Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Jan. 22, 1998)
CONTACTING US NEWSROOM: ADDRESS: (541)346-5511 Oregon Daily Emerald E-MAIL P.0 BOX3159 ode@oregon.uoregon.edu Eugene, Oregon 97403 ONLINE EDITION: www.uoregon edu/~ode Perspectives EDITOR IN CHIEF Sarah Kickler EDITORIAL EDITOR Mike Schmierbach NIGHT EDITOR Mike Schmierbach The unfit side of the IMF bailout The New York Times and other media have ignored key aspects of Indonesia’s crisis sia deepened the crisis.” The IMF is the International Mone tary Fund, the crisis in question is the economic collapse that has struck throughout Southeast Asia, and the admission is that IMF demands for bank reform may have fueled finan cial difficulties in Indonesia. On Jan. 15, readers were told In donesian President Suharto “signed an economic reform package today that is expected to help pull Indone sia out of its financial slump.” That package is the combination of a $40 billion IMF loan and an agreement to obey the agency’s reform rules. Even to the editors of the Times, something about this should have seemed odd. One day, the IMF was admitting its reformist tactics don’t always work, and the next it was compelling an economically and so cially troubled nation to swallow more of its possibly toxic medicine. Perhaps something did seem odd. The Jan. 14 story sounded a cautious note, readily accepting IMF argu ments that the blame for the collapse in fact lay with Suharto’s govern ment, “which [the IMF) castigated for failing to enact promised reforms in exchange for the $40 billion.” Times readers may not know this, but Indonesia’s government certainly deserves to be castigated. Suharto has slaughtered civilians in actions that can easily be described as genocide, including an invasion of East Timor that strove to wipe out the native population. All of this was done with the backing not only ofU.S. and IMF dollars but also with U.S. arms. A Times story on Jan. 16 dedicates almost a page to an exacting discus sion of the Suliarto family. While readily noting that Suharto has gotten rich from his dictatorship, leaving his people in poverty, the story ignores the violent, U.S.-backed atrocities that have taken place. This shouldn’t be surprising — Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman’s “Manufacturing Consent" documents the paltry amount of coverage of such events that has appeared in the Times over the years. Nothing about the coverage of the latest tango between the murderer and the money-lenders is really sur prising. After all, we should expect nothing less from the solemn (albeit no longer gray) manifesto of the elite class. Nevertheless, there is something infuriating about the way the Times and the media as a whole have ap proached the Indonesian situation and the bailout overall. The ongoing n Jan. 14, readers ofThe New York Times discov ered that the “IMF now admits tactics in Indone CHRIS HUTCHINSON/Emerald question asked by the media has been whether the economy can be “saved,” when they should be asking who it’s being saved for. The Times plainly conveys the opinion of the pro-business press: “If enacted, some reforms may strongly affect the lives of Indonesia’s 202 million people at a time when unem ployment and inflation are rising. The armed forces have said they are ready to deal with any unrest the eco nomic crisis might set off.” In a relat ed story, the Times notes that the Pentagon is pledging increased mili tary support for Suharto, presumably to help repress any civilians who might be so uppity as to demand food or wages. This is the only mention given of how the reform package might affect the people of Indonesia, and the con text is clearly how public reaction might adversely affect the efforts of businesses to save themselves. Prior to the crash, domestic and in ternational companies had been en joying marvelous conditions in In donesia and throughout Southeast Asia. The only complaint the United States had about the vast wealth of cheap labor and dearth of environ mental or labor restrictions was that the markets weren’t open enough. Weak regulations weren’t enough; U.S. businesses wanted no regula tions. Now, with the leverage of foreign capital, the U.S.-dominated IMF might achieve just that. Never mind that foreign investment was a signifi cant factor in the original collapse. Never mind that the bailout makes no provisions to help those starving be cause of the situation. Never mind, in short, that people already hurt by IMF influence are now going to see their future sold for good. According to the United States me dia, this isn’t the story. The only question is whether the marvelous marketplace that was Southeast Asia can be restored and improved. Im ages of starving civilians only come into play when they can be used as symbols of why capitalism of that uniquely American sort must be saved; the images are never tied to the question of whether capitalism might have left the people hungry in the first place. Something certainly needs to be done about the economic collapse in the region. People cannot be allowed to starve. The situation is not as sim ple, however, as the media portrayal of free-market heroes rushing to save the masses while behind-the-times isolationists sit and watch the people starve. There is a real debate that needs to take place in the pages of the Times and the halls of Congress; it is not whether Southeast Asia needs help but what form that help should take. It might be leaving the region alone, or it might be massive inter vention of a fundamentally different sort. The story was there on the front page of The New York Times: The IMF screwed up. The story, however, slipped through the editors’ fingers as they and everyone else continued to offer only two options for the fu ture. For the people of Indonesia and elsewhere in the region, both “sides” the media have chosen to show make up the same proverbial coin, and however it lands, it will crush at least some of them. This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald editorial board. Responses may be sent to ode®oregon. uoregon .edu LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Environmental education I am an intern with OSPIRG and am interested in promoting awareness in the Eugene communi ty. A critical element in environmental and social activism is public support. The public must be aware of both local and global issues. This aware ness comes through education. Children are very interested in new ideas. They are constantly ex ploring their options and forming their own views and ideas; they have an insatiable curiosity. OSPIRG understands the importance of educat ing children on environmental issues. Until recent ly, there was very little information available about the increasingly important problems of endangered species, pesticides, deforestation and water pollu tion. The OSPIRG Environmental Education Pro ject shares their knowledge with local elementary school classes through presentations and active participation. The children love learning new facts, such as 85 percent of the rivers in the United States are too polluted to fish or swim in. Students can take this information and share their new knowledge with family and other friends. The volunteers are reaching not only these children but also those around them. It is a wonderful opportunity to spend time with ele mentary school children who love having “older kids” teach them. If you are interested in envi ronmental education, contact OSPIRG at 346-4377. | Meredith Singer OSPIRG Quoted “Americans with college de grees have sex less often than those who fin ished only high school, and those who went to graduate school get even less, ac cording to a study in Febru ary's American Demographics magazine.” From an Asso ciated Press sto ry in the Jan. 15 Oregonian. Less sex and poor job prospects. Why am I going for a Ph.O. anyway? “That has not stopped Ms. Croft—whose tanned, volup tuous cyberframe is the equivalent of 34-24-34 — from becoming a popular female icon. She is a far cry from Betty Boop, and she is no Barbie doit. She is more like a female Indiana Jones, but pumped up, ver tically and hori zontally, in the fashion of the 1990s." me ms. Croft” The New York Times was talking about on Monday is Lara Croft, the digital “sexsymboT' who stars in the videogame 'Tomb Raider." And people are worriedabout human cloning? “Trademarks are proper adjec tives and should be capitalized and followed by a generic noun or phrase. ...Trade-, marks are never verbs.” From an adver tisement in the January/Febmry Columbia Jour nalism Review encouraging writers to refrain from “misusing “ trademarks. I for one will write my self a post-it to remember to xe rox a copy so I canhi-liteitand tossitinazipioc.
