To the editor:
About “I Told the Last Trump Joke” by David Kump (opinion guest essay, January 24):
I encourage Mr. Kampf to keep telling jokes about Donald Trump. Mr. Trump is a serious threat to the institutions of American democracy and pluralism, so Mr. Kampf’s concern that the joke makes the danger seem trivial is understandable.
But alongside all the jokes aimed at chilling Trump, 74 million Americans voted for him in 2020, and even more will support him and his dictatorship in 2024. There is also the fact that there is a possibility of voting. Despite the hard facts, humor can bring solace to Trump. Oppose Trump and unite us in opposition. Because it reminds us not only of the dangers of having such a narcissistic mediocre in power, but also that he could be deposed and defeated.
Indeed, Mr. Kamp needs better jokes than the second-rate epithet of “short-fingered snob,” which simply puts the comic on the same level of immaturity as Mr. Trump. But jokes that remind Trump of his disdain for democracy, pluralism and decency could be a powerful weapon against Trump’s campaign.
No joke will turn MAGA supporters against their savior, but a good joke will remind the rest of us why we need to vote and work for President Biden’s reelection. .
Tony Speranza
Washington
To the editor:
Shortly after I watched the cold open of “Saturday Night Live” with James Austin Johnson’s Donald Trump impression and didn’t laugh once, I read David Kampf’s essay. He expressed my feelings eloquently in words.
It’s definitely time to stop making jokes about President Trump. There is no room for humor in him as we face what the coming months have in store.
Michelle Putterman
raleigh, north carolina
To the editor:
David Kampf’s guest essay advises, “Hold your laughter until he is defeated.” But I’m going to buy what columnist Nicholas Kristoff prescribed in 2020 with the headline, “To Defeat Trump, Mock Trump.”
Kristof gave examples of the successes of tyrannical deflation and concluded with thoughts on making the eventual collapse “more gentle and less violent.” “Clowns don’t need revenge as much as monsters,” he said, quoting Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo.
Steven T. Corneliussen
poquoson, virginia
To the editor:
David Kampf is reading the room correctly. Trump’s humor is very much his 2016. For quite some time, it provided us with some relief from the harsh realities of the individual and the dark realities of the presidency. We need humor even about our favorite presidents. But Donald Trump is no longer the president, or even a normal presidential candidate.
It took a long time for many of us to feel comfortable laughing at Hitler (“The Producers,” “Jojo Rabbit”). The dictator we see before us is never interesting. Even imitating him contributes to his normalization.
There is nothing normal about this situation.
mary ann cherry
Los Angeles
it was a riot
To the editor:
Regarding “Why January 6th Wasn’t an Insurrection” by Ross Douthat (nytimes.com, January 12th column):
What would have been the outcome if Donald Trump’s insurrection had been successful?
It would invalidate Joe Biden’s legal election as president and make Trump the president.
It doesn’t matter the size of the mob or the length of the action. What was the purpose of that action? The purpose of Mr. Trump’s actions was to overthrow the duly elected government.
It’s a rebellion. Full stop.
bruce higgins
san diego
Concerns about China’s declining birth rate
To the editor:
Regarding “Beijing’s setback in raising birth rate” (front page, January 18th) and “A quarter of humanity affected by drought” (news article, January 16th):
China understands that an aging population reduces economic growth, but like many other countries, it says relying on unbridled population growth is not a sustainable model for social and environmental prosperity. It seems like they don’t want to face the facts.
We know that the root cause of global warming is overpopulation. Relying on a constant increase in the number of babies to drive economic growth and support an aging population is essentially “pyramid demographics,” the consequences of which we are all experiencing. It is a pyramid scheme that privatizes benefits and profits without considering the enormous environmental damage that will result.
The drought facing a quarter of humanity is not a natural occurrence, but is another glaring reflection of humanity’s failure to understand the planet’s limits to support overpopulation.
In his 1968 book The Population Bomb, Paul Ehrlich echoed the warnings of Thomas Malthus and predicted the dire global consequences of overpopulation. At the time he wrote, the world’s population was approximately 3.5 billion people.
Ehrlich and Malthus may not have foreseen the exact impact that today’s 8 billion humans are having on the climate, but they were farsighted in predicting the scope of disasters facing humanity today. There was light.
Karl Mezoff
stamford, connecticut
To the editor:
The Chinese government may consider slowing population growth a “national emergency,” but from a global perspective, this is far from the case. Unlimited growth is incompatible with the planet’s limits.
Declining birth rates generally reflect women’s greater physical independence, education, and career opportunities, and are something to be celebrated rather than lamented. But there is a problem when people feel that having children creates a significant disadvantage and exposes them to further injustice. It’s good to see that the authors point out that China’s (as well as South Korea’s) continued decline in birth rates appears to be due to “deep-rooted gender inequality.”
Helping people meet their desired family sizes should replace the goal of promoting population growth. Xi Jinping needs to start listening to women’s voices and focus his efforts on promoting gender equality and improving the quality of life. He and other world leaders also need to accept that small families are likely here to stay and prepare for the inevitable aging of the population.
Authoritarian efforts to roll back women’s rights will only backfire and slow economic and social progress.
olivia nutter
Boulder, Colorado.
The author is the communications manager at Population Connection.
Discuss the Israel-Gaza war at school
To the editor:
About “New York City Schools Teach About Prejudice in Response to War” (News article, January 23):
You are reporting: “Approaches to discussing war in the classroom vary widely across the city’s more than 1,600 public schools. Some people try to avoid talking at all.”
But heated debate is part of the vitality of democracy. Why not allow students to participate in democracy by inviting pro-Israel speakers and pro-Palestinian speakers to hold debates and then opening them up to student participation?
Felicia Nimue Ackerman
Providence, Rhode Island
The author is a professor of philosophy at Brown University.