Objects to Recent Letter
I am appalled that you would publish a letter such as “Occupy Wall Street and the Bankers.” Regardless of one’s personal opinion of the Occupy Wall Street protests, comparing it to Nazism is ignorantly reductive at best and highly dangerous at worst. Running that letter, which is more than double your standard for length, gives readers a dangerously biased opinion of the Occupy Wall Street protests. The sheer length of the diatribe indicates to readers that your paper shares that view, and it prohibits me from being able to address the letter point by point within your 300 word limit.
Most basically, a straw man argument falsely equates one view to a more offensive one. Mr. Morse wrote “When one replaces the word ‘banker’ with the word ‘Jew’ in the Occupy Wall Street Rhetoric, one glimpses at the true nature and intent of the assault.” I wonder if Mr. Morse would agree that replacing “e. coli” with “Jews” would allow one to glimpse the true eradication goals of the USDA. Such views are obviously absurd.
In the same breath that he accuses protestors of sharing the ideology of Marx and Hitler, Mr. Morse says they hide behind “democracy and collective decision making,” which he goes on to trivialize. It cannot be both ways, and no sane American, right or left wing, would argue that democracy is a pipe dream.
Finally, Mr. Morse is not even local. He is a Boston-area radio host, and his letter was part of a larger article that was published on the Internet. I do not pretend to understand why your paper would publish such an offensive, logic-defying letter that seems to be clearly self-promotional for Mr. Morse.
Editor’s Note: As you correctly pointed out Mr. Morse’s opinion went over the 300-word limit set for letters to the editor. In hindsight we should have run Mr. Morse’s opinion as a guest commentary.