Racist then, racist now

October 5, 2005

Dear Sir,

During the 1960s, the late Eugene Cox told me that after he got an engineering degree from McGill University, he applied for a job at the Public Works Department and was refused.

He asked why and was told: “We don't want people around here who look and sound like you.”

He thought this was a racist remark.

WILLIAM M. COX

Devonshire

Why not every ten years?

October 7, 2005

Dear Sir,

This whole issue of Independence is in danger of decaying (I know it should be “withering”) on the vine - good thing, too, some might say. Comparatively few people really want it, very few see any advantages except the emotional ones and the downside in terms of cost to the taxpayer (i.e. you and me) has been grossly underestimated by the now notorious BIC. Add to that the debate on referendum/General Election and we find ourselves in the middle of a political quagmire that is doing no one (including international business) any good. Incidentally the suggestion that those who signed the petition for a referendum did not understand what they were signing is so stupid as to be laughable (fortunately).

Discussing the whole matter with a couple of friends the other day, one (who asked me to write about it) came up with a brilliant idea. Basically he suggested that legislation should be put in place that stipulates that a referendum on Independence should be held every ten years (it is ten years since the last one). Although it would not take all the politics out of it, it would certainly remove some of the emotion - a decade not decayed!

My brilliant friend would have written himself but he is travelling extensively over the coming weeks and will not be around to enjoy the “crap” that the suggestion will inevitably engender.

A. GOODFELLOW

Paget

Snide, acerbic, offensive

October 7, 2005

Dear Sir,

During my first week back at university, feeling somewhat homesick, I decided to catch up on what was happening in Bermuda. During my online excursion I stumbled across www.bermudasucks.com, a website purportedly containing “The Inside Scoop”. Attracted by the controversy surrounding the site, I decided to have a look. I must admit at first I was amused. The writer of the page seemed to have a thorough grounding in Bermudian culture; he was obviously alert to many of the Island's loveable (to some) idiosyncrasies. Yet then as I read further I grew somewhat disheartened. The page is satirical, that much is irrefutable; many of the Bermudian traits depicted are exaggerated and distorted to the point of absurdity. This is no bad thing: by ridiculing Bermudian society's ‘failings' (at least, according to the writer of the page), satire hopes to cure society in a sense, causing a heightened awareness of Bermudian society's shortcomings.

But then it struck me. This is not good satire. It is in fact poor. It is snide, acerbic and, most offensively, pretentious. For, explicit in the page's content and authority is the distinction between expatriates and Bermudians. Non-Bermudians are elevated, escaping the otherwise remorseless ridicule. If anything, they are heroes, managing, somehow, to survive in the socially hostile environment of Bermuda. The page therefore, disappointingly, implies two distinct spheres in Bermuda, and further, that this demarcation is not equal. Writing of this kind is not useful; it is divisive and cruel at a time when such sentiments are not needed. I should make clear that I do not oppose free speech. In fact, I celebrate this liberty by making my own views known and inviting the thoughts of others. I am not attacking the webpage's existence, merely questioning its artistic and social merit.

EDWARD RANCE

Cambridge, UK