I would like to clarify part of my letter “Opinion off mark” (Dec. 8) that was totally misunderstood by Michael Bonds in his letter “Views misled” (Jan. 30).

Mr. Bonds, in your first letter, you stated that the ACT should be geared toward “the majority,” in which you claim membership because nine-tenths of the world’s population are “of color.”

My response was, briefly, it already is. Since Asians generally perform slightly better than whites on standardized tests, it makes obvious sense to group them with whites for purposes of analyzing your claim that the tests are not geared toward the majority. Whites + Asians = majority.

In your next letter, you accused me of “two-dimensional” thinking because I supposedly did not consider Asians, inter alia, in your alleged nine-tenths majority.

Automatically assuming you are in “the majority” and I am not based on quantity of skin pigmentation appears to prove your race-limited thinking, not mine.

In the issue of standardized tests, you are in the minority. Sure, a majority of people are darker than whites. It is equally true that a majority of people are lighter than blacks. SO WHAT?

Finally, you state that whites have a “stab-me-in-the-back, smile-in-my-face tendency.” Thus, if I am unfriendly to you, I am hostile; similarly, if I am friendly to you, I am also hostile.

Paranoia is defined: “…mental disorder characterized by systemized delusions and the projection of personal conflicts, that are ascribed to the supposed hostility of others.”

Bruce Latimer

Graduate Student

International Relations/Comparative Politics