The problem with liberalism

Liberalism’s failure to be heard is due not to corporate ownership but to elitist views like those expressed by James D. Squires in his review of “A Matter of Opinion” by Victor S. Navasky [Book Review, July 10]. As long as liberals continue to characterize those who disagree with them with words like “moronization,” blame their impotence on “the dominance of multinational corporations” (as opposed to multinational anti-democratic, anti-capitalist movements?) and believe that politicians need journals of opinion to “know what to think or say,” they will continue their self-marginalization.

William H. Deaver

Mojave

In his review of Victor S. Navasky’s “A Matter of Opinion,” James D. Squires writes, “it’s easy to imagine dinner parties in Cambridge or entire weekends in the Hamptons being ruined by the discovery that your name is missing from the index of Vic’s book.”

Most of the liberal intellectuals of the world tend to be wealthy individuals. I believe that is because they don’t have to live with the real-life consequences of the policies they advocate, namely socialism. The unrelenting poverty of Cuba, North Korea, China until recently, Eastern Europe under communism all attest to the proven wrong-headedness of their ideas. But, like most rich people, they feel good about themselves for being “compassionate.”

Mike Burns

Bakersfield