After reading Alex Scott’s Feb. 5 letter to the Exponent, "Purdue Should Reject Communism," I could do little but shake my head in disbelief.

Actually, my first reaction was surprise that Mr. Scott chose communism over the more-preferred socialism, since, with the "fall of communism," socialism has replaced communism as the buzzword conservatives throw around to frighten an ill-informed public. Mr. Scott’s assertion seems rooted deeply in the past, as is consistent with the very definition of conservatism. The Worker Rights Consortium is interested in one goal — protecting the rights of the worldwide workforce. I realize this may be a difficult concept for Mr. Scott to believe, since most attempts at protecting workers from blatant abuses by business in pursuit of the almighty dollar is supposedly "communist," but give it a try, sir. The "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" philosophy of the past, while an honorable goal, is dependent on one condition — namely, an inherent respect for the workforce on the part of management. Sadly, this has not been the case in the past, and shows no sign of change.

His assertion that workers who add value have power is also based on this nearly non-existent respect. Even in the good old United States, it has been my experience that good work is rewarded not with compensation and respect, but exploitation of this willingness to go above and beyond. Smith’s laissez-faire economics had its chance, and it resulted in child-labor, forced-labor and scores of deaths from hazardous conditions. Call me a "dirty liberal" if you like, but I’ll protect the people over the profit any day. Welcome to the 21st century, Mr. Scott — we respect human rights here.

To quote Franklin Delano Roosevelt, "A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs that is incapable of walking forward."