Bryan Corbett apparently likes to cite a lot of examples that do not agree with his point of view to tarnish the reputation of the Gazette’s neutrality of opinions and letter publishing (Your Views, Sept. 1). But what about the Gazette pieces that do not fall “right of the political spectrum” as Bryan would point out?
I believe in recent times the Gazette published stories about banning plastic straws, bags, rainbow crosswalks and even allows for millennial Marxists to have a regular thought piece in their commentary. Heck, they even allow weekly contributions of a pro-communist and pro-socialist Doris Wrench Eisler to preach about how bad Jordan Peterson is.
Even for the most layperson, Bryan’s complaint is more about revanchist denialism then it is about the Gazette being a source of right-wing fanaticism. In our hyper-polarized political climate, people seem to avoid the truths of accountability and choice. We have the choice to vote or support whatever political party or individual we want. If our vote results in unintended consequences like an ineffectual carbon tax that was not part of a campaign promise, then that is not the fault of those who oppose such ideas.
When someone pushes an agenda of ethanol-based gasoline, paper straws, etc., that do more to harm the environment than save it, you get the revanchist denialism that claims batteries are the new ethanol (revanchist) and still refuse to admit Starbucks’ solution to ridding the world of plastic straws only utilizes more plastic (denialism).
Keep up the good work, Gazette! Although I don't agree with a lot of what you print at times, I will stand up for the fact that you do a very good job of providing an equal platform to differing opinions.
Nat Vey, St. Albert
