To the Editor,
I read Mr. Riviello’s letter to the editor (July 31 edition) and would like to make a few points. First, I agree with Mr. Riviello that we need to make equality of opportunity available to all people — regardless of their background, social class, skin color, religion, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity, etc. However, I must respectfully disagree with Mr. Riviello on some issues.
First, our country was not the first to be formed by a set of ideas. Our country was also formed by revolution, or armed revolt. There are many examples in history prior to the American Revolution. One is Oliver Cromwell’s revolution in England in the 1600s — though I’m not saying that I agree or disagree with it. It may be argued that every armed conflict is, at least in part, a conflict over ideas as much as it is other things, such as land, money, capitalism, or ideology. Ideas like democracy and human rights were established thousands of years ago. One pre-European human rights text is the cylinder of Cyrus the Great, a leader of ancient Persia, which is regarded as a manifesto of human rights. Embarrassingly for the Brits, and even to a certain extent for anglophiles such as myself, the cylinder is held in the collection of the British Museum. The situation is a strong reminder of Western imperialism. (All imperialism is shameful).
Second, a return to federalism, which Mr. Riviello calls for, would mean we would support a stronger federal government rather than state or local governments, as he seems to think.
Third, socialism is not defined by equality of outcome. According to the online “Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,” there are over 40 definitions of socialism. The most commonly accepted one seems to be the idea that the population should have control over the means of economic production. This is not the same thing as equality of outcome. There may be some similarities. But the implementation of such things as universal healthcare, the government provision of roads, and the regulation and enforcement of our human rights (including freedom of speech, religion, and equal pay for equal work) would not mean that we lived in a socialist society.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Parisa Zangeneh
Galway, Ireland (formerly of Wallingford)
