The letters we publish here are edited for space and are representative of those we receive. We print only those letters referring to an article in the most recent edition of the magazine, not those responding to letters or commenting on issues not addressed in the recent edition.
A check-up for the body politic
Credit to Notre Dame Magazine for publishing a thought-provoking, civil, multidisciplinary symposium on the state of our body politic, complete with each contributor’s prescription to cure what ails it. Having formed a tripartite democratic republic, our Founding Fathers cautioned us that its nurturance required an educated, virtuous and God-fearing populace. They would roll over in their graves to see what a mess we have made of things lately.
One of the writers, Patrick Deneen (“Democracy and Its Discontents”), has it partially right, observing that “the United States today is an oligarchy with a veneer of democratic legitimization.” With due respect to the professor, I offer that it has, in fact, devolved into a kakistocracy with a veneer of competence. The only saving grace is that history has long demonstrated that the Catholic Church where Jesus is Lord can survive and indeed thrive under any form of government.
Vincent C. Muscarello, M.D. ’79
Burr Ridge, Illinois
The evolution has been televised
The autumn issue was agreeably thought-provoking, starting with Robert Schmuhl’s “One Nation, Divisible.” His reminiscence of pre-cable television is not mine. The late ’60s, when he was at Notre Dame and I was in grad school, saw the three giant networks all spewing the same biased line. That led to discussions of whether the First Amendment protected the unbalanced content of those networks.
By the 1980s the big networks had abandoned their propaganda role for tabloid-style reporting. With cable came the blossoming of openly slanted programming in all its variety. I celebrate the diversity of opinion now available on TV, with no regrets for the demise of the ’60s party line.
Of course, TV in all its power is not everything. Then as now you could choose print media from all over the spectrum of opinion. Finally, Schmuhl refers to the Fairness Doctrine as “a 1950s-era policy.” I remember it only in the ’70s, sometimes a little ludicrous but regarded as an antidote to the ’60s abuse of power.
Edward Ryan ’66
El Segundo, California
‘Term’ limits
I really enjoyed Robert Schmuhl’s essay. However, I have a comment about descriptive language. Schmuhl uses words like “Blacks,” “Hispanics” and “whites” to refer to different groups of people. I believe these terms are outdated — especially for an article about seeing those we disagree with politically as people with whom we need to work toward common goals — and should be replaced with terms like “Black people,” “Hispanic/Latino people” and “white people.” This type of language focuses on a person’s foremost identity as a human being who deserves dignity and respect, which would ultimately contribute to the article’s message of working with others despite other aspects of their identity — whether chosen, like political alignment, or not chosen, like race.
If Schmuhl found these more outdated terms in his research, I understand, but he and the editor should have clarified that this was a specific source’s language and used more inclusive terms when not directly quoting that source.
Riley Flood ’20MSM
Mount Royal, New Jersey
Taking nothing away from Schmuhl’s well-thought-out and instructive piece, I take issue with the use of the phrase “reproductive decisions.” It is not clear what that means. If it means decisions about abortion, he should say that. It could mean many other things. He should not go along with those who hide abortion behind vague terms like reproductive decisions, reproductive rights, reproductive freedom, et cetera.
Paul Coppola ’78
Washington, D.C.
Stay out of the fridge
There’s nothing wrong with the old fridge (“Fixing the Old Fridge”). The author misses the essential feature of the Electoral College — the protection of the interests of the states. It’s actually a good thing that the smaller states are overrepresented in the Electoral College; otherwise, they would get bullied into second-class status.
The author further laments that in our current system, presidential candidates ignore vast parts of the country, but eliminating the Electoral College would result in the same behavior — only the areas being ignored would change. Without the Electoral College, New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago and a few other big metros would determine the outcome of every election. But those areas already have an outsized influence on our society. The Founding Fathers were deeply concerned with preventing consolidation of power and designed a system to keep power divided. We should keep it that way.
Matt Shostak ’87
Austin, Texas
A question of character
I enjoyed the thought-provoking articles of the “State of the Union” section, particularly the essays by Schmuhl, Lisa Schirch (“Discourse Correction”) and Ian Marcus Corbin (“Disagreement in Principle”). However, there was an area of interest that I did not see covered: What about the character of the candidate?
For most of my life I have been a registered Republican, but mostly I voted for the person more than the issues at hand. This year’s election was no exception. I voted for Kamala Harris because I believe she has the moral character and principled leadership our country needs.
To me, Donald Trump has neither trait. A person with an upright moral attitude does not ruin the lives of innocent election workers by making unfounded claims about their behavior at work. A principled leader does not tell supporters at a rally to “fight like hell or you won’t have a country anymore” or ignore competence in lieu of loyalty when choosing staff or cabinet members.
I can understand why voters with strong political views may vote for someone they agree with, even if they are lacking the above characteristics. What I have trouble with is members of the House Freedom Caucus and others being OK with this aberrant behavior of our president-elect. Do they really think he is the person to lead them, or is he just a means to an end? Either way, it is troubling.
Are we becoming a nation where we don’t care about the character, principles and ethics exhibited by our leaders, if we think those leaders will take us where we want to go? I would be interested in seeing more discussion about this topic.
George T. Thompson ’68
San Diego
Pushing buttons
I must bring to your attention the recent cover of the autumn magazine. With all the negative rhetoric of political campaigns, I am especially sensitive to subliminal messaging of views on both sides of the aisle. On the cover were pins of various promotions. As I turned it over, I saw the Harris-Walz pin stand out because of the white lettering on a black background and its near-center placement on the page. I looked for a Trump button and found a smaller one below the address box.
I hope you are not trying to push a political message, which I believe you may have because of the placement and size of the buttons. Remember, there are many Trump supporters at Notre Dame as well as Harris supporters. Please do not create what looks like subliminal messaging to influence people’s voting one way or another or to state your personal opinions.
Jill Welsh
St. Louis
I suspect you’ve heard from other alums at this point. Your cover was interesting — brought back some memories.
However, position is everything in marketing. You chose to obscure the Trump-Vance button near other similarly colored and patterned buttons — and of course near the dominant white address box.
Harris-Walz took a prominent position — nearly center of the back cover and surrounded by contrasting buttons. Also the clearest button of all on the back. Eyes are easily drawn to it. That button was the most noticeable button when I turned the magazine over. I had to search quite a bit for the Trump-Vance button — even thought I’d have to send a note asking why you didn’t include one.
I know Notre Dame Magazine has a left bent. But please do better to neutralize your agenda. Many of your readers do not subscribe to your liberal bias. This positioning choice was not random — it was intentional.
Just asking for equal placement. Those buttons should have been side by side. No excuse for your editorial choice.
Nancy Lynch ’86
San Mateo, California
The buttons on the cover sent me looking for my Notre Dame banner on which I had attached various buttons from my experiences on campus from 1967 to 1971. Included were some political buttons from the mock presidential political convention in 1968.
One shows our attempt to nominate Indiana Senator Birch Bayh as a “favorite son” candidate. Years later I had the opportunity to work with the retired Senator Bayh in my legal practice, and he enjoyed hearing about our “favorite son” efforts. He was a great man.
I also recall reaching out to shake hands with Bobby Kennedy in his motorcade as he campaigned in Indiana and spoke at Notre Dame in 1968.
The other buttons on my banner reflect just some of the events and activities in which a boy from a small town in Oregon was able to participate — “Theisman for Heisman,” “Screw Lew” (when Lew Alcindor — Kareem Abdul-Jabbar — and UCLA came to campus) and “Don’t Settle for Less / Army ROTC,” which got me off to a successful, 25-year active-duty, Guard and Reserve U.S. Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps career.
Thanks again for your excellent magazine, and thank you for the memories.
James Roberts ’71
Arlington, Virginia
The display of political campaign buttons on the cover of the Autumn 2024 issue has prompted me to share this story. In September 1964 I attended my first meeting of Paul Bartholomew’s American Government class. Afterward, he made available leftover buttons from the Republican convention. One button had “Vote Miller” inside a green shamrock. Above that was written “Join the Fighting Irish,” and below, “Vice President.” The button was in support of William Miller ’35, who was Barry Goldwater’s running mate.
Thomas Harkins ’67
Needham, Massachusetts
Renovation recollections
Your beautiful story and photos of Washington Hall and the diligent staff restoring her elegance (“The Jewel Box”) brought back so many memories. Entertainment of every style, even movies, was enjoyed in its luxury — though it was a bit tired in the decor. And now, just like Notre Dame, Our Mother, Washington Hall stands out in a salute to her majesty again.
Burke Cueny ’57
Rochester Hills, Michigan
As an active member of the “theater crowd,” Washington Hall was my second home. I do remember the dank, gray walls, now stripped away to reveal the beauty hidden beneath. My best memory, however, is my first job after graduation as part of the 1972 summer theater program. Having nowhere else to go, I was permitted to live in Washington Hall during the run. And no, I did not have any encounters with the ghost of George Gipp, rumored to be one of the spirits to inhabit the place.
Bob Souders ’72
Hermosa Beach, California
Cultivating our own gardens
Thank you for “Pollinator fields boost nature and region’s crops.” How exciting to learn that Notre Dame is dedicating substantial areas to native plants. What a wonderful example for all of us to follow in our backyards and our faith communities. So many churches and individuals maintain large swaths of ecologically barren grass which can be converted back into a Garden of Eden. What a beautiful way to improve our stewardship of God’s creation.
Debby Reelitz ’92
North Granby, Connecticut
Grave mistake
I was really disappointed in the real estate you gave to “Please Come to My Funeral,” where the author recalled her mother, her mother’s death and her father. I kept waiting for the purpose — on an issue so important as the aging and death of parents — but this was just name-dropping, elitist fluff. I wasted several minutes, and I hope in the future you choose otherwise with your important publication. I could name-drop here, but if my faith has taught me one thing, all that matters is our name on heaven and how we write that in our time on Earth. Keep up the otherwise good work.
Joyce Keen ’97MBA
Berwyn, Illinois
Farewell, Fred, and thank you
I just received the autumn issue, only to learn that my beloved political science professor, friend and mentor recently passed away.
Fred Dallmayr was a prince among men — a brilliant and prolific scholar, and a specialist in European philosophy who also looked East, especially to India, to better understand and bridge the divides in political discourse.
Upon receiving my master’s degree from Northwestern University in 1989, I received a book in the mail with a nice, handwritten note. When I read the preface, I was speechless and probably cried. The book — Margins of Political Discourse, which Fred published in 1989 — was dedicated to me and my roommate and bestie, Nicholas Griffin ’86.
I was clearly not a scholar — and today you’d never mistake me for one! — but a curious kid who wanted to learn everything, especially from the best of the best. Fred made me feel smart and worthy, like I belonged in the room with big thinkers. He encouraged me to keep traveling, keep learning, and to live and love out loud and proud.
Thank you, dear Fred in heaven. I’m lucky to have known and loved you. You made my Notre Dame experience extra special. And gave me the confidence to pursue a career in nonprofit management, and to lead with love, always.
Mark Ishaug ’85
LaGrange Park, Illinois