Change is due and worth a try

A guest columnist had her say a while back. A second letter in support was published the following week. I wrote a rebuttal a week after that. I’d have been fine simply leaving it there, 2 to 1.

Last week, however, she came back. The writer who, lest we forget, spent time in the Soviet Union over 40 years ago (among other biographical trivia) now singles me out, several times by name, saying that my initial response reminds her of what she encountered in the USSR! Really? Well, memories fade, I guess.

A major difference, ignored or forgotten by Ms. Chaffin, between news media in the former Soviet Union and those of the United States is that both print and broadcast (radio and television) media within the USSR at the time cited were operated under strict control of the government. National print operations were generally limited to Isvestia, published by the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet, and Pravda, the official newspaper of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Quite different than in this

country.

Regarding what she calls “Whataboutism”: When criticized for abuses of human rights by their governments, their citizens often cited our own failings in this regard. To telling effect. It is a key to exposing hypocrisy, with which the left is, of late, rife.

In her original letter, as only one example, among other statements, Ms. Chaffin had this to say about 40-year-old Soviet and “right-wing” propaganda: that “they both rely on their domination of mass and social media.” Contrary to her assertion last week:

1. I can refute this.

2. I do so now.

3. It is untrue.

By almost any measure, the media in this country, with very few and, thus, notable exceptions, is dominated by the left. To whom do they make political contributions? Which candidates do they support? What stories do they run with and which do they ignore or trivialize? Where are they from and where did they obtain higher education? To what party are they affiliated? What causes do they support? Who do they aid and abet and who do they accuse of “treason,” “sedition,” and “insurrection”? (Although none have been charged, let alone convicted, of such crimes.)

Curiously, and merely as an aside, how many have served in the armed forces?

When one accuses a vast segment of our population of misconduct and neglects to attribute the same behavior when exhibited by another, the clear implication is that they are blameless in these regards. Such is not the case and to support such a claim, examples are a pretty standard requirement. I provided examples. These, of course, were not things Ms. Chaffin said, nor were they attributed to her, but rather things noted leaders among the left had said (H. Clinton, Pelosi, Biden) and common knowledge to those of us familiar with the subject.

Finally, a very general observation regarding her lengthy defense of current Oregon governance: Although I love what the state has to offer, Oregon is an embarrassment in many regards — PERS, Portland riots and senseless destruction, homelessness, foster care, health care, unemployment insurance payouts (months delayed!), prison releases, education, even COVID response in some cases.

It is difficult to place specific blame, but it is clear who’s been in charge — for a long time. I’d just say a change is due and well worth a try. I don’t think placing others in the driver’s seat for a change poses any undue risk but presents an opportunity to improve things and is easily reversed at the following election cycle.

Ross Flavel, four-year resident of Berlin — yeah, that Berlin, the one occupied by and surrounded by the Soviet Union’s Red Army — since Ms. Chaffin deems such information pertinent to the discussion.