fenders come.rnWhen Pataki became governor, hernsought to grant early release to some ofrnthe criminal aliens clogging the state’srnjails and to turn them over to the INS forrndeportation. The state would therebyrnsave millions of dollars and have morernroom to store its native-born criminals.rnPataki’s policy led to a kind of Marielrnboatlift in reverse—the large-scale deportationrnof hardened criminals to countriesrnill-prepared to accept them. As the CaribbeanrnWeekly Gleaner complained, it isrnoften the case that “the deportee grew uprnin North America. . . . When sent back,rnhe has no one to go to, no home to stayrnin. He is young, homeless, unskilled andrnunemployed.” And, as Tony Best wroternin the CaribNews, local police in Jamaicarnand neighboring countries havernalready blamed the new arrivals for a significantrnshare of the recent crime and violence.rnAs a result of the uproar among Caribbeanrnleaders, INS and State Departmentrnofficials agreed at the U.S.-CaribbeanrnSummit held in Barbados last year tornchange the guidelines for deportations.rnAccording to the West Indies-based CaribbeanrnWeek, procedures are now inrnplace to give advance warning about deportationsrnof thugs as well as summariesrnof their criminal histories —a protocolrnwhich, given the number of criminals,rnwill undoubtedly slow down the deporta-rnHon process.rnNow hindering the deportation ofrncriminal aliens in New York is GovernorrnPataki’s decision to grant prosecutors ofrnthese aliens more power to decide if earlyrndeportation and release are appropriate,rnmeaning criminal aliens wouldrnsene out more of their time —in Americanrnprisons, of course, at taxpayer expensern—before coming up for deportation.rnThere seem to have been twornpolitical reasons for his decision. First,rnPataki was undoubtedly embarrassed byrnsome high-profile cases in which Israelirnand Colombian drug dealers got out ofrnjail after a ver’ short time and got rightrnback into business.rnSecond, as Irwin Claire, a lawyer whornheads the Queens-based Caribbean ImmigrantrnServices, points out, New York isrnhome to an estimated 500,000 to onernmillion Caribbean immigrants whornlargely agree with the governor’s pro-entrepreneurialrnvalues and who helpedrnhim win his last election. Many of thesernimmigrants, of course, have familiesrnback in the countries being ravaged byrnthe deportees. Another factor, saysrnClaire, is the effect of massive deportationrnon the tourism industry. Antigua,rnfor instance, depends for its livelihood onrnan offshore banking sector and a tourismrnindustry. And who owns and operatesrnthis tourism industry? Overwhelmingly,rnAmerican companies. In other words,rnthe early release and deportation ofrnaliens could adversely effect Pataki’s futurernfundraising campaigns.rnPataki is justly popular as a conserativerngovernor who signed the deathrnpenalty back into law. The question isrnhow quicklv his popularity will wane ifrnhe continues to put his political ambihons,rnthe interests of other countries, andrnthe plight of foreign thugs over the wellbeingrnof his own state and its citizens.rn—Michael WashburnrnOCTAVIO PAZ, who died m April,rnwas one of the greatest poets of the secondrnhalf of the 20th century. On the leftrnfor most of his life, Paz held convictionsrnthat were often more compatible withrnconservati’e thought. Paz was not arn”progressive.” In fact, he complainedrnthat the ethos of progress had no appreciationrnof irony, melancholy, despair, nostalgia,rnpleasure, and doubt. “Progress,”rnhe wrote in One Earth, Four or FivernWorlds: Reflections on ContemporaryrnFlistory (1985), “is brutal and insensitive.”rnHe regarded the Soviet leviathanrnand its satellites as the main contemporar)’rnenemies of human freedom, and hernrelentlesslv criticized the fellow travelersrnand deluded pacifists of the Western intelligentsiarnwho impeded the necessaryrnstruggle against the Evil Empire. He hadrnthe courage to condemn Pablo Nerudarnand Gabriel Garcia Marquez for theirrnshameless complicity with the bloodiestrnsvstem of thought in the modern world.rnAmong the Latin American intelligentsia,rnthe price for adopting such viewsrnis high. I remember a Latin Americanrnprofessor advising me never to suggestrnPaz’s name as a possible recipient of anrnhonorar- doctorate. Fortunately, by thatrntime Paz was above such yappings andrnsuch honors. His reputation was alreadyrnimmense, in spite of the opposition ofrnthe same sectors of the professoriate whornhad stopped Jorge Luis Borges from gettingrnthe Nobel Prize. Of course, as arnconfirmation of his standing as a writer,rnPaz needed a prize from the SwedishrnAcademy no more than Borges did. LikernBorges before him, he had already receivedrna far more meaningful prize: thernT.S. Eliot Award bestowed by The IngersollrnFoundation,rnBut unlike Borges, Paz did get the Nobel.rnOne reason is that he was never anrnenfant terrible like Borges. Another mayrnhave been that Paz enjoyed the governmentalrnbacking and connections thatrnBorges lacked. Unlike Juan Peron andrnhis delightfiil wife Evita, Mexican rulersrnnever thought of humiliating a superiorrnwriter by naming him a poultry inspector.rnOn the contrary, Paz was consistentlyrnhonored and promoted. Nonetheless,rnhe never allowed government favor to affectrnhis convictions. When the Mexicanrnpolice shot a number of students demonstratorsrnat the Tlatelolco Plaza in 1968,rnPaz resigned his ambassadorship inrnprotest. After that, his writing of poetryrnand essays on literature, art, and anthropologyrnalternated with works of moral,rnpolitical, and social criticism. Like Eliot,rnPaz became one of the great cultural essayistsrnof his time.rnPaz started as a leftist, but eventuallyrncame to see Marxism as a movement createdrnand controlled by the same intellectualsrnwho hated Western democracyrnwhile co-opting its name. He explicitlyrnattacked the refusal of such intellectualsrnto allow for the peaceful change of governmentsrnand policies through cleanrnelections. Paz’s political conversion mayrnalso have had something to do with thernartistic dryness and banality of Marxism.rnThough far from his best set of essays,rnthe early Labyrinth of Solitude establishedrnhis reputation as a cultural critic.rnBut as critical of the Mexican psyche asrnthis book had been, Paz’s love of hisrncountry never wavered. This love ofrnMexico, and of Latin America, madernhim prefer their imperfect democraciesrnto the alternatives found in Cuba or Nicaragua.rnBut Paz did not want Mexicornand Latin America to follow Washington’srnexample, either. Paz was not just arnuniversal writer but a universal Mexicanrnone. Because of his respect for the localrnand the particular and his refusal to acceptrnthe transferability in toto of Americanrnpolitical and cultural ways, he hadrnmore in common with paleoconservativesrnthan with neoconservatives.rnOn the other hand, unlike most Americanrnconservatives, Paz was not a religiousrnChristian. His spirituality, like thatrnof the surrealists, found outiets that onernmight characterize as neopagan andrnthat, if anything, placed him closer to thernviews of contemporary European conser-rnAUGUST 1998/7rnrnrn