To the editor:
The diatribe you printed by Steve Martin of Amity telling of how he believed Dr. Johnson employed force to bring Chinese students to study here is very upsetting. Historical knowledge must be brought forth as a manner by which to point out that the dissemination of ideas will overpower negative concepts.
Although it is true that adults may reject diversity, not all adults throw diversity to the winds. Is diversity a disruptive influence? Is it something illegal, or, anti-Christian, or anti-Jewish? Or, is it an enlightening factor in the lives of the curious, the receptive, to those who want to learn more, to those whose mental processes are not crippled with a desire that their dominance will set the tone to enhance ignorance, thus enable them to continue to subject a people?
The cultures, and institutions of the Western countries evolved as a result of influences through trade and travel over a wide expanse of land by the venturesome through many centuries. Changes in philosophies came about by courageous people speaking out, seeking a fairer way of living within a society. Those in political power, unwilling to change their ways or beliefs put the challengers to death at the stake, before firing squads, starvation, by whatever method to eliminate those voices in the wilderness as could be employed. Those voices were not silenced. They resonated, kept circulating, adding to the din which became a force the political leaders could no longer ignore, or suppress. Thus, a document Western countries hold dear, the Magna Carta was signed, and the king’s dominance curtailed. The thirteenth century document came as a result of centuries of demands, and influences of people wanting a better way of living within a society. It is the base of our Bill of Rights. It did not come about by closing people off from foreign influences.
Centuries ago a Chinese emperor feared influences of the explorer/traders from distant cultures entering his domain. To keep his dominance he ordered the erection of a Great Wall around the territory he considered to be his. By so doing, he cut off his land and people from the rest of the world. After World War II political leaders adopted a political concept, but in order to maintain dominance within that concept, the political leaders closed off their country once again. Outside influences contra to their philosophies were to be kept out, and their leaders threatened to destroy other cultures. They had the power to do just that.
But, ideas have ways of filtering, permeating, overpowering entities. Trade, once again, introduced the dissemination of positive ideas over powering people who have suppressed a populace. As the philosopher, Voltaire, once stated, “Ideas are harder to stop than armies!”, is a reality under which innovators must work. We see a student standing in front of a tank, masses of young people making demands for more freedoms, leaders responding as did the leaders of old who did not want to be forced from their positions of power. Change comes about by example. Change evolves by people learning from others over a period of time. That is what we are seeing now. Changes brought about by trade of all sorts.
Students coming to this country will learn, first hand, what are the values earned by Western people over the centuries. It is very doubtful that young radicals would be able to survive the interrogations of immigration officials in order to receive visas to study in this country. By permitting students to live among us for a year, or years, extends opportunities to disseminate ideas, and philosophies which they may take back to their homes. Perhaps some will do as many of their countrymen already living among us have done—stay here, and add to our society. Think about all the Chinese who live among us as restaurateurs, physicians, researchers, neighbors desiring to live the way of life we hold dear.
Dr. Johnson did not force the idea of inviting students from China to study for a year with our high school students. That is not the way he operates. Did Steve Martin of Amity voice his concerns with the Board during the years of study, and discussions by teachers, administrators, and Board members? Board members would have listened to his questions, as long as he did not engage in a diatribe.
Most likely, regardless of Mr. Martin’s distorted view, the vote to adopt the idea of bringing Chinese students to join with us would have passed in full view of any, and all in attendance at that particular Board meeting. To deny the students of any culture an opportunity to learn here, to associate with us, to return to their homes with first hand knowledge of our concepts, would add to the negatives of being cut off from the exchange of philosophies, and any positive impact they might have.
Dana Allison
Mapleton
