I agree with the point that Bruce Peterson and William Doherty make in "November 2020 will test us" (Opinion Exchange, Oct. 25) that we all need to be "wary of our own partisan zeal" during these contentious times. One of the things I have been doing is to read the perspectives of people with whom I disagree with an open mind.
In that spirit, I read both "The case for Republicans" by Minnesota Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka and "The case for DFLers" by Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman. As one would expect, they presented different perspectives on the issues facing our state and nation. What I did not expect, but perhaps should have, is that Gazelka wrote not one word about racial inequities or racial justice. Not one word. Yes, he worked in the idea that we should expect "every Minnesotan to be treated fairly by police," but the focus was an assertion that Democrats want to defund the police and, unlike Republicans, do not care about public safety.
I do believe that people of goodwill can disagree about the police reform and funding of police departments, but the discussions we have been having since the death of George Floyd are not rooted in concern of police maltreatment of people who look like me or Gazelka. The fear of crime has been used to support racially biased policies from the time of slavery through Jim Crow laws and right up to our president's focus on threat of fair housing policies to the safety of suburban women. Consequently, in my view, political use of the fear of crime without explicit acknowledgment of racial inequities as context is an old and pernicious dog whistle.
So, when I see Hortman's assertion that "too many Republicans have fanned the flames of hate and division because they think that benefits them politically," I conclude that Gazelka's omission proves her point. I know that people like me who tend to favor a larger government role in addressing social problems are not always right. I believe that there are people of kind heart across the political spectrum. But until the Republican Party can speak forthrightly and without ambiguity about issues of racial justice and racial equity, it does not deserve our support.
John McGuire, Rochester
NUCLEAR WEAPONS TREATY
Why isn't U.S. a signatory?
On Saturday, the 50th nation ratified a United Nations treaty to ban nuclear weapons, triggering its entry into international law in 90 days ("U.N. nuclear treaty to take effect," Oct. 26). The U.S. is not one of those countries. We should be.
Cathy Murphy, St. Louis Park
• • •
Unfortunately, the treaty will add nothing to world peace initiatives, as nuclear powers maintain their stockpiles and rogue nations such as North Korea and Iran continue to enhance their nuclear capabilities. With opposing nations citing "verification and disarmament issues," nothing will really change from the status quo, so what's the point? Similar problems afflict the Paris accord on climate change, as India, China and other members remain major polluters. Furthermore, countries will continue to buy and employ every conventional weapon enhancement available, as war readiness remains their only option for survival.
God has stated that there will never be peace on earth, but a 12-year-old offers some hope for future generations ("I can't vote but you can," Readers Write, Oct. 26). Jaelyn Kline cites a statement from justiceandpeace.org: "True peace is of God so it involves the harmony of all people pursuing justice for all. In this way peace is, at its heart, a reflection of God's Kingdom." Wise words for future generations to save the world from potential nuclear, biochemical, pandemic and pollution devastation.
Michael Tillemans, Minneapolis
COVID-19
Regarding responsibility …
Per the front-page Oct. 24 article "Masks could easily save 100,000 lives," depending upon which of five strategies the U.S. adopts, we will experience between 400,000 and 1 million before February.