Page 2
The Blue Banner
April 11,2002
Opinions
. 1
are what
we buy in retail
^Columnist, \
Free-market economics seems to
be the order of the day. As global
ization takes hold on more and
more products, companies find
themselves in need of cheaper means
of production, and thus, lower
“prices” for the consumer.
There are those who argue that
low prices are essential to a healthy
economy, but how can we account
for the disparity between low prices
of wholesale goods in a superstore
compared to the slightly higher
prices of a local business?
That is, why are businesses like
McDonald’s, Food Lion or Wal-
Mart able to charge lower prices
than, in our case, Laughing Seed,
the French Broad Food Co-op, or
Asheville
Hemp Em
porium, re
spectively?
Just as im
portant a
question is
whether re
tail cost is an
appropriate
single decid
ing factor in
how we think
about what
we buy,
whether
from global
corporations
or local busi-
“What is not always
apparent in the re
duction in overall
production costs is
the detriment to the
environment, soci
ety and human
health ofunwanted,
externalized costs”
tribution and sales of the tooth
paste, otherwise known as middle
man costs, are included in the final price.
In order for the company charg
ing $4.15 to lower the retail price,
therefore attracting consumers, any
number of these aforementioned
costs must be reduced.
Similarly, the company charging
$2.39 may already have reduced
these costs. This competition to
lower prices between businesses to
attract customers is called the race
to the bottom.
What is not always apparent in
the reduction in overall production
costs is the detriment to the envi
ronment, society and human health
resulting from unwanted, external
ized costs.
Much of
the environ
mental mis
management
apparent to
day (air and
water pollu
tion, destruc
tion of wild
life and hu
man habitat
and toxic
waste) as well
as social in
justice (ex
ploitation of
workers, deg
radation of
communi-
To answer
these questions, we must begin with
the economic mantra “we are what
we buy.”
How we, as consumers, react to
marketing gimmicks, sale prices and
technological innovation, strongly
influences how they, as producers,
operate.
For instance, consumer preference
indicated that a certain automobile
should have power windows (based
on polls, surveys or actual pur
chases), then automobile compa
nies will produce cars with power-
windows.
Likewise, if a consumer decides to
buy a tube of toothpaste for $2.39
instead of $4.15, then whoever is
selling toothpaste at $4.15 will try
to reduce the price to near that of
the competition’s price.
The catch in this scenario is that,
while reducing the price of tooth
paste on the shelf, costs must be
displaced from production or op
eration involved in the making of
the toothpaste so that company may
still turn a profit.
Unfortunately, it is the displace
ment of the costs, or externalization,
where we run into trouble.
Since we live in a closed-system
here on Earth, meaning we must
use what is already here (apart from
incoming energy from sunlight),
care must be taken not to utilize
resources faster than they may be
renewed.
The extraction of metals for the
tube, minerals for the paste and
petroleum for the plastic cap all
have their side effects on non-re-
newable resource supply and envi
ronmental health through activi
ties of extraction and processing,
and represent a cost on the natural
environment.
Next, are the more implicit costs
of capital, labor and cash required
to put everything together to make
a finished product.
Finally, costs associated with dis-
ties, and
power/money polarization) can be
traced back to displaced or exter
nalized production costs in some
way.
There is an actual cost for making
a tube of toothpaste that accounts
for all inputs and outputs in the
process. Such a cost takes into ac
count the loss of natural capital (i.e.
forest biodiversity, water quality or
community sustainability) as well
as the realized costs of production.
Natural capital is essential to the
functioning of our economy, since
everything we use comes from the
Earth in some form or another.
Responsible companies take these
extra costs into account when set
ting retail prices, which is why much
of the organic, ecologically respon
sible and local products available
seem to ‘cost’ more at the register.
In reality, we are paying for those
externalized costs not made harm
ful to us and the rest of the world.
With this in mind, I would like to
suggest that, in order to provide for
both human and environmental
health and to allow our economy to
reflect the real prices of production
activities, we must begin to educate
ourselves, as consumers, on what
we are really buying at the multi
plex superstores, as well as in our
local businesses.
Often, local businesses ‘internal
ize’ their external costs, but they
must also be held accountable for
responsible economic pricing.
In a capitalist, free-market soci
ety, there is an opportunity for prod
ucts to be affordable while remain
ing ecologically responsible, but we
must all be conscious of these fac
tors so no corporation is able to get
away with the cost externalization
that brings ruin to so many systems
in our world.
I hope you finish this article with
more questions than when you
started. You should, because there
are many answers to be found.
Defending Israel: not a Holocaust
VNCA
In a recently published column,
Glennie Sewell takes the opportu
nity to commence a diatribe against
the state of Israel, and in the process
he spouts so many lies and, at best,
half-truths, that I simply do not
know where to begin.
The most damning of his accusa
tions is that which equates Israeli
defensive action to Nazi tactics.
Sewell asserts that, “The Jews do
to the Palestinians what the Nazis
did to them.”
I kindly suggest that Sewell pub
lish a response in which he details
the German offer of Jewish self-
determination and statehood. I as
sume Sewell will have a difficult
time finding this information, for,
as we all know, it never happened.
Israel, however, offered Palestin
ian independence, as did the U.N.
Both times, the Palestinian leader
ship chose war rather than peace.
When one makes such a choice,
and loses, the results are often un
fortunate.
I ask that Sewell point out a few
references to Nazis supplying Jews
with weapons for their police forces
in autonomous Jewish territories,
or perhaps Sewell could provide a
list of German innocents brutally
butchered by Jewish suicide bomb
ers?
Might Sewell have evidence of
organized Israeli plans to extermi
nate the Palestinian people? Might
Sewell show where German-Jewish
schools taught students to despise
Germans, teaching that Germans
used the blood of innocent Jewish
children to bake their bread? I doubt
he will.
Sewell believes that the Palestin
ians were “forcibly displaced by the
Jewish leadership in 1947 and
1967.”
I must point out that it was Arab
violation of U.N. resolution 181
that resulted in any Palestinian loss
of home in 1947, and Arab initi
ated war that caused Israel to, in a
defensive measure, take the West
Bank and the Gaza Strip (which
Jordan and Egypt had shown no
interest in giving the Palestinians in
the first place).
In fact, the vast majority of the
Palestinians chose to leave of their
own volition or at the urging of the
Arab League and the Arab Higher
Command, the official Arab lead
ership of many of the cities in Pal
estine. In Haifa, for example. Mayor
Shabtai Levy expressed “his earnest
desire that members of both (Arab
and Jewish) communities in Haifa
should live in peace and friendship
together, and that he personally
would be only too willing to bring
about such a state of affairs.”
The Arabs and the Hagana (the
Jewish military) went through the
truce terms one by one, oft:en modi
fying them to meet Arab wishes.
The truce agreement read that the
Arabs were to “carry on their work
as equal and free citizens of Haifa.”
Stockwell, the British intermediary
of the truce negotiations, recorded
that, when they returned from con
tacting other Arab states on the
matter “(The Arab delegates) said
they could not fulfill the terms of
the truce (and) as an alternative
that the Arab population wished to
evacuate Haifa and that they would
be grateful for military assistance.”
They made the choice to leave.
The elderly mayor Levy, with tears
in his eyes, pleaded with the Axab
delegates, crying that they were
committing “a cruel crime against
their own people.” Stockwell thun
dered: “Think it over, as you’ll re
gret it afterwards. You must accept
the conditions of the Jews. They are
fair enough. Don’t permit life to be
destroyed senselessly. After all, it
was you who began the fighting,
and the Jews have won.” The Arabs
remained entrenched in their belief
that “They had lost (the) first round
but there were more to come.”
The Syrian, Iraqi, and Egyptian
militaries were doing the fighting
in 1948, and are largely the reason
the Palestinian representatives re
fused to sign the treaty. “(They)
stated that they were not in a posi
tion to sign the truce, as they had no
control over the Arab military ele
ments in the town and that, in all
sincerity, they could not fulfill the
terms of the truce, even if they were
to sign.”
In the following days, Hagana, on
their Arabic radio broadcast, said
that the Jews “never intended evacu
ating the Arab inhabitants from
Haifa. On the contrary, the Jews
did and do still believe that it is in
the real interests of Haifa for its
citizens to go on with their work
and to ensure that normal condi
tions are restored to the city.” The
following day, the Hagana broad
cast called for anti-imperialist (in
reference to the foreign military
bands) Arab-Jewish cooperation:
“Arabs, we do not wish to harm
you. Like you, we only want to live
in peace. Like you, we want to expel
all imperialists from our country. If
the Jews and the Arabs cooperate,
no Power in the world will ever
attack our country or ignore our
rights. Be assured that through
Arab-Jewish cooperation miracles
can be achieved.”
Unfortunately, the power of the
Arab leadership was too great, and
other Arab officials, through threats,
scare tactics, and brute force, pushed
the vast majority of the Palestinians
out of Israel.
On April 26, a British district
Superintendent of Police reported:
“every effort is being made by the
Jews to persuade the Arab populace
to stay and carry on with their nor
mal lives, to get their shops and
business open and to be assured
that their lives and interests will be
safe.”
That sure sounds like Nazi Ger
many to me. How about you,
Sewell?
I am curious as to why authors
such as Sewell are so poised to strike
out at Israel for responding to vio
lence with violence, as opposed to
chastising the Palestinians for initi
ating the violence in the first place.
Sewell says: “Israel says that it wants
peace, but it continues to respond
to violence with violence as its only
option.”
Perhaps if Sewell would care to
catch up on the news a bit (other
than when the mass media is por
traying the plight of the “poor in
nocent Palestinians”) he would learn
that Israel, for a period of three
weeks, did nothing in the face of
escalating suicide bombings and
sniper attacks. After three weeks of
warning the world that if the at
tacks continued unabated, they
would initiate severe retaliation.
They did just that.
One has to ask, when did these
attacks begin? Well, the original
attack began in the 1930’s with the
likes of the Hebron massacre, in
which scores of Jews were butch
ered. The attacks began again in
1947-48 when Israel declared its
independence (which the Palestin
ians had every opportunity to do as
well), and again in 1967 and 1973.
The current intifada began after
Arafat rejected the Camp David
accords, and refused to make a
counter-offer. The day before
Sharon went to the Temple Mount,
a suicide bomber struck an Israeli
military post, beginning the cur
rent intifada en masse.
Everyone knows that the only
thing the Palestinians want is a state
in the W. Bank and Gaza strip,
right? I hate to point out that the
PLO began its attacks on Israel
prior to 1967, in other words, be
fore Israel even touched the W.
Bank and Gaza strip.
How about some quotes from
Arafat, the democratically elected
representative of the Palestinian
people?
“We Palestinians will take over
everything, including all of Jerusa
lem. Peres and Beilin have already
promised us half of Jerusalem. We
will take over everything including
all ofjerusalem!” (January30,1996)
“You understand that we plan to
eliminate the state of Israel and
establish a purely Palestinian state.”
(January 30, 1996)
“I have no use for Jews; they arc
and remain Jews! We now need all
the help we can get from you in out
battle for a united Palestine under
total Arab-Moslem domination!”
(January 30, 1996)
“This agreement (Wye Accord), I
am not considering it more than
the agreement which had been
signed between our prophet
Muhammed and Koraish (ten-year
peace agreement between
Mohammed and the tribe of
Koraish, when Mohammed’s mili
tary capability improved after two
years he tore up the agreement and
slaughtered the Koraishites). And
you remember that the Caliph
Omar had refused this agreement,
considering it ‘solha donia” (a des
picable truce).” (May 10, 1994)
“The goal of our struggle is the
end of Israel, and there can be no
compromise.” (March 29, 1970)
“Peace for us means the destruc
tion of Israel. We are preparing for
an all-out war, a war which will last
for generations.” (February 11,
1980)
Arafat means what he says, and
has already been shown to have
direct connections to the suicide
bombings, suggesting that he ac
tively pursues the goals he himself
has asserted. Time and time again,
Israel has attempted to make peace
with the Palestinians and has met
only rejection from Arafat and his
entourage.
A nation who wants nothing but
peace, but has no peace partner,
and has only the misery of suicide
bombings everywhere they look wil
naturally elect a Prime Minister
with a mandate to, rather than at
tempt (again) to make peace, to
make safety. Hence the election of
Sharon.
Israel is not perfect, but neither is
France, nor the U.S., or Indonesia.
I, for one, refuse to make Israel’s
right to exist contingent upon their
moral perfection. Israel does not do
everything right, but to compare
military operations obviously aimed
at cementing safety for its citizens
as Nazi-like, is to, quite frankly, be
anti-Semitic.
To spout ignorance about Jews,
and to declare them the perpetra
tors of an c bviously non-existent
genocide, is to be anti-Semitic. To
believe that Jews do not have the
same right to self-protection when
under organized attack, as any other
country wouldhave, is anti-Semitic.
Last week. Professor Chess re
sponded to Sewell by saying that
words can either kill, or make peace.
I know the words extended by
Haifa’s Jews in 1948 live on.
I only hope the Palestinians will
be able to come up with the right
words to respond, because indi
viduals such as Sewell are certainly
not doing it for them.
(
lue BdnneikEditor
•SSTiier
ii-'TfrVif
Kudos to the athletic department
The UNCA athletic department has just named a new head women's basketball coach, after a nation-wide search.
Replacing any coach has to be a large undertaking, and UNCA Athletic Director Joni Comstock, along with her staff,
have found a coach that is sure to bring the women's basketball program around. Betsy Blose succeed Kathleen
Weber, coming from Shepherd College in West Virginia.
The athletic department does an overall good job at what they do. OK, so they may not be perfect and they defi
nitely have their downfalls, but overall, for a liberal arts college, they don't do a bad job.
Think about it, this is the only public liberal arts college in North Carolina, so what does that mean? It means that
some undergraduates do not come here for sports, they come here for environmental studies or social sciences. So, it
is often difficult, surely, for the athletic department to recruit athletes to attend UNCA.
Many students may not care that much for athletics here at UNCA, but really the sports here are always entertain
ing and something that can get all students involved in their university. Support for UNCA athletics has been lack
ing for the past few years, and that is really a disgrace for our school.
Many do not realize how much time and energy the athletes, coaches and the entire athletic department put into
what they do. Think about finding a new coach for a Division I school. Not only has the athletic department had to
search for a new women's basketball coach, but also new head men's and women's tennis coaches. That is a lot to
take on in just a few months.
Athletics here often get overlooked and do not get the credit that they deserve. Every student, no matter their major
or whatever, should really come out and see what UNCA athletics are all about.
S'
ggSS
Di
plus
Hal
47,(
Its
ter :
fron
lost
you
Wi
ing
ente
elim
sign
mini
Wh
insic
thei:
Mot
W
Iworl
the :
from
into
devi(
get a
Thi
Ions
day I
Exc
[time
own
I It’s (
nis-d
erytli
snob
lines;
nobc
Not
feelir
this t;
read
Cot
worri
gost
long
Place
lights
h
serve(
So, c
topee
way,
urina
And
anyw:
our L
kve
on-th
No-F
force
Ch
Me
Dear
I fou
Rick
Sewel
Israel’
Mech
the A]
Jier.
Ches
sous
can or
situati
3nthe
Sewe
rferei
wide
>ewell
'^ech;
I cc
len
peci;