issue written by Andrew McCabe. Yes, Duke owes its graduates a platform; the tragedy is that time is unlikely to burnish his reputation with the esteemed glow that characterizes Coach Krzyzewski’s reputation. McCabe’s
stitution, the Electoral College, and the American voter, led him to contribute mightily to an atmosphere where “tougher challenges and darker times” slipped the blindfold off Lady Justice with the expectation that her eyes would see the world through his eyes, and more ominously, through the eyes of any one
Ironically, he failed to see the spirits of men and women rising ghost-like from the Pandora’s box that he opened, politicians yet to be elected who will author the very fate he fears: a tenuous and fearful nation where justice is no longer blindfolded. own words—the frequency with which he uses the pronoun I—proves that the person most impacted by his image of reality, the person most deceived by his “faith,” most tarnished by his belief in America will be none other than himself. Given the now-public and increasingly large legal record—including official e-mails sent by McCabe while employed by the FBI—McCabe imagines a nation I do not wish to live in. His words are not benign: “My former colleagues might be disappointed with my forsaking the discipline of analysis for optimism and faith in the American spirit.” His statement is a confession that he knowingly and willfully relinquished objectivity and tilted the scales of justice to satisfy his subjective opinion of a duly-elected politician and his (McCabe’s) subsequent willingness to negate the will of the very public that he claims to champion by removing, without due process, a legally elected president that he doesn’t like. If you recall, in 1860, the same Electoral College system that put presidents Trump and Clinton in office also put President Abraham Lincoln in the White House despite winning only 40 percent of the popular vote. That small portion of the American electorate opposed slavery and willfully triggered the Civil War in defiance of the 1857 Supreme Court majority decision (and appalling opinion) in the Sanford v. Dred Scott case. Mr. McCabe’s disdain, not only for Trump but by extension the Con8 www.dukemagazine.duke.edu
person with the power to silence opposing voices—you know, that free speech bugaboo that yanked President Clinton from the jaws of shame. Who cared what he did in private, certainly not the American electorate. As many moderate Democrats know too well—including many of the people McCabe purports to protect—subjective justice is the foundation of tyranny. As he suggested, “This analysis paints a dark picture of our future, one in which division and politics tear the country into warring tribes, unable to unite around issues necessary to protect our nation and advance the lives of all Americans,” and he is right. Ironically, he failed to see the spirits of men and women rising ghost-like from the Pandora’s box that he opened, politicians yet to be elected who will author the very fate he fears: a tenuous and fearful nation where justice is no longer blindfolded. In the end, McCabe’s argument clarifies one point. He cares deeply about one person: himself. Not surprisingly, he failed to point out that free speech has become an endangered species in the United States. The issue has bipartisan defenders including Whoopi Goldberg, who recently rose in strong vocal defense of free speech and privacy within the voting booth. By printing McCabe’s article, you proved that free speech is not endangered in Duke Magazine. Kudos! Karen Humeniuk, P ’07 Greenville, South Carolina
Let’s be more inclusive I just enjoyed reading the latest issue of Duke Magazine over a cup of coffee. I appreciated the insight and creativity of the contributors in thinking about the future. I am, however, truly disappointed that women were not included in the roster of faculty contributors. It’s very much an artifact of the past to exclude—even unintentionally—women from our conversations. And we have incredible women on our faculty here at Duke. Their omission was striking, especially given the theme of the issue. Joyce Gordon Director, Jewish Life at Duke Not the Marxism he knows I just read “Seeing Beyond the Now” by Sydney Roberts of the Class of 2019. Given the hysterically retro and historically ignorant analysis of economics that she parrots, I assume she is a member of the Class of 1919. Certainly no one in 2019 could mindlessly recite Marxist dogma with no recognition of Marxism’s disastrous century of death, destruction, failure, and evil. Placing this foolish propaganda piece about the failed Marxist belief system in “The Future Issue” is the height of irony. Thanks for the laugh. Daniel Blonsky ’87 South Miami, Florida CORRECTION: In the Spring 2019 issue, a caption accompanying “A little help from civilians,” about an interdisciplinary course that connects students and alumni with military groups to help solve problems, included a misspelling of a student participant’s name. Her name is Akanksha Ray.
SEND LETTERS TO: Box 90572, Durham, N.C. 27708 or e-mail dukemag@duke.edu. Please limit letters to 300 words and include your full name, address, and class year or Duke affiliation. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity. Owing to space constraints, we are unable to print all letters received. Published letters represent the range of responses received. For additional letters: www.dukemagazine.duke.edu.