Quotes of the Day

Thugs on Drugs
Yes, it's true that we in Britain need to listen to youngsters and focus on helping them [April 7]. But at the same time, we need to introduce new laws to stop teenage crime. We need to be very tough on guns, drugs and alcohol. Parents and teachers should be given more of a role in building children's character. They should be allowed to take the actions they deem necessary for kids' benefit.
Hasan Raza Gondal,
Birmingham, England

We Brits have all but given up on our disaffected youth. Their surly demeanor and vicious behavior are a consummate failure of the Tony Blair-Gordon Brown era. The people who once famously claimed to be "tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime" chose instead to be even tougher on the victims of crime. Some young hooded lout threatens you or your family's safety, so you clip his ear, and an army of social workers springs to his defense while the full might and majesty of the law are brought down on you, with all the consequent personal and financial penalties.
Robert Frederick Birkett,
Drinkstone Green, England

As author of Scared Of The Kids, a book published in the U.K. in 2001, I am well aware of the concern about young people. A key question that is rarely raised when discussing young people is, What has changed about adults? Rather than asking what has happened to the young, we should be asking why adults have become cowards. Why do those on the left see "having a go" as vigilantism? Why do we rely on the police to deal with young people on the streets, the vast majority of whom are not criminals in any shape or form? The question of the common good lies at the heart of this debate — a question politicians appear not only unable to answer but also too nervous to touch with a barge pole.
Stuart Waiton,
Glasgow, Scotland

Twenty-odd years ago, civil libertarians and assorted do-gooders brought about the relaxation or removal of limits on almost every aspect of young people's lives. This was invariably justified on the basis that traditional rules suppressed youngsters' natural development or infringed their human rights. Parents who wish to set boundaries on their children's behavior should insist that their parliamentarians, police and judiciary back them up.
Thomas Sweeney,
Ivanhoe, Victoria

Your article omitted two of the causes of behavioral problems among teenagers: school curricula that do not relate to actual life in today's society, and teachers who have been programmed to push information into pupils rather than develop their potential. Don't blame the kids!
Gordon Rabey,
Wellington

My husband and I lived for 13 years in the northwest of England. Last year we moved to Australia. Part of the reason was the deterioration in the social order. The problem starts in early childhood. Children as young as three or four are not told what to do by their parents but instead asked what they would like to do. The message is that they can do whatever they want. They are not rebuked for fear of hurting their feelings. Later, when parents and teachers try to impose rules and regulations, children react by becoming disrespectful and rebellious. They also see far too many adults and celebrities who act as if getting drunk and behaving like rowdy footballers is the ultimate way to have fun. Today's Britain is a society where responsibility, duty and respect for others are sadly lacking.
J.Y. Yeung,
Buderim, Queensland

I am sick of the generalizations about young people in the media. My friends and I don't spend our evenings causing havoc or drinking ourselves into oblivion. But the media's focus on youths who do makes some adults think we are all alike. On a bus not long ago I overheard other passengers saying young people are "no good." How can we have faith in ourselves if others don't?
Rachel Scholes,
Manchester, England

On a recent trip to Mexico, I took a day tour of Mayan villages. The nine young Swiss, Americans and New Zealanders on the tour engaged fully with the guide, looking, listening, and asking questions. The five young Britons hung back, loudly and boorishly swapping notes about where to get cheap booze and which drinking places had the best happy hours. Last year, at home in New Zealand, I gave a ride to a twentysomething English hitchhiker whose only "travel stories" of his time in Australia and New Zealand were a monotonous succession of boasts about how often and heavily he'd got drunk. His only question about our destination was whether the backpackers' lodge had a bar. Sadly, it seems that the loutish outlook of British youth is not confined to their homeland.
Warren Bennie,
Auckland

Gore to the Rescue?
Joe Klein's article provides a refreshing alternative to the dismal prospects facing Democrats in the current campaign [April 7]. Al Gore has proved himself on a global playing field. Can the ordinary citizen be strong enough to bypass the delegates' nominee and write in Gore on the ballot in November?
Barbara Sturman,
Lexington, Kentucky

Klein states that the African Americans who support Barack Obama will sulk and stay home if Hillary Clinton is nominated. What does he think we women feel? We have waited all our lives to see one of us — qualified, experienced and capable — run in the national election with a chance of winning. Although millions of us are angry that Obama couldn't wait four more years, we are not so unwise as to sulk, stay home or vote for John McCain.
Cecilie K. Bodnar,
Canandaigua, New York

To Quit or Not to Quit
I'm glad Hillary Clinton comes from a family in which quitting is not an option, but forging ahead without integrity is simply wrong [April 7]. In life, many people believe they are the best person for any job. But to subvert the mandate of the voters and try to influence delegates directly will do irreparable harm to the country, the Democratic Party and the integrity of the process.
Adam Signore,
Medway, Massachusetts

I share senator Clinton's disbelief over Democratic officials' suspending their own judgment in favor of their children's enthusiastic support for Obama. Young people are enthusiastic about fast cars and loud music too, but that is no reason to embrace them. If Obama can't withstand the scrutiny of the Clinton campaign, what chance does he have against the Republicans?
Ann Gardner,
Dover, Delaware

So It Goes
Vice President Dick Cheney's monosyllabic response of "So?" to a question regarding the two-thirds of Americans who don't support the Iraq war [April 7] suggests he is more committed to forcing democracy in Iraq than practicing it in this country.
Roy Hartzler,
New Paris, Indiana

End of Mugabe's Road
"Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose," goes the Kris Kristofferson lyric. It might have been written about Zimbabwe's freedom from colonialist rule 28 years ago [March 31]. Now, sadly, that freedom amounts to hyperinflation, barren farms, food scarcities and the flight of millions of citizens. It's time for Mugabe to go. Zimbabwe has nothing left to lose.
Ron Eddy,
Auckland

Another Spin for R.E.M.
I enjoyed Josh Tyrangiel's recent article about R.E.M., and I generally agreed with his assessment of the band's last three albums before Accelerate [April 7]. However, I completely disagree with the chart that deems Monster below respectable. Following Automatic for the People, R.E.M. ran the risk of falling into a rut. After two similar-sounding albums, what would its members do next? Their willingness to completely change their sound from mandolins to gutsy electric guitar helped establish R.E.M. as a group not afraid to challenge expectations. It is good to see in their new album that they are willing to do it again.
Henry Rosenberg,
South Windsor, Connecticut

I agree with Tyrangiel that R.E.M.'s new album is terrific. But to me, the three preceding albums represent the work of a band that was still growing and maturing. To compare the R.E.M. of a quarter-century ago with the R.E.M. of today makes no more sense than saying the Beatles' Strawberry Fields is inferior to I Want to Hold Your Hand. I admire artists who have the courage to evolve.
Debbie Gilbert,
Cleveland, Georgia