I would like to comment briefly on Michael Feuerstein’s letter to the editor (“No thanks,” Oct.30). Michael’s characterization of Virgil Goode demonstrates a real problem with today’s political climate. In his letter, Michael characterizes Goode as “racist,” “xenophobic,” and a “bigot.”
Michael may not agree with some of Goode’s policy positions; indeed he may not agree with any of them. However, verbally trashing somebody you disagree with seems a poor way of expressing one’s disagreement, especially in what is supposed to be an adult conversation.
Is it constructive to begin a political debate by labeling the people you disagree with as “racists,” “bigots” or any number of other slurs? Is it even possible to have substantive debate after already resorting to name calling? I find it sad to see my peers rally around “The Politics of Change” and still resort to the same name calling we’ve seen for years.
Kevin Tschirhart
CLAS IV
Read More
LETTER: Your U.Va. Health System coverage lacks important context
September 9, 2024I understand this event could be seen as “breaking news,” but your reporting left out relevant, easy-to-find, publicly available data to give it proper context.
LETTER: U.Va.'s relationship with the University Guides
By Stephen Farmer | August 30, 2024We are grateful to the leaders of the Guide Service for being open to working with us to improve the reliability and consistency of their tours.
LETTER: It is critical to hold individual hazers accountable
By Todd Shelton | May 10, 2024But while education is absolutely integral to hazing prevention, we must also hold individuals accountable for their hazing behavior.
