United Nations Expansion

With all the recent flurry of interest in the flaws of the United Nations [“U.N. is Deemed a ‘Lost Cause,’ Annan or Not,” Meghan Clyne, Page 1, December 9, 2004] and its proposed expansion [“Heroes of Turtle Bay,” Editorial, November 26, 2004], I am surprised that no one seems to be talking about the most obvious – and relevant – question regarding this issue. To wit, why is the Secretariat crumbling?

In architectural terms, the U.N. headquarters building is a mere child. I live in a pre-war building. Most of the homes in my neighborhood date from the 1890s and early 1900s.My previous apartment building was erected in 1867. There are dozens of buildings scattered around New York that date from the British and even the Dutch colonial periods. Indeed, I would hazard a guess that the large majority of buildings in New York City are as old or older than the U.N.’s rent-free and tax-free East Side address. All of these structures are perfectly sound and habitable. Why then is the Secretariat, a mere 55 years old, apparently on the verge of being condemned?

The only possible explanation is that the U.N., while reaping millions of dollars a year from the American taxpayers and then stealing billions more from starving Iraqis, simply could not be bothered to perform routine maintenance and upkeep on its own home. This strikes me as a little like the child who wants a puppy but doesn’t want to care for it. If the U.N. couldn’t even be bothered to take care of the building it has now, why on earth should we give it more land and financing for a new one?

ADRIENNE SCHOLZ
Brooklyn

‘The Campus Crisis’

Ironically, The New York Sun’s three opinion pieces on “The Campus Crisis,” on December 8, 2004, comprise a view as one-sided as the anti-conservative college ethos they decry [“Wanted: Intellectual Diversity,” Bruce Bartlett; “A New Free Speech Movement, Starting With Alumni,” Ronald Lauder; Higher Education in Decline,” Walter E. Williams].

One of the authors, Mr. Williams, suggests that people support only those schools that make it onto one Web site’s list of the “Top 10 Conservative Colleges.”

Mr. Williams’s argument against what he perceives as “academic fraud” is shopworn. It is easy to cite names of courses that sound facile, like “Rock and Roll,” and decry them as “mindless.” But unless one has taken the class, to criticize a title means little. A course on popular culture could be demanding and vital, and a course on American history might put a student into an intellectual slumber. Or vice versa. To renounce critical analysis of either the classics or cultural currents is close-minded.

Mr. Williams cites a survey that found 98% of college seniors knew rapper Snoop Doggy Dogg, but “only 34% knew George Washington was the general at the battle of Yorktown.” Of course. Thirty-four percent sounds impressive to me. Those surveys don’t measure context or depth, and can be tailored to make anyone look like a fool. Here, the author seems to be arguing only for which version of Trivial Pursuit students should be able to ace.

What upset me about these essays is that they intensify the whole right-left, red-blue, conservative-liberal split that is growing to shape so much of American thought. Everything gets framed in terms of that battle. What about wisdom?

While we’re speculating on what college should be, before ideas get bogged down by the world, it would be nice to at least imagine a curriculum guided only by wisdom – truths that are above politics, above the hill.

ANDY SELSBERG
Brooklyn

Conferees View Schools

The current response of the political class to the ruling demanding $15 billion in additional spending on the New York public schools reveals an unseemly willingness to participate in a stampede [“Outlook Grim as Conferees View Schools,” William F. Hammond Jr., Page 1, December 6, 2004].

Prudence, fiscal sanity, and a respect for basic democratic principles demand that the people and our elected Legislature take a long calming breath and say, “No.”

Al Smith said, “The solution for the problems of democracy was more democracy.” The real problem that needs to be urgently addressed is not a perceived imbalance in funding between regional school districts. The spending per student in the city is sufficient if effectively applied and the differences between funding in urban and rural districts are to a considerable extent a product of legislative choices that can and should be dealt with in that elected branch of government.

The real problem is the effort to transfer the legislative power to spend the peoples, money to the judiciary. That effort is a genuine threat to our liberties.

ROSS WEINER
Rego Park, N.Y.

---

Please address letters intended for publication to the Editor of The New York Sun. Letters may be sent by e-mail to editor@nysun.com, facsimile to 212-608-7348, or post to 105 Chambers Street, New York City 10007. Please include a return address and daytime telephone number. Letters may be edited.