Lt. General Lewis Burwell (Cbest y } Pull er, U.S.M.C., Rei . Volume XI - Number 8 Mr. Nixon Gary Allen 1 M r. Wallace Susan L. M. Huck 25 De Libris Medford E vans 41 From Sc ie nc e Da v id O. W oodb ury 55 Princi ples Of E con omics Han s F. Sennholz 57 F rom London Frank MacMiIIan 6 1 From Af ri ca George S. Schuyler 63 F rom Latin Ameri ca Harold Lord V arney 65 F rom Washi ngton R eed Benson and Robert L ee 67 From The South T om Anderson 69 From Poetry Edited by E . Merrill R oo t 71 For Students E . M erriII Root 73 P oor Excuse Medford Ev ans 81 On M anlines s Tayl or Caldwell 91 Lt . Gen. L. B. ( Chest y) Puller WiIIiam C. Lemly 113 Cover P ortrai t Daniel M ichael Canavan- Co ve r Dear Rea der : T he next forty pa ges of t his issue of AMERICAN OP INION arc devoted t o t he f i rst of a co n t in uing ser ies of commen taries on lead ing candidates f or President of the Unite d States. T he art icl es f or this month, on Ric ha rd N ixo n an d George \Vall ace, were com mi ssion ed month s ago with t his sing le editorial ad- moniti on to our au t hors: T ake a hard look at t he candid at es and " te ll i t l i ke it is. " T hen, having cho sen cons er vat i ves Gary Alle n and Susan Huc k to prepare t he first two i n t he ser ies, we simply moved out of t he way and let t hem get at t he j ob-- promi sing t o p ubl ish thei r f indings as th ey gave t hem to us, Warts and all. W e arc now doing just that. Let us emp hasize, however , t hat t he polit ical cornmcnrar ics which you arc about t o rea d are 110t mea nt as an en dorsemen t or a re ject ion by AMERICAN OPINIO>l of t he candid acy of ei t her Mr. N ixon or Mr. Wallace, bu t r ep resent persona l jou rn al ism ref lecting t he op in ions and analyses of t he authors whose names arc affixed to th eir respect ive art icle s. As you know, AMERICAN OPINION does not endorse polit ical ca ndidat es. Not becau se we agree wit h Thomas J ef ferson t hat when a ma n en t er s poli ti cs a cert ain rotten ness appears- t hou g h t he though t docs in trude- but because we know that it wo uld be u nf ai t h- fu l to ou r p urpose to abandon t hose con ser vat ive principles wh ich t his magaz ine re p resen ts to ma ke a necessar ily com- premising chase af t er insta nt heroes on horseback. Free na t ion s arc not preserved t h at way; in fa ct they arc somet imes lost . and by t hose who love t hem the most , fo r havin g set upon just such a course. To repeat : N o art icle whic h fo llows is intended as a n en - dorsement by AMERICAN OPINION of t he presidential ca nd id acy of either Ri ch ard M. Nixo n or George C. \Vall ace. And, lest ou r f rie nd Mr. N ixon express his u nbou nded joy at th is fac t and alle ge t hat i t is Vice P resi den t H umphrey who has received our cndorsement by process of el imin at ion , let us say simply t hat H uber t Hump hrey' s t urn no t t o be endor sed by AMERICAN is corning next mon th . Sinc erel y, It Edit or ROBERT WELCH Mallaging Edit or SCOTT STANLEY, J R. Associat e Edito rs T HOMAS .I. ANDERSON MEDFORD EVANS FRANCIS X. GANNON ROBERT H. MONTGOMERY E. MERRILL ROOT Contributi ng Edit ors GARY ALLEN H ILAIRE DU BERRIER FRANK MACMILLAN H ANS F. SENNHOLZ HAROLD LORD VARNEY Assistant Matlagillg Edit or MARIAN PROBERT WELCH Publisher RICHARD N . OBER Business Manager DONALD R. GRAY Ci rcul ation Mallager DONALD L. FOLKERS Edit orial Advisory Committee The f ollowing grou b of distill - gllished AmericalIS gives t he edit or com ments and advice tubic]: are bel pflll ill determining t he edito - rial policy, conte nts, and opinions of t hi s magazi ne, But 110 respon- sibilit y can be att ribu t ed t o allY members of t bis Committee fo r allY speci fi c arti cles, ite ms, or COII - elusions u/bicb appear in t bese pages. K . G. BENTSON LAURENCE E. BUNKER F. GANO CHANCE MARTIN J. CONDON, III ROBERT B. DRESSER CH ARLES EDISON WM. J. GREDE CLARENCE MANION N. FLOYD MCG OWIN W . B. McMILLAN LUDWIG VON MISES ROBERT W . STODDARD ERNEST G. SWIGERT CONTENTS SEPT EMBER, 196 8 AMERICAN OPINION-is published monthly except July by Robert Welch, lne., 395 Concord Ave ., Belmont, Massachusetts 02178 U.S.A. Subscription rates are ten dollars pe r year in the United States and Canada; twelve dollars elsewhere. Copyright 1968 by Robert Welch, Inc. We use almost no articles except those written to order to fit our specific needs, and can assume no responsibility fo r the return of unsolicited manuscripts. Second Class Postage Paid at Boston, Massachusetts MR. NIXON A Hard Look At The Candidate Gary Allen, a graduate of Stanford University and one of the nation's top authorities on civil turmoil and the N ew Left, is aut hor of Communist Revolu- tion in the Streets-a highl y praised and definitive new volume on revolutionary tactics and strategies, published by West- ern Islands. Mr. Allen is active in anti- Communist and other humanitarian causes and is President of the Foun da- tion ,tor Economic and Social Progress. A ftlm writer and journalist, he is a Co nt ri buti ng Editor to AMERICAN OPINION. Gary Allen lectures widely. T HESEEMINGLY endless search for the "real" Richard Nixon has been a popul ar sport of American pundits since 1948. As wit h the hunt for Jack the Ripper, the quarry has proved bri lliantly elusive yet quadr ennially captivating to the imagi nation. Every four years, by the time the snow falls in New Hampshire, Mr. Nixon returns to the political scene as certainly as the recurring legend of the Ripper lives on in the wary step of the London shopgirl. Who is he? Why does he do it? In the answers to these questions are t he secrets that pro- long the legends. I T HE NIXON STORY is one that begins almost as if it had been wr itten by Horatio Alger. Reared in a hard-work- ing Qu aker fami ly, Richard Milhous Nixon was early inspired by his father 's commit ment to overcoming economic hardship through di ligent effor t. As the former Vi ce Pr esident has said, "My dad was an individual- he'd go to his grave SEPTEMBER, 196 8 before he took government help. This attitude of his gave us pride." An d, no doubt it did. The schoolboy Nixon worked in t he fami ly's small grocery store until nine or ten o'clock at night, and after-hours would study until two or three in the morning. In Nixon's junior year in high school, in keeping wit h his Quaker phi losophy of individual responsibility and personal dignity, young Nixon's fat her gave him complete charge of the vegetable counter in the family groce ry store. Dick di d the buying, dr iving to the Los Angeles public market before sunrise to haggle wi th the local produce growers, then hu rried back to arrange his displays befor e leaving for school. All the profit he could make was his, and all that he could save went into a college bank account. It was superb training for any boy. A good student of aggressive nature, Ni xon became entranced wi th debating in high school. His debate coach, Mrs. Clifford Vi ncent, remembe rs that she used to feel "distur bed" at his superiority over his teammates. "He had this abilit y," she said, "to ki nd of slide around an argument instead of meeting it head on, and he could take any side of a debate.?" His teenage skill at debati ng may have been honed by his six weeks as a barker for a wheel of chance at the Slipper Gulch Rodeo in Pr escott, Arizona. There "he learned the knack of drumming up customers and then lett ing them have it," writes Phillip Andrews in This Man Nixon. "His " William Costello, The Fact s About NixOII , Vi- king Press, New York, 1960. 1 booth, it is said, became the most popular one in the show." While work ing his way through Whit tie r Co l lege, Ri ch a r d Nixon majored in history and again covered himself wi th distinction as a debater and also as an actor in school dramas. Dr. Albert Upton, who directed Nixon in one of the Whittier College plays, is still awed when he recalls how adept the young collegian was at produci ng tears. "It was beaut ifull v done, those tears," he remembers, co n f essi ng to having "twi nged" when he saw photos of Nixon weeping on Senator William Kn owland's shoulder after the famous "Checkers" speech. Dr. Upton says he never dreamed that his former student would go into politi cs, but adds: "I wouldn't have been surprised if, after college, he had gone on to New York or Hollywood looking for a job as an actor." During all four years in college> the youthf ul Nixon doggedly went out for football. Though he never got beyond the bench, being possessed of two left feet, he neverth eless refused to give up. Hi s coach, Wallace Newman, recalls th e weeks that would go by wi thout Ni xon's ever playing a minute, but says he was nonetheless "wonderful for morale, because he' d sit there and cheer.... To sit on the bench for the bett er part of four seasons isn't easy." According to Earl Maze, his most fri endly biogr apher, "Nixon classified himself a 'Liberal' in college, ' but not a flaming liberal.' Like many law stu- dent s of that per iod, his public heroes were Justices Brandeis, Cardozo and Hughes, then the Supreme Cour t's pro- gressive minority."* At Duke Law School on scholarship, he gra duated th ird in his class. Stewart Alsop quotes a former classmate: "My imp ression was that Richard Nixon was not an excep- tionally brilli ant stude nt. However, he " Ear l Mazo, Richard Nixon, Harper and Brot hers, New Yor k, 1959. 2 was outstanding because of his ability to do prodigious amounts of work. He pursued his ambition to stand at the head of his class with an intensitv that few people are capable of." . Upon graduation Nixon was none- theless turned down bv several VI!all St reet firms and, cur iously, by the F.RI. Shaken, he accepted a job in the bureau- cracy of Washington, D.C., then served in the Navy during Wo rld War I!. Mr. Nixon described his war record in the famous "Checkers" speech of 1952 in these words: My service record was 110t a partic- ularly nnnsual one. I went to the SO/Ith Pacific. I guess I'm entitled to a couple of battl e stars. I got a couple of lett ers of commendation, but I was jl/st the re when the bombs were falling, and then I returned. That isn't just how it was. In fact, Stewart Alsop not es in N ixon and R ockefell er that ". .. Nixon had a non- combat job far from the battle lines. . . ." For a few weeks, though, his naval unit was on the f rin ges of a combat area. And, whi le he received a citation for being efficient in providing supplies - something he had been doing effec- tively with cabbages and parsley since the age of seventeen - he was cert ainl y entitled to no battle stars. Home from the South Pacific, Nixon began his politi cal career as a protege of a group of businessmen who were so anxious to defeat Leftist Congr essman Jerry Voorh is in 1946 that they had run an advertisement in a local newspaper to seek prospective cand idat es. Friends in Whittier, no doubt regaled by Nixon's war stori es of bombs bursting in air, suggested that he answer the ad and run for Congress. Up to then, Richard Nixon says he had littl e interest in politics, but he ac- cepted the offer with alacrity: "Why did I take it ? I'm a pessimist, but if I figure AMERICAN OPINION Richard Nixon discusses his "war record" in the nationally televised "Checkers" speech of 1952 . I've got a chance, I'll fight for it." As the acid Stewart Alsop observes : "Nixon became a polit ician, in short, more be- cause it seemed a good idea at the time than because of any profound political convictions. Having thus ente red poli- tics more or less by accident, one suspects that he though t of a polit ical career much as another young veteran back from the wars might think of adverti s- ing, or meat packing, or bond selling - as a way to make a living and get ahead." Young Mr. Nixon, campaigning in his Navy uniform, won that first elec- tion against grea t odds, using a stra tegy described by biograph er William Cos-- tello: "... Nixon, canvassing the 200,000 voters of the district, introduced himself as a 'liberal Republic an.' He refrained from attacki ng t he New Deal in all its aspects, but he pull ed no punches in attacking Voorhis." II IT W AS the Hiss case in 1948 which rocketed the young Calif ornia Congress- SEPTEMBER, 1968 man to the headlines. Although the actua l investigation of Alger H iss was done by Robert Stripling of the staff of the House Commi ttee on Un-Ameri- can Activities, it was Nixon's persistence which finally nailed Hiss as a Soviet spy. The Hiss case had its origi n in testimony given by Whittaker Chambers before the House Committee on Un- American Activities, of wh ich Mr. Ni x- on was a member. Nixon recalled later that Chambers "made charges which at the time seemed fantastic - that he'd been a Communist, that he had worked with Hiss, White, Abt, Press- man, Witt, and a group of others who were also conn ected with the govern- ment. " Alger His s, of course, was a very important man. He had long served with the State Department , was instru- ment al at the founding of the United Nations, and had since become Pr esi- dent of the powerful and prestigious Carnegi e Endowment for International Peace. Hiss promptly came before the Committee to den y all. "He was an 3 amazingly impress ive witness the first time," Nixon said later. "I would say that ninety percent of those who were in the committee room were convinced that Mr. Hi ss was telling the truth ... when he said that he did not know Mr. Chambers." The case was almost dropped. Of course, Chambers too was a man of some standing, one of six senior editors of Time magazine, but Hiss had a phenomenal record in government service and came before the Committee not as a confessed ex-Commu nist, like Chambers, but as a man of redoubt able credenti als. Nonetheless, and to his eternal credit, Congr essman Richard Nixon took the lead in urging further investigation. His s helped seal his own doom by suing Chambers for calling him a Com- munist. Now under pressur e, Whittaker Chambers produced a thick envelope containi ng four pages in Hi ss' hand- wr iting and a number of typewritten document s whi ch he said had been copied on Alger Hiss' typewriter. He charged the envelope contained confi- dential State Documents which Hiss had pilfered and passed on to him in the service of the Interna tional Commu- nist Conspiracy. Examinat ion showed the papers were in fact copies of authen- tic top-secret documents; and, other testimon y established that the trans- mission to the Russians of verbatim texts of these papers woul d have en- abled the Soviet government to break the State Department's secret code. So powerful were the Communists in government that, even in the face of all of this, there was an intimati on from the Justice Department that the Hi ss- Chambers case would be dropp ed un- less additional evidence could be found. At that point Mr . Nixon performed his penultimate service in the Hiss case. At a pri vate interview with Chambers on the latter 's farm in Maryland, Congr essman Nixon learned that 4 Chambers had in his possession addi- tional documentary evidence. The next evening, in a cloak-and- dagger scene that fired the national imagination, an agent of the Commi ttee served a sub- poena on the ex-Communist, Chambers led him in darkness to a pumpkin in hi s garden, and from the pumpki n he drew five rolls of microfilm containing photostatic copies of confidenti al and secret documents stolen from the State Department. A New York Grand Jury, on the verge of indicting Whittaker Chambers for perjury, reversed itself when Nixon rushed to New York and testified that it must have been Hiss who lied in say- ing he had not turned official document s over to Chambers. Simultaneously, the F.B.I. was able to establish that the pumpkin papers, and letters from Mrs. Priscilla Hiss, had been typed on the same Woodstock typewrit er. On Decem- ber fifteent h, the Grand Jur y climaxed its investigat ion by bringing in an in- dictment of perjury against Alger Hiss, who was later found guilty and jailed. For his role in exposing Hiss, Richard Nixon earned the undying hat red of a vast segment of the American Left. Hiss had been a fair-haired boy among the "Liberals." Adlai Stevenson and Dean Acheson had served as character witnesses at his trial, and many another "Superliberal" had gone out on a limb to defend him. Umil Nixon's persistent investigation produced the evidence, the dapper and urbane Hiss was on his way to being cleared. Ni xon left a lot of "Liberal" Democrats with egg on their faces, but he concluded the experience as a national hero. In 1950, Congressman Nixon emerged victorious in a vicious campaign in California to defeat extremist Helen Gahagan Douglas for a vacated seat in the U.S. Senate, capitalizing on the considerable reputation he had earned as an anti-Communist in dogged pur- suit of Alger Hiss. Nixon Red-baited AMERICAN OPI NION the "Pink Lady" unmercifully, if quite correctly, and introduced some interest- ing campaign techniques no doubt re- membered from the midway of the Slipper Gulch Rodeo. For anyone who answered the phone to Nixon's can- vasses with the words, "Vote for Nixon," ther e would be, "PRIZES GALORE!!! Electric clocks, Silex coffeemakers with heating units - General Electric auto- matic toasters - silver salt and pepper shakers, sugar and creamer sets, cand y and butter dishes etc., etc." Nixon also sent every registered Democrat in the state a handbill which began: "As one Democrat to another. . .." Yet another handbill, featuring a smiling photo of the Repub lican candidate, began: "Fel- low Democrats ..."1 Political success seemed only to stimu- late Mr. Nixon's ambitions. Senator Robert Taft, for one, described him as "a little man in a big hurry." He was in a hurry, all right . And he played his cards carefully. Although Nixon had built a considerable reputation as an anti-Communist in the Hiss affair , and as sponsor of the Mundt-Nixon Sub- versives Control Bill, the Californian had also been careful to remain a vigorous internationalist. The individual most responsible for Nixon being confirmed as Dwight Eisenhower's running mate in 1952 was apparently Paul Hoffman,* the man who was instrumental in making the Leftist policies of the Ford Foundation what they are today, a trustee of the Communist Instit ute for Pacific Rela- tions, and member of Amer icans United for World Government. At a meeting to pi ck a running mate for Eisenhower, the Left ist Mr. Hoffman, as chief spokesman for the Citizens for Eisen- hower movement, was most persuasive. As he said later : "I told them everything I had heard about Senator Nixon was " See Biographical Dictionary of the Left by Franc is X. Gannon , American Opinion, Boston, $1.00. SEPTEMBER, 1968 good. I looked on him as one of the Republicans who had an enlightened view of foreign affairs, and I thought that a man of his views should run with General Eisenhower." Nixon, you see, had moved quickly to become a fair-haired boy to the Re- publican "Liberals" through his efforts in behalf of an organization known as Republican Advance. ' It had been easy to see that 1952 would be a pivotal year in American history and that the Re- publican Party was virtually a cinch to regain control of the White Ho use. The Nixon family: Trida, Julia, Richard, and Pat. The Truman scandals, the Korean War, Communis t infiltration of government, the fact that for the first time since 1932 the G.O. P. was not faced with an in- cumbent President - all these factors combined to make the Republican nomi - nat ion ta ntamount to election. Nixon knew t hat the Lef t was thus fiercely determined that the nomination not fall to conservat ive Robert Taft, but to one of their own . He joined the effort. Russell Davenport, a devout "Liberal" Democrat who had successfully run 5 the campaign to sell fellow Democrat Wendell Willkie to the Republican Part y in 1940, and who had later been a founder of the AD.A., served as the organizing force behind the Far Left's move to set up the Repub lican Ad vance movement. Working with Davenport were Hoffman, Nels on Rockefeller, and Sidn ey Weinberg.* Advance made its first public move on Jul y 4, 1950, wh en twenty-one Republ i- can Congressmen joi ned wh at they termed a "revolt" against the Taft wing of the Part y. It was they who publicly procl aimed the formati on of Republi- can Advance, launched in semi-secrecy the previous week with the announced purpose of destroying Taft. An Advance manifesto was quickly issued to supplant a G.O.P. declaration of policy adopted in February of 1950 by House and Senat e Republicans, and concur red in by the Republican Nat ional Commit- tee. The official Republican state ment had dar ed to declar e tha t the election issue would be "liberty versus socialism." Republi can Advance advocated playing down the issues of socialism and anti- Communism and stressing "positive" programs in the fields of collectivist legislation - in ot her words, to out- "Li beral" the Democrats. As the mani - festo declared : "The real issue against the Democrats does not lie with the goals. . . .r r The move was on to shift the Re- publ ican Party from one wh ich advocat - ed repealing socialism to one promising to run socialism in an efficient and businesslike manner. By taking the heat off the socialists and Communists, Leftist inroads into the American Re- publ ic were consolidat ed and assured bi-part isan support. Now, here's the key; According to the Los A ngeles Times of Jul y 14, 1959, one of the founders of Republican Ad vance, later *Weinberg, who served as chief mo ney raiser for Eisenhower in 1952 - 1956 , is t his year raising $3 million for t he campaign of H uber t Hump hrey. 6 re-name d Citizens for Eisenhower, was Richar d M. Nixon. III AT THE BEGI NKING of the 1952 election campaign Nixon swore he would make Communis t subversio n and corruption the theme of every speech . "If the record itself smears," he said, "let it smea r. If the dry rot of corruption and Commu- nism, whi ch has eaten deep into our body politic during the past seven years, can only be chopped off with a hatch et - then let' s call for a hat chet." The words were aimed at the many dis- couraged supporters of Senat or Taft, and were design ed to get them back int o the 1952 campaign. Even the "Liberals" saw through the ploy. As "Liberal" columnist Stewart Alsop wrote at the time: "The admirati on for N ixon among the Taft-worshippers is essential- Iv irratio nal, since Nixon contributed to Taft's last defea t in 1952, and since he has none of Taft 's hankering for a simpler past." St ill, the ploy worked. In his new job as President of the Senate, Vice President Ni xon labored vigilantly to implement even the most Leftist features of the Eisenhower pro- gram. In an article in Colliers for Octo- ber of 1965, enti tled " How Ike Saved the G.O.P. " (by pu rging conservatives), Paul Hoffman noted: III the Senate f rom the very be- ginni ng the President's program had the IInqllalified and cigoro: SlIpport of Vice President Nixon. Some liberal Repnblicans are nncanuinced as to the Vice President's attitllde, hold- ing that he has SliP ported the pro- gram only ant of personal loyalty to the President . That his original nltrn-conseruatioe uieios are changed. Based on what N ixon has said both pllblicly and privately, it is my view that he gellllillely and deeply beli eves that the fll ll Eisenhower program is best f or the COl/lltl'Y. AMERICAN OPINION Nixon is shown in 1959 as he welcomes Khrushchev, the Butcher of Budapest, t o the United States. Vice Pr esident Nixon, a one-time sup- porter of Senator Joseph McCarthy, now worked vigorously to carr y out the directives of Ike's so-called Palace Gu ard ( Paul Hoffman, Sidney Weinberg, and C. D. Jackson) to silence the Wiscon- sin Senator whose investigations were flushing top conspira tors from the government. "Liberal" White House correspondent William Costello even credits Nixon with having "persuaded McCarthy to call off his thre at to in- vestigate the CIA," and having "talked McCarthy out of keeping J. B. Matthews as chief investigat or rof the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee] . . .." Matthews, one of the most knowl edge- able experts in the United States on Communist subversion, had made the mi stake of writing a magazine article documenting the activities of subversives inside the N ation al Council of Churches. While Communism in the govern- ment was a good campaign issue, you see, Costello says that once the election was over Nixon "tried to guide McCar- SEPT EMBER, 1968 thy away from the whole Communist issue, telling him that he would benefit by broadening his field of activity." Nixon's role as an Eisenhower hench- man is furt her described in The Facts About Nixon as follows : Althotlgh Nixon's original under- taking as a middle-man applied pri- maril)' to the McCarthy investiga- tions, and altbongb Eisenhower re- frained from giving him any f ormal status as a deptlt), leader of the Ad- ministration, his talents as a legisla- tive broker were invoked f rom time to time on a variety of problems. In the f irst weeks of the Administration, the President ran into trouble on the conf irmation of two key ambas- sadorial appointees - Bohlen to go to Moscow and Conant to Bonn. In both cases, it was Nixon who re- assured the edgy right- wingers. . . . Again, it was Nixon who dming the Congress got Senator Pat sue . ran to call of f a [ilibuster on the immigration bill, and persuaded 7 Dan Reed of the House Ways and Means Committee to swallow the President's tax program af ter giving vent to violent rumbl es of discontent . Ignoring bleeding Hungar y, a Com- munist takeover in Cuba, the loss of the Suez Canal, the Korean stalemate, a major recession, the gold drain, in- creased taxes, and all-time-high peace- time budget deficits, Nixon said that Eisenhower had "the best eight-year record of any Administration in the history of this country." Washington, Lincoln, Madi son, and Jefferson, please take note. Memory of the Hiss affair and Nix- on's hard-fought campaigns, however, still rankled uninformed "Liberals," and Nixon was doing his best to create a new image-to come out as the "new Nixon." By 1958, columnist Doris Flee- son would write of him : "Having now ' matured,' he earnestly repents and is heartily sorry for the kind of campaigns he waged for the House and Senate against then-Representative Jerry Voor- his and Hel en Gahagan Douglas respectively." Those, of course, were Nixon's anti-Communist campaigns. Stewart Alsop says of this "new Nix- on": "He want ed to be Pr esident very much, and he knew that he had a chance, perhaps a good chance, to be- come President. But he also knew - for he is anything but a fool - that a reput ation as an extremist and parti san would sharply reduce that chance. Hence his change of political style. A man's motives are always mixed, and no doubt it is true that Nixon changed his political style after 1954 in part for purel y practical political reasons." In October 1956, "the new Nixon" told an audience at Cornell Un iversity that investigations of Communist activi- ties, such as those formerly conducted by Senator Joseph McCarthy, were no longer needed. Associated Press of October 17, 1956 says he gave credit to 8 the Eisenhower Administration' s secur- ity policies for taking "this issue . . . out of the political arena." Four days earlier Ni xon had explained in Rock Island, Illinois, just how the Eisenhower Admi nistration had cleaned the security risks out of government. "The present security program," he said, had "resulted in 6,926 individuals being removed from the federal service." This was quickly contradicted by Phillip Young, Eisen- hower's Chairman of the Civil Service Commission, who test ified that he kn ew of no single government employee who had been fired by the Eisenhower Ad- ministration for being a Communist or fellow-traveler.'*' As 1960 approached and "the new Nixon" was to have his own shot at the Presidency, he announced t hat the Com- mun ist thr eat had all but disappeared. Late in 1959, Nixon claimed : "Domestic Communism is no longer a political issue. The danger has receded a great deal in the last few years, domestically, mainly because we have become in- creasingly aware of it. The Communists used to fool an awfu l lot of well-mean- ing people who were not Communists." IV RICHARD NI XON felt more than ready in 1960 to step up to the Pr esidency. Hi s .,After pro misi ng t o investi gat e th e Commun ist s i n "every department," Eisenhower let stand an Exec utive Order issued by Pr esident Truman in 1947, whic h pr ohib ited Congre ss f rom access to government fil es on t he loyalty of personnel. Another 1948 direct ive by Mr . Truman, for- bi ddi ng government officials to give informa- tion to Congressional Commi ttees wit hout Whit e House permission, was also lef t sta nding by Eisenhower. On Friday, May 17, 1954, Eisenhower issued an orde r stopping the supp ly of any information on administrat ive departments t o investiga t ing com- mittees, whic h went fa r beyond the Truman "gag" rule. Ch airman Francis Walters of the House Commit tee on Un -A merican Activities called this Eisenhower Executive Order "i nc redibly stupid." Congressional Commi ttees were now, for all practical pur poses, out of th e busi ness of i nvesti gating Co mmunis ts and ot her subve rsiv es in t he government- in complete repudiation of Eisenhower' s campaign promises. AMERICAN OPINION onl y serious rival for the candidacy was Governor Nelson Rockefeller of New York. Rockefeller had run hard, but Nixon, a tireless campaigner for the Republican candidates across the coun- try, was well in control of the Conven- tion. When Rockefeller found he could not lay claim to the actual nomination, he moved to dictate policy from behind the scenes. A meeting was thus arra nged between Nixon and Rockefeller for the Saturday before the Republican Con- vent ion opened in Chicago. In Th e Making of the President, 1960, Theodore White notes that Ni xon accepted all the Rockefeller terms for this meeting, including provisions "that Ni xon telephone Rockefeller personally with his request for a meeting; that they meet at the Rockefeller apartment . .. that their meeting be secret and later be announced in a press release from the Governor, not Nixon; that the meeting be clearl y announced as taking place at the Vice President' s request ; that the statement of policy issuing from it be long, detailed, inclusive, not a summary communique."*' As a result of the meeting, a four-way telephone circuit was set up linki ng Rockefeller prot ege Cha rl es Percy (Chai rman of the Republican Platform Committee) , a second Rockefeller deputy in Chicago, Nixon, and Rocke- feller. What finally emerged were the four teen points of the famous Compact of Fifth Avenue. The Republ ican Platform Commit tee had been meeting in Chicago for an entire week, laboriously pounding out a platform reflecting the views of Re- publicans from all fifty states. Now the Platform Commi ttee was hand ed the Rockefeller-Ni xon orders : Forget the effort and the time you have spent to come to Chicago at your own expense, hear witnesses, and draft a document to " Theodore White, The Maki ng of t he President , 1960, At heneum Publ ishers, New York, 1961, Page 196. SEPT EMBER, 1968 submit to the Convention- throw it all out and accept the Rockefeller-Nixon platform worked out, in secret, 830miles from the Convention site. The "Lib- erals" were ecstatic; here was their kind of democracy in action! The Wall Street Journal of July 25, 1960, claimed that the Fifth Avenue meeting was not a Rockefeller coup but a Nixon victory; that Nixon had needed a rationalization for dumping the Party conservatives. As a result of t he meeting, the Journal states, "a little band of con- servatives within the party, of whom " Kennedy and I agree on most of the issues... ." Senator Goldwater is symbol and spokes- man, are shoved to the sidelines. . . . First impressions to the contr ary, Mr. Nixon has achieved all this without giving Mr. Rockefeller a single impor- tant concession he did not want to make. "This is not to deny that the four- teen points are very liberal indeed ; they comprise a platform aki n in many ways to the Democratic platform and they are a far cry from the things that con- servative men thi nk the Republican par ty ought to stand for. . . . 9 "But as you go down the four teen points, one by one, it's clear they reflect the Nixon brand of liberalism. . .. "Actuall y, Mr. Nixon has rather skill- full y used the Rockef eller meeting to get a few liberal planks int o the plat- form which he alreadv wanted but which he was having trouble getting through the platform committee. . . . "Thus it is tha t in one burs t of speed Richard Nixon has accompli shed three maneuvers - defied the conservative wing of the party, cut loose from Presi- dent Eisenhower and neatly outflank ed his major opponent within the party. . . . Mr. Nixon's risk is that conservative voters will be outraged enough to stay away from the polls and that his liberal gesture will not in fact gain any liberal vot es from the Democrats. . . . "In doing so he has moved the Re- publican party a little mor e to the left on the political spectrum, a thing tha t is bound to be sad not onl v to men of conservat ive mind, but also to those wh o would like to see the philosophic differ- ences that divide the count ry sharpened into clear political issues. Once more we are going to be deprived of that kind of a choice in a presidential election. "As a matter of tactics, Mr. Nixon with this platform abandons the deep Sout h and conservatives everywhere to whatever they can make of the Demo- cratic plat form." Another Wall Street [ournal article of the same day concluded that the Rockefeller-Nixon agreement "brings the spotlight shining once more on a facet of his public image he has long labored to eradi cate; that of 'Tricky Dick,' the politician who sacrifices prin- ciple to expediency." The Chicago Tribune headlined the Nixon-Rock efeller meeting as "Grant Surrenders to Lee." The Welfare plat- form dictated by Rockefeller and Nixon, which included an endorsement of the abject ives of Communist-led sit-ins in the South, was called by Senator Gold- 10 water "the Munich of the Republican Party." Republicans everywhere understood the meaning and significance of the new Rockef eller-Nixon alliance. Nixon had purged himself of his ind ependence to become acceptable to the Insiders of the In ternational Left. As Theodore White put it: Nevel' had the quadrennial liberal swoop of th e regul ars been more Ilakedly dramatized than by the open compact of Fifth Auenue. Whatever bonor th ey might have been able to cany f rom their services 011 the pl at- f orm committ ee had been wip ed out . A sing! Ilight 's meeting of the two men ill a mill ionaire' s triplex apart - ment in Bnbyl on -b y-t b e-Hndson, eight bundred and thirty miles away, was about to ooerrule them; they were exp osed as cloums for all the world to see. Nixon confirmed his alliance by accepting as his running mate one of the foremost darlings of the interna- tionalis t clique, a discredited instigator of the smear-Ta ft maneuver of 1952 and I of the anti-McCarthy smear of 1954, Henr y Cabot Lodge. Cabot Lodge then proceeded to virtually sit out the cam- paign. Newsweek of March 23, 1964 phrased it more delicately: " His laziness became legend." That there was a deal of monstrous proport ions is beyond question. In analyzing Nixon's acceptance speech at the Republi can Convention, the Wall Street [ournal of August 1, 1960, noted: H e does not reject all)' particular Federal activity - whether it be Federal medical help f or the aged, Federal aid to education, or Federal fo reigll aid - 0 11 the ideologi cal ground that it is somethinv the central gOl/em mellt has 110 right to do . AMERICAN OPINION Of course, Nixon did throw a bone to the dejected conservatives, proclaim- ing in his acceptance speech : "T he only answer to a stra tegy of victory for the Communist world is the strategy of victory for the fr ee world ." But , as the [ournal commented, "Exactly what Mr. Ni xon has in mind in this regard will have to awai t clarification." That clari- fication never came. In the 1960 camp aign Nixon attempt- ed a feat more difficult than passing a camel through the eye of a needle. He tried to out promise the Democrats. News week of Jul y 11, 1960 quoted him as saying : " We are not going to be outbid We can reach goals the so-called economic liberal s of the Gal- braith-Schlesinger school can never reach. We can show that we can pro- duce bett er schools, hospit als, health , higher living standards." Wow! And Ni xon kn ew what he was doing. He was now advocating more of the very same policies he had once denounced so vociferously as socialist and Commu- nist. The Wall Street [ournal even headl ined an article for Jul y 29, 1960: "Nixon Ai ms to Wed Fi scal Responsi- bility to Welfare Stat e." As the [ournal explained : . , . the Republican party this year stands on a platf orm that borrows much from this modern liberalism, In the area of civil rights, and ioel - fart! legislation, in the acceptance of big Gouernment spending, the Re- publican party is once more seeking to meet the Democratic part), on its own ground, , . , MI' . N ixon is going to completely ignore any distinction betuieen con- servatives fwd liberals in wide politi- cal areas. , , , He will accept it as propel' f or the Government to interven e in the na- tion's bnsiness, to take on f or the peo- ple some of the obligations whi ch were once left to them individually SEPT EMBER, 1968 - the path is straight from social security to socialized medi cal care, In that sense the Roosevelt revolution is complete; Mr , Nixon, if elected, will not dismantle the welfare state. The only difference the [ournal could find between the Democrats and Re- publicans was that the Democrats promised socialism through deficit spendi ng while the Nixon Republicans promised socialism with balanced bud- gets. Either way, America was to be the loser. In his campaign agai nst Senator John Kennedy, Richard Nixon regularly pull ed his punches. He never discussed what informed Rep ublicans considered his best issue : the Senat e records of Kennedy and Johnson - including Senator Kennedy's sponsorship of legis- lation to repeal the loyalty oath provi- sion of the National Def ense Education Act, his vigorous support of Commu- nist revolutionaries in Algeria, and his backing of the repeal of the Battle Act provision wh ich prohibited the sendi ng of strategic materials to Iron Curtain countries. And, Nixon never even men- tioned Mr . Johnson's killing of the bill to restore to the states the right to punish subversion. Instead, like Willkie and Dewey be- fore him, Richard Nixon conducted a campa ign using the ort hodox "New York strategy," concentrating his efforts on the big cities at the expense of rural areas, the West, and the South. Nixon failed as Willkie and Dewey had failed before him: He simply could not wedge the "Liberal" East and conservative West into a single phalanx. The princi- pal iron y of Mr. Nixon's campaign was that he could very probably have won every state he did win without any effor t to project a "new Nixon." And, had he not turned Left, he might have picked up in the South the votes he needed to become President. Yes, it was very ironic indeed. 11 V ACCORDING to his most author itative biographer, Earl Mazo, Richard Nixon personally "considers himself a 'radi- cal' when it comes to the goals he would set for the country (his defi nition of ' radical' being the 'opposite of conserva- tive' ) ." This has become more and more evident. In his oft-used phrases about relying on the private sector and the free enter- prise system, Nixon is simpl y supporting with cliches that which he does not really und erstand. In economic matters, the Wall Street Journal of April 27, 1959 reports, Richard Nixon is ", . . trying to avoid getting obsessed with the idea [of balancing the budget] . He believes the real issue is not a balanced budget so much as the danger of infla- tion." Since deficits beget inflation, this is like being for motherhood but against childr en. When asked by U.S. News & World Report how to cure an economic slump, Vice Pr esident Nixon betrayed his ignorance of the market economy by answering: . . . W e should have trin the bank" a great number of tested and proven pllblic-works projects on which some of the preli minary planning work has been done. . . . I believe we should have a host of sucb projects which could be P" t into motion in the event the economy needed a shot in the arm. (August 29, 1952. ) Of course, Nixon should know that the economy can be "given a shot in the arm" only when a government with a balanced budget reduces spending and taxes so that the taxpayers can buy more goods and services. When a government incr eases the spending, and hence the taxes, it merel y spends the money that consumers would have chosen to spend themselves. It is thus, in the macro- economic sense, mer e tommyrot to in- crease the political giveaway and ex- 12 pand the role of government to try to ease economic difficulties. Since his first term in Congress, Nix- on has also been an active advocate of giving away our wealth to foreign coun- tries, and of fighting perpetual-wars-for- perpetual-peace. "Li beral" columnist Stewart Alsop says admiringly of Nix- on: "He is an interna tionalist, an activist, and inte rventionist . . . in foreign policy." And, that is quite true. Whi le a member of the Herter Com- mittee, Nixon even helped to write the repor t that paved the way for the great gi veaways following Wo rld Wa r II. At a news conference in Baltimor e in 1958, he defended American aid for Commu- nist Poland and added : I challenge anybody who has a more consistent record in the fi eld of f oreign aid, starting with the Greek- Turkish loan, going through the Marshall Plan, and making speech af ter speech f or f oreign aid two years ago during the budge; f ight when very f ew peopl e were f or it . Nixon's one-worl d proclivities are, alas, notori ous. Although he has always been clever enough never to openly join the dangerous United World Federalists (U.F.W.) , he has sponsored several pieces of their legislation in Congress. For example, the U. F.W. magazine, World Government News for October 1948 (Page 14), noted that "Richard Nixon : Introduced world government resolution (HCR 68) 1947, and ABC (World Government) resolution 1948." World Government News of May 1951 (Pp. 8-9) lists Nixon as sponsoring on January 15, 1951, a resolution "which calls for U.S. initiative towards a fed- eral union of democraci es." This was the infamous Atlantic Union Resolution and was co-sponsored by such "Liberal" extremists as William Fulbright, Hu- bert Humphrey, Estes Kefauver, and Herbert Lehman. AMERICAN OPINION Stewart Alsap: "There are in fad no sharp ideological differences between Rockefeller and Nixon ," The Atla ntic Union Committee, whose Resolution Mr. Nixon sponsored, was set up by socialist Clarence Streit to ad- vocate federal union with Western Eu- rope as a first step on the road to world government. Pollster Elmo Roper, in his book The Goal is Government of All the World, explains that : "Some of us who have been interested in World Government for several years now have come together to form the Atlantic Union Committee." When queried by angry conservatives on how he could sponsor the Atlantic Union Resolution after having taken an oath to uphold and defend the Consti- tution of the United States, Mr. Nixon has vehemently claimed that the Res- olution really has nothing to do with world government and that it only pro- vides for a "federal convention to ex- plore . . . within the framework of the United Nations, the principles of free world union." Of course, if Richard Ni xon was really opposed to world gov- ernment, he would hardly have called over and over again for a convention SEPTEMBER, 1968 which its promoters say is aimed at sur- rendering our independence and mak- ing the United States one region in the new federal nation of Atlantica. Another standard bail-out used by Nixon when confronted with his activ- ities on behalf of the interna tional Left is to say that he does not believe a World State is practical at this time, but that it will be in the future. While the pro- posed federal union with the N.A.T. O. nations is (as he says) not total world government, it has always been claimed by the Federal Unionists that such total world government is their goal-for the future . In a brochure called "Eight Rea- sons Why Atlantic Union Will Benefit You Now," issued in the I950s when Nixon was sponsoring their Resolution in the Senate, President of the Atlantic Union Committee Owen J. Roberts de- clared: Our ultimate goal is world federa- tion, but the way to start is with those civilized people who recognize indi- vidual liberty under law. Th e door 13 will be kept wide open f or all free- dom-loving peoples to come in. . . . It will be the first step towards gov- ernment of all the world. The latest Atlantic Union bill was in- troduced in Congress by Republican Paul Findley of Illinois, who inserted into the Congressional Record letters of support which he had received from prominent Republicans. In his letter of endorsement to Findley, Nixon wrot e: "As Clarence Streit probably told you I have supported this resolution for many years and I wish you every success in your effort ." (Freedom and Union , March 1966, Page 9.) The United World Federalists' slogan is "World Peace Through World Law. " The New York Times of April 15, 1959 editorially congratulated Nixon for his "important and far-reaching proposal " to "elevate the International Court of Justice at the Hague to a real Supreme Court of the world with far wider juris- diction and .. . power to make binding decisions. . . ." Nixon has repeat edly urged the repeal of the Connally Res- ervation, which now prevents the World Cour t from having sovereignty over American domest ic affairs. An even mor e impo rtant key to pre- serving the sovereignty of the United Stat es was the Bricker Amendment, forbidding the President to surrender to any int ernational body those freedoms guaranteed to American cit izens by the Const itut ion. This attempt to preserve basic American liberti es was described by "Liberals" as "t ying the hands of the President in dealin g in foreign affair s," and "undermining the treaty-makin g power of the President." Nixon had or iginally supported the Bricker Amend- ment. But , wh en he joined the Eisen- hower team, that all changed. In his biogr aphy of Nixon, William Costello notes: The Bricker Amendmen t, in turn, 14 called for Nixon's best talents. Th e White House set itself adamantly against the amendment's proposed limitation on the President 's treaty making powers, and it was Nixon who brollght the report that sentiment both in and ont of Congress was more sympathetic to Bricker than the Pres- ident had sspposed. Th e Vice Pres- ident, after f irst proposing compro- mise, [ound himself in loyalty to the White House stalling, placating, in- stmcting, and negotiating, and fi n- ally joining Eisenhower in opposition to Bricker's demand. Thanks to Nixon's failure to stand firm, the Bricker Amendment did not pass, despite the fact that no one has yet adequately explained wh y any President should want to give away any of the rights guaranteed to American citizens by our Constitution - a Constitution which every federal officer has sworn to defend. It is, you see, to the field of foreign af- fairs that Nixon has devoted his primary Lefti st efforts. As "Liberal" authors Dav id Broder and Stephen Hess say in their book, The Republican Establish- ment,* "One senses that Nixon really does not have his heart in domestic ques- tions. His most carefully considered speeches are on foreign policy." Now, here's the point: In the Wall Str eet lour- nal of April 27, 1959, Nixon calls him- self "a liberal rather than a conservative because I have an international VIew . . . of foreign policy." It was biographer Earl Mazo who wrote of Nixon's foreign policy views as far back as 1959: "He is the administra- tion's- and perhaps the nati on' s-lead- ing advocate of Big Aid over Big Guns. 'In the next ten years our greatest ex- ternal danger will not be milit ary, but economic and ideological,' Nixon insists. " David Broder and St eph en Hess, T he Republi- can. Est ablislnnent , Har per and Row, New York, 1967. AMERICAN OPINION Therefore, he believes, it is mo re impor- tant to prov ide money for peopl e-to- peopl e and cultural-exchange progr ams than for missiles and submarines. 'If we have to choose in allocating funds be- tween mil itary programs and the eco- nomi c, infor mation and ot her non-mili- tar y progr ams, I would put the emphasis on the non-militar y programs and take a gamble on the military programs." To handle serious confli ct, Ni xon ad- vocates a strong U.N. army to sup er- cede Amer ican military ind ependence. As the Los Angeles Examiner report ed on Oct ober 28, 1950: A strong ef fo rt to obtain appro val of his resolution calling f or establish- ment of a United N ations police force will be made by Coneressmnn Rich - ard Nixon when Congress reconvenes N ovember 27th, the Califomia Sen- atorial nomi nee said today. . . . Nix- on's resolut ion Sli ggests that a UN police antbority be set liP 0 11 a per- manent basis, to consist of land, sea and air forces. It wOllld swillg into action against aggression under deci - sion of a simple majorit), vote of the police autborit, Realizing that thi s was fro m the "old 'conse rvative' Nixon," and that the Communists control that "simple ma- jori ty" he was talk ing about , one begi ns to wonder just how far "the new Nixon" can move to the Left without announ- cing support for Mao Tse-tung. Well, he has made a good beginning by an- nouncing his admira tion for Secretar y of Stat e Dean Rusk. On March 10, 1968, in New Hamps hire, Mr. Nixon told the N cta Yorl( Times: "I think Dean Ru sk would be an excellent Secretar y of Stat e under a President who had a bett er un- derstan ding of foreign policy. He's a gutsy guy and a fine, professional dip- lomat." Rusk, of cours e, was a key member of the Institute of Pacific Relations wh ich SEPTEMBER, 1968 the Senate Intern al Security Subcom- mittee says "has been considered by the Communist Party and by Soviet officials as an instrument of Communist policy, propaganda and military intelligence." The work of the I.P.R. was largel y re- sponsible for the sell-out of Chi ang Kai- shek to the Ch inese Reds, and Dean Rusk was one of the "China hands" who played an impo rtant role in tha t disaster. In March of 1950, Dean Ache- son named Rusk as Assistant Secretary of State for Far East ern Affairs . While holding that position Secretary Rusk even delivered a speech in praise of the Chinese Communists in which he de- scribed the Peking Reds as revolutionar- ies comparable to the American patriots of 1776, and declared that the course of their agrarian reform was "not Russian in essence." Nixon's "gutsy" friend Dean Rusk was also instrumental in shap ing those policies of the Korean War which General Douglas MacArthur described as "a cat astrophic blow to the hopes of the Free World," including the policy of giving the Communist Chinese a privileged sanctua ry north and west of the Yalu River. Mr. Nixon's expression of admiration for Ru sk provides a clue to the type of man Nixon woul d appoi nt as Secretar y of State if he is elected President. One now begin s to realize wh y Goldwater, shortly after the 1960 election, referred to N i ~ o n as a "worse appeaser than Nev- ille Chamberlain." (Joseph Alsop, San Francisco Examiner, Novembe r 29, 1963.) That word appeaser is a bitter and prej udicial one . Let us simply say that- I despite fifty years of proofs to the con- trary-Nixon has always been a strong believer that negotiations with the Com- munists can be meaningful and fruitful. He has argued that once the Commu- nist conspirators "understand the rul es and are willing to have them fairly en- I forced by an impart ial umpire" [the I Worl d Court1 then the United Stat es I 15 and the Communists can engage in "peaceful competition, knowing that both systems would be moving in the direction of a world of peace. . . ." In his book, Tile Challenges We Face, Nixon writes: "The alternative-to have no ne- got iations-would mean, obviously, that we would lessen our chances of achiev- ing agreemen ts with t he Commu- nists...." Nixon, who supports cultural ex- change programs with the Soviet Union despite thoroughl y substantiated pro- tests from J. Edgar Hoover that such programs are a front for Red spies, sup- ported bringing Nikita Khrushchev, the Butcher of Budapest, to the United States in 1959. The invitation to Pr e- mi er Khrushchev, who had been respon- sible for the deliberate starvation of mil- lions in the Ukraine, served to tell the enslaved peoples behind the Iron Cur- tain that America was no longer int er- ested in their plight ; that we had de- cided to co-exist with their masters. Speaking in London in November of 1958, the Vice President said the Free World should "speak less of the threat of Communism and ... adopt as our pri mary objective not the defeat of Communism, but the victory of plenty over want, of health over disease, of freedom over tyranny." Pr emi er Kh rush- chev declared it a "welcome statement." (Mazo, Page 205.) Nixon even part icipated in several "debates" with the Butcher of Buda- pest, including this incredible response to Nikita's braggin g about the accom- plishments of Communism: "There are some instances where you may be ahead of us: for example, in the thrust of your rockets for the investigation of outer space. There may be some instances in which we are ahead of you - in color television, for instance." When the Vice Pr esident ar rived in Moscow on his "goodwill trip" in 1959, he went so far as to apologize to Khrushchev for the resolut ion recently 16 passed by Congress commemorating "Captive Nations Week" which de- manded that the United States conti nue its efforts to win the release of the "Cap- tive Nations." Nixon told Khrushchev, "t his was a foolish resolut ion." No t only does the former Vice Presi- dent suppo rt acceptance of a Commu- nist Central Europe, but he even op- poses qu aranti ning Mao's China, butch- er of more than 25 million Chinese and exporter of revolution to all Asia. Nixon said in Hong Kong on August 11, 1966: "There is a great desire on the part of the American people to improve rela- tions with Communist China." In clos- ing his speech, Mr. Nixon declared: "At this time the problem is not that the United States has isolated China, but that Communist Chi na is isolating it- self." As in making war against Thai- land, Burma, India, Tibet, Laos, and Indonesia, and supplying war materiel to kill American soldiers in Vietnam, and aiding Reds in Tanzania, Kenya, Mozambique, Angola . .. ? Some isolation! Just where Nixon stands in regard to the Vietnam War - the key interna- tional issue at the moment - has been most difficult to assess. Hess and Broder say in Th e Republican Establishment: With respect to the Johnson Admin- istration, while Nixon has endorsed the American commitment in Viet - nam and the President's statements of America's ptl/pose there, he has been steadily critical of the actual conduct of the war. (Page 192.) At this writing, Mr. Nixon supports the major fallacy of a "no-win" policy and aid and trade with the East Eu- ropean arsenal of the Communist ene- my killing our soldiers in the field, but leaves open t he door of criticism just enough to mak e political capital out of the war. Many conservatives have speculated AMERICAN OPINION that Richard Nixon's dangerously Left- ist attitudes on foreign policy are a product of his close association with the extremist Council on Foreign Rela- tions. At one time Nixon readi ly admit - ted in letters to his constit uents that he was a member of the international Left' s Council on Foreign Relations. Since the C.F.R. has been exposed, and come under considerable criticism from conservatives, the former Vice Pr esident now engages in a great deal of doubl e- talk whenever the subject is broached. He has even tri ed to pass off the C.F.R. as merely an "advisory body" to whi ch he belonged in ord er to obtain their magazine, Foreign Affairs. The C.F .R. itself boasts tha t it is far more than an advisory body, and in fact leads the way in creating American foreign policy; as for the magazine, it is certain- ly not necessary to be a member of C.F .R. to receive Foreign Affairs. H uman Events of Mar ch 23, 1968, re- ports that Ni xon dropped out of the Council on Foreign Relations in the early Sixties. The C.F.R., however, ad- mi ts that many of its most import ant members are forced, in effect, to "go un- dergroun d." Nixon has never repudi- ated nor attacked the C.F. R. nor its pol- icy of seeki ng U.S. convergence wi th the Soviet Union and aid and trade with the Communist bloc suppl ying the Viet- cong. Although supposedly not a member of the Council on Foreign Rel ations at this time, Mr. N ixon recentl y authored an articl e for the 45th Anniversary issue of the C.F .R.'s magazine, Foreign Af- fairs. The article, in the number for October 1967, is entitled: "Asia After Vietnam." In it Mr. Nixon speaks of "the evolution of a new world order" based on "r egional approaches to devel- opment needs." The former Vice Pr esi- dent suggests that "an appropriate foundation stone" on which to build such a regional defense pact is the Asian and Pacific Council. And, accordi ng to SEPTEMBER, 1968 Mr . Nixon, "its members have voiced strong feelings that ... it should not be made ' a body to promote anti-Commu- nist campaigns .' '' In other words, the organization which Mr. Nixon recom- mends to defend Asia against Commu- nist aggression is not even anti-Com- munist! Also in that arti cle, Nixon again stressed his belief that : "We simply can- not afford to leave China forever outside the family of nations. . . ." Hi s solution to the cont inuous aggression of Com- munist China, even as it supports Com- munist North Vi etnam in the killin g of American soldiers, is a giant Mar- shall Plan of foreign aid for all Asia: " ... We have to find ways to engineer an escape from privation for those now living in mass poverty. T here can be no security, whatever our nucl ear stock- piles, in a world of boiling resentment and magnifi ed envy. The oceans provide no sanctuary for the rich, no barrier behi nd which we can hide our abun- dance." Incredibl y, Mr. Nixon was is- sui ng a Marxist call to share the wealth - not only in America, but in the en- tire world . Surel y he is not unaware that the amount of money that it would require to per manently raise the stan- dard of living for Asia's billion people by any appreciable amount would strip Amer ica bar e. VI IN DOl\IESTIC POLITICS, Richard Ni xon has built a reputat ion for supporting Republicans of whatever ideological stripe. At the Hershey Conference of 1964, he declared: "I want all Republi- cans to win; 1 am just as strong for a liberal Republican in New York as 1 am a conservative Republican in Texas, and 1 can go on and just as enthusias- tically campaign for both, because we need both liberals and conservatives to have a major ity." As early as 1958, Mr. Ni xon had be- gun to argue vigorously in favor of 17 making "Liberals" as well as conserva- tives feel at home in the Republican ranks, thus breaking with those who fought to keep the Republican Party de- voted to its historic conservative princi- ples. No Republican is too far to the Left for Nixon. As far back as 1954, he even campaigned for Senator Clifford Case of New Jersey, who was running for re-election and accurately accused by his opponents of "being soft on Com- munism." Biographer Mazo reports that : "No cand idate got mor e vigorous support from Nixon than the liberal, frankly anti-McCarthy Senator Case. . . Case was elected by only 3,200 votes. Without Nixon' s help he would have lost." Time magazine of December 22, 1967 notes that Nixon even attended a recent Manhattan fund-raising dinn er for New York's "Liberal" Senator Jacob [avits. "While Rockefeller and New York Mayor John Lin dsay listened with fixed smiles," says Time, "Nixon warmly endorsed [avits for re-election next year." A Republican by accident, [avit s is like Ni xon a supporter of the United World Federalists. He has a nearly perfect AD .A voting record." Nixon also supports "ultra-Liberal" Republican John Lindsay, giving him this warm endorsement: "John Lind- say is the best political property to ap- pear on the national scene in years. . . . John . .. should run as an independent ... I am interested in his winning . . . I will help him in any way. . . ." (Los Angeles Times, October 18, 1965.) Nixon has not been nearly so friendl y in supporting conservative candidates. Biographer Costello describes Nixon's strategy for the G.O.P. : *According to test imony before the Senate In - ternal Securi t y Subcommittee by t he Communist Party's fo rmer political leader in New York, Dr. Bella V. Dodd. she was order ed by t he Party to help get Javits sta r t ed in pol iti cs. She advised Javi ts, a Democrat, to re-register as a Republican and entered him in a race where th e Democratic Party was badl y split. 18 In defiance of the Taft thesis, he brushed of f the protests of reaction- ary conseruatiue Congressmen, on the theory that they come mostly from rock- ribbed Republican districts whe re they would win as a matt er of course. If by this tactic he drove ul- t ra-conservatives away f rom the polls, he considered that a part of the price he had to pay to broaden the popular- ist image of the party. So reckl ess were his tactics that by 1959 mem- bers of the Republican N ational Com- mittee admitted in ef f ect that the party's position had reverted to what it was eight years bef ore. . . . the part), organization, with Nixon gen- erally ackno wledged as its ef f ective operating head, had f allen to pieces as a result of the tactics that had been pursued. In 1962, Mr. Nix on went to Califor- nia to run for the governorship of the state. This was a calculated and brutal blow to conservative Assemblyman Joe Shell, who had been campaigni ng for many months before Nixon entered the race. Before launching his campaign, Shell had checked with Nixon to see if he was inter ested in the job, and was told by Nixon that he had no intent ion of running for the governorship of California. Subsequentl y, Shell was telephoned by Nel son Rockefeller to see in whose corner Shell would be at the 1964 Republican Convention. The con- servative Shell informed Rockefeller that he would not support the New York Governor. Soon thereafter, Shell received a call from Rockefeller's office announcing that Richard Nixon was leaving New York and coming to Cali- fornia to run for Governor. Nixon, who was much more widely known to the voters, defeated Shell in the primary. Richard Ni xon's campaign against the bumbling Pat Brown, whom even many Democrats believed to be an oaf, was one of the most incredible in polit- AMERICAN OPINION ical history - especially in light of the fact that Nixon prides himself on being a shrewd campaigner. Instead of turn- ing his guns on Brown, who had been described by Time magazine as a "tower of jelly," the former Vice President campaigned against the apolitical but anti-Communist John Birch Society. Nixon, who has regularly campaigned for such "ultra-Liberals" as Jacob [avits, John Lindsay, Clifford Case, and Ed- ward Brooke, repeatedly called for the political liquidation of conservative Re- publican Congressmen John Rousselot and Edgar Hiestand. In fact, Nixon, the great uniter of the Republican Party, refused to appear on the same stand with either of the two incumbent conservative Congressmen because they were members of The John Birch Soci- ety. The other prong of Nixon's "fight- ing campaign" was directed against Proposition 24, a statewide initiative to outlaw the Communist Party. The ini- tiative had been carefully drafted by a committee of Constitutional lawyers so as to protect legitimate civil rights and avoid conflict with Supreme Court de- cisions. Half a million voters had signed petitions to put this anti-subversion measure on the ballot. As the Oakland Tribune of October 29, 1962, remarked: Every such law, even if perfectly written, is challenged and subjected to court test. . . . This will nndoubt- edly happen again, and if Proposi- sition 24 has faulty sections, they will be eliminated by court action. . . . On the other hand, the measure con- tains certain provisions that are vital- ly needed. The Communists, of course, were screaming bloody murder about Propo- sition 24, as were Governor Pat Brown and his comrades. Amazingly, Nixon offended half a million voters by also coming out against it. To top the mat- SEPTEMBER, 1968 ter, the Brown Administration was highly vulnerable on the issue of Com- munism - an issue which Nixon had used so successfully against Voorhis and Mrs. Douglas. Mr. Nixon not only re- fused to use it but prohibited distribu- tion of a former F.B.I. counterspy's devastating expose of the Red-infested California Democratic Council. Richard Nixon's bitter, down-in-the- mouth, lackluster campaign astonished both his supporters and his enemies. What they did not know was that Nix- on had no heart for the battle, since he no more wanted to be Governor of California than he wanted to be Em- peror of the Hottentots. He had every- thing to lose in California and nothing to gain. Having lost to John Kennedy by a hairsbreadth was nothing to be ashamed of, but a loss in California would make him a two-time loser. On the other hand - well, Nixon was literally in debt to Rockefeller. While the former Vice President was playing "Liberal" and losing by over 300,000 votes, Dr. Max Rafferty, an avowed conservative who refused to compromise on his conservative princi- ples, was winning his campaign for the key post of Superintendent of Public Instruction in California by nearly a quarter of a million votes. This despite the fact that Rafferty's all-out "Liberal" opponent had the hundred percent sup- port of the Brown Administration, union leaders, the California Democrat- ic Clubs, the California Teachers Asso- ciation, the State Board of Education, California's powerful campus Left , and all the Democrat organizations in the state. At the beginning of his campaign the polls had showed that Nixon was ahead by the landslide margin of fifty-three percent to thirty-seven percent for Brown . But, by gearing his campaign not against Pat Brown and his Spend- thrift Administration, but against Prop- osition 24 and conservative Republicans 19 and anti-Communists, Nixon - like Dewey in 1948-snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Four years later Ron- ald Reagan, a political amateur who had never before stood for public office- running as a conservative-dispatched Pat Brown to his political Valhalla by a million votes, making Nixon's per- forma nce all the mor e obvious. Still, as the 1964 election approached, the old firehorse Nixon began to smell the perfumed smoke of the White House once agai n. Since the catastrophe of 1962, he had lain back, bided his time, and avoided the stop-Goldwater movement until late in the game. Then, as "Liberals" Hess and Broder report with approval: lust as suddenly, Nixon switched sides and became the selj-appointed leader of the stop-Goldwater f orces. A week af ter California had voted, on [une 9th, he fl ew to Cleveland f or the national Governors Confer- ence. . . . Nixon . . . astounded ever)'- one by attacking Goldwater at a press conference. Citing the Senator's view of the United Nations and So- viet-American relations, his sugges- tion that social secnrity be made voluntary, that the Tennessee Valley Authority be sold to pri vate interests, and civil rights enforcement be l ef t to the states, and a national right -to- work law be enacted, Nixon said, "It would be a tragedy f or the Republ i- can party in the event that Senator Goldwater's views, as previollSly stated, were not challenged and reo pudiated." (Pp. 168-169.) Nixon was trying to set up .Romney as a stalking horse in a last desperate effort to produce a Convention dead- lock from which he, Nixon, would emerge as the nominee. Seeing that this strategy would not work, the former Vice President changed directions once agalll: 20 . .. privately, the last two weeks of [nn e, 1964, Nixon began to re- adjllSt his sight s f rom the 1964 nom- ination to the 1968. . . . Nixon evolved a new role f or himself: the apostle of party Imity who would campaign doggedly f or the ticket in 1964 and f or all Republican candi- dates in 1966, as a way of rebuilding his political capital fo r 1968. ( Hess and Broder, Page 170. ) Nixon believed that Goldwater was "doomed to defeat," but he nevertheless campai gned tirel essly for the Arizonan knowing that by doing so he would make himself appear to be the only pos- sible candidate in 1968 who would not divide the Party, as most other Repub- lican leaders wer e engendering rank- and-file bitterness by sitting out the campaign. One week after the 1964elec- tion, Nixon told Warren Duffee of United Pr ess Internat ional that the Re- publican Party had "gone too far right" and now "most of all needs some dis- cipline ." Nixon continu ed: "The Re- publican party's national position must represent the respectable and responsible right and the responsible ultra-liberal." The future position of the G.O.P., Nix- on said, "must be the center. . . . The formula [for victory] should be the Eisenhower-Nixon formula, not because it is more to the left, but because it is the right position.. .." Nixon placed himself squarely in the "center," but failed to comment on the fact that the middle of the road has been moving Left for thirty-five years. VII IN HIS QUEST for the 1968 nomination, Richard Nixon has assumed that con- servatives have nowhere else to go and has consistently courted the "Li berals." By attending the funeral of "Civil Rights" agitator Martin Luther King, along with virtually every other presi- dential office seeker and black national- AMERICAN OPINION ist, Ni xon made it clear that he was still willing to crawl for a bloc vote. With his vast contacts, Nixon certainl y had access to the information in the F.B.I. file on King, which full y discloses King's close association wi th the Com- munists . Two former presidents of the Amer- ican Bar Association called the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 "ten percent civil rights and ninet y percent federal power grab." Ni xon, who called it a "great step forward," even capitalized on the hysteria following Dr. Mart in Luther King's death to help push another "Civil Rights" bill through Congress. According to the Los A ngeles Times of March 24, 1968, Mr. Nixo n had been working behind the scenes to support forced-housing provisions in the new bill even before King's assassination. Human Events noted that after the kill- ing Ni xon played a strategic role in get- ting Congress to adopt the hastily drawn 1968 Civil Rights Act. He nat only pressed for adoption of the "open hous- ing" section, which had never under- gone proper Committee Heari ngs, but urged House Republ icans to accept the Senate version of the Civil Rights bill without alteration. Such Ni xon lieut en- ants as Representative Clark MacGregor of Minnesota helped to persuade House Republ icans to accept the Senate amendments in toto. Nixon's call to Representative John Anderson of Illi- nois, swing man on the important House Rul es Committee, turned out to be a crucial move for the fat e of the Senate bill. As Human Events noted: The rules committee had appeared deadl ocked over whet her to send the Senate bill t o a Senate-House con- ference, where House members could rework the legislation, or to send the bill to the House fl oor f or a vote with a gag rule that would prevent any amendment whatsoever. Nixon phoned Anderson and urged him to SEPTEMBER, 1968 send the bill to the House f loor for a quick vote. Under pressure from Nixon and the tense conditions in the count ry f ollowing the murder of King, Anderson buckl ed. The Insiders and their puppets know that during the psychological shock of a disaster the public is willing to accept measures which would not otherwise be adopted. In order to capture Negro support in his 1968 quest for the presidentia l nom- ination, Nixon has even formed an al- liance with the revolutionary black power fanatics of the Congress of Rac- ial Equality. C.O.R.E. has adopted the forty-year-old Communist cry for a sep- arate Black Nation and its retiring chair- man, Floyd McKissick (a violent Marx- ist who has led e.O.R.E. in officially repudiating non-violence) advocates a complete redistribution of the wealth beginning with the government subsi- dization of certain Negro business en- terprises. This has been mislabeled "Black Capitalism" and is a subtle per- version of the onl y honest answer to economic difficulty - the genuine free enterprise system. On May 29, 1968, columni sts Evans and Novak reported : In recent days, Nixon has been in contact with CORE leaders Floyd McKissick and Roy Innis (McKis- sick's snccessor'y throllgh intermedi- aries. Th us, their surprising agree- ment on economic black power co/tid tUI'l1 out to be Nixon 's first real breakthrough into the N egro leader- ship. Subsequently, C.O.R.E. came out in praise of Nixon for having seen "the relevance of black power " and claimed that Richard Nixon is the "only Presi- denti al candidate who is moving in the direction of CORE's program." What the fanatics of C.O.R.E. are advocating is not the channeling of pri- 21 vate capital into Negro-owned busi- nesses, but non-profit co-ops which will be financed by government loans. Tax- free, non-profit co-ops, financed by the taxpayers, do not constitute capitalism. What Nixon mistakenly calls "Black Capitalism" is in reality the creation of Black Communes or Black Soviets. In a further quest to attract support of Leftist Negroes, says Parade maga- zine of June 16, 1968, Nixon has con- sidered naming Senator Edward Brooke of Massachusetts as his running mate. However, Brooke decided to throw in his lot with Nelson Rockefeller. "Lib- eral" columnist Carl Rowan, who served in important capacities with the Ken- nedy and Johnson Administrations, re- ported that leftward forces in Massa- chusetts "regard Brooke as one of their own, infiltrati ng the enemy camp-and making them like it. They regard [this] as a contest to see whether an ideolog- ical Democrat can go all the way to the top in a Republican masquerade." One of the great puppet shows of 1968 has been the Nixon-Rockefeller contest. Many an astute observer believes that Rockefeller may have enter ed the Presidential race at a time when he had little chance of winning, only to bring some badly needed publicity to the Re- publican Party's efforts and to solidify conservatives behind Nixon. The Rocke- feller announcement that Nixon would be ideal as Rocky's running mate tends to support this view. At the very least, Nelson Rockefeller will have tremen- dous bargaining power with Nixon and would be the power behind the throne in a Nixon Administration. As Stewart Alsop writes in his book, Nixon and Rockefeller : There are in fact, it should be noted, no sharp ideological diffe r- ences between Rockefeller and Nix- on, as there were betu/en Dewey and Taft and Eisenhower and Taft . When Rockefeller worked in Wash- 22 ington for the first Eisenhower Ad- inistration, he often f ound an ally in Nix011 on such issues as foreign aid. The differ ence is really a difference of style and background and approach to politics. . . . Nixon's friend and biographer, Earl Mazo, says that in Washington, "Nixon and Rockefeller became good friends and supported each other consistently. . . ." After the 1956 election, Rockefeller wrote to Nixon on November seventh that ". .. under you and the President the Republican party is now emerging, at home and abroad, as the great liberal party of the future." (Mazo, Page 186.) The Nixon-Rockefeller alliance is so solid that when Nixon moved from California to New York following his defeat for the governorship of Califor- nia in 1962, he was delighted to become a tenant in the Rockefeller-owned apartment building in whi ch Nelson Rockefeller lives. In discussing Nixon's financi al situa- tion, authors Hess and Broder note : . .. His chauffeur drives him home to a ten-room cooperative apart ment on Fifth Avenue . . . the venerable building comes one apaltment to the floor and the tenants include Nelson Rockefeller and William Randolph Hearst, Jr. It cost Nixon about $100, 000 [and he must pay] a yearly main- enance fee of $9,600 to live there. . . . When he left government at the age of 48, his net worth was about $50,000, mostl y in the equity of his Washington home and his Federal Employees Insurance Plan. Of course, a pension plan is a non-liquid asset. And, as a matter of fact, Nixon had just left California with unpaid bills from his gubernatorial campaign. Where does the money come from? Certainly Mr. Nixon doesn't spend AMERICAN OPINION much of his time practising law. For lengthy periods of each year he has toured the globe on persona l fact-find- ing j unkets. For ot her parts of each year he has stu mped the Uni ted Stat es, restor- ing hi s crede ntials as a poli tical leader. W here does the mo ney for all this come from ? T he fact is that N ixon is paid $200,000 a year for "practising law" by a firm of international lawyers which sophisticated N ew Yo r k e r s say gets much of its business from Rockefeller interests around the world. H is stand- ing is undoubt edl y worth $200,000 a year to the fi rm. Rocky's speech wri ter, Emmett John H ughes, has written that Rock efeller believes Nixon to be less tha n br ight. But N ixon has been, and can conti nue to be, useful to N elson Rockefeller- and Rockv k nows it. Richar d Nixon may even ' personally desp ise the New York Go verno r after suffe ring humilia- tion in 1960 and 1962 because of him, but money talks and Richard Nixon has always wanted, and never before ha d, money. VIII THE SEARCH for the " real N ixon" con- tinues. In an appar ently introspective mood the for me r Vice Pres ident told Stewart Alsop, "The mo re you stay in thi s kind of job, the more you realize that a public figure, a major public figure, is a lonely man... You can't talk too ' much about your personal plans, your personal feelings. I beli eve in keep- ing my own counsel. It 's some thing like wear ing clothing - if you let your hair down, you feel too naked. " Then Nixon added : "Any kind of personal confes- sion is embarrassing to me generally. I can di scuss issues, ge neral subjects. I have fun playing poker, being with frie nds. But any letti ng down of my hair , I find that emba rrass ing." When the intervi ew wa s nearl y com- pleted, Alsop said, "Well, I' ve taken up a lot of your time alr eady. Thanks very SEPTEMBER, 1968 much - it 's been reall y interesting." Out of the clear sky Nixon then vol- unteered : "You know I try to be candi d with newspapermen, bu t I can't really let my hair down with anyone." "Not even with old frie nds?" "No," ad mit ted Nixon, "Not reall y with anyone. Not even wi th my fami ly." Does anyone know the " real Ni xon" ? Even his fami ly? P robabl y not. T he sad flaw in hi s cha racter is tha t he has trie d to be all things to all people at all times. No one is quite sure wha t, if any, pri n- ciples he sincerely holds. T heodore White, in The M aking of The Presi- dent , 1960, says he bel ieves Ni xon lost the presidency in 1960 precisely because he had no visible set of princi ples, and th at "... Ni xon was above all a friend seeker, almos t pat hetic in his eage rness to be liked. " A clue to wh at mot ivates the real Ri chard Nixon is given by "Liber als" H ess and Broder: For Nixon, the end is power - speci fically the incomparable power of the Presidency. He moved toward it in a spectacular, meteoric career; Congressman at 33, important Con- gressman at 35, Vice President at 39, only two -term Repnblican Vice Presi- dent at 43, President ial nominee at 47. The Engl ish histori an Lord Acton has noted that power corrupts and ab- solute power corr upts absolutely. It may indeed be one of the great tragedies of our ti me that thi s man, who mi ght have gone down as one of the truly great men in American hi stor y, was - pr ecisely as Senator Robert Taft observed- in too big a hurry. Of course, the final chapters ar e not written and we cannot yet close the book on Richar d Milhous Ni xon. Cert ainl y the next few months will tell a great deal mor e about him. We hope to one day be able to writ e a much happ ier end to thi s biography. 23 THEY PAUSED TO REMARK: We Americans have been running away from the spirit and principles of our Revolution in order to embrace an alien program saturated with Marxism. Weare under the delusion that there is some safe middle ground between the idea of Freedom on the one side, and Communism on the other. But the dan- ger of the "middle-of-the-road" position, as former President Hoover once re- marked to me, is that "you get hit by the traffic in both directions ." If we are really opposed to Marxism there is only one place to take a stand and that is with Freedom, which makes no compro- mise with Communism, however it may be disguised. Admiral Ben Moreell Fluoridation . . . is of doubtful legal- ity; it offends deep convictions concern- ing doctoring without consent; it is against the medical tradition of care for the individual; against the function of a public water supply; against sane eco- nomics; against the considered opinion of eminent nutritionists, bio-chemists, physiologists, pharmacologists, aII e r- gists, toxicologists; above all it is against natural caution and common sense. Dr. C. G. Dobbs, Microbiologist, University of Wales * Primitive necromancers in the dank rain forests of tropical Africa have for ages controlled and conquered by in- ducing in their victims a sense of guilt for imagined crimes, and leading in- evitably to death. George S. Schuyler He [St . Paul] turned a pagan world of vice and cruelty and slavery to the thought of God . He raised an immortal and imperishable Temple of the Soul in a disintegrating world of power and ex- 24 ploitation and solicitude for the "weak," a world of murderous tax-gatherers and devouring vagabonds and harlots and bloated Caesars. And, always, every- where, he plied his trade to earn his shelter and his bread and cheese, and was proud that he had now been called by God but had been called to labor. Never once did he say, "I'm disadvan- taged. I never had a good school and privileges. Therefore those who work should take care of me, feed me, shelter me. They're guilty because they have what I do not have." St. Paul ... had words for such as they: "He who does not work, neither shall he eat!" Taylor Caldwell We make men without chests and ex- pect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the gelding be fruitful. C. S. Lewis, British Theologian I am very alarmed about the lack of teaching courtesy, discipline, punctual- ity and truthfulness in our schools. I'm not so interested in a boy having a Mas- ter's Degree as in a fellow being able to put in a good honest day's work for a good day's pay, and in his having some pride and dignity in work. I am inter- ested in children learning to develop their potential and learning to recognize their limitation. Weare not all equal because we weren't all cut out of the same cookie cutter; but ability has noth- ing to do with race. ... If I am a sloppy, noisy, rowdy neighbor in one part of town, I will be the same in another neighborhood. You don't get culture on a movll1g van. Mrs. Mattie Coney, Negro head of Citizens Forum, Indianapolis AMERICAN OPINION MR. WALLACE A Hard Look At The Candidate Susan L. M. Huck is a graduate of Syr acuse Un iversity, with advanced de- grees from the University of Michigan and Clarl( Uniuer- sity. Dr. H ucl( has taught as a universi- ty professor of bot h geography and soci- ology, lectured be- fore academic audi- ences on four conti- nents, acted as advis or to one of the world's leadi ng encyclopedias, and is A n- alysis Editor of The Review of the News. ALL POLITICAL commentators agree that 1968 has been, and will doubtless continue to be, an extremely turbulent year in domestic polit ics. The "Liberal"- Conservat ive split has become clearer and wider within the t wo major Parties as the thi rty-five-year-old "Liberal" al- liance of wildl y disparate forces has been comi ng unstuck, with the Negroes car- ried away by the rhetoric of militancy, the Sout h awake at last to its bet rayal, "labor" tiring of its Leftist shepher ds, and the fervid tykes of the New Lef t striving to sink their babyteeth into the nearest soft flesh society affords them ( which is so often the "Liberal" uni ver- . . I) Slues . . Comment ators also note the sullenness of the "u ndecided," the stirrings amo ng the middl e-class majorit y hitherto dis- missed as too "dumb, fat, and happy" to require further placating. There is smoulder ing mutiny among the relative- ly "affluent," yes. But, most important, the hard-working, tax-payi ng, ulti mate- burden-bearing majority-which is still SEPTEMBER, 1968 not on Welfare, learning Leftist slogans in college, or engage d in wr iting, shuf- fling, or enforcing "guidelines" - is be- gi nning to mutter darkly. It is at least beginning to gain the att ention of the people that all is not well - that our leaders seem to have brought us to the brink of actually losing a war for the first time in American hi stor y, wh ile we teeter on the edge of open civil warfare at home, and a painful economic come- upp ance. Yet, neither major Party, understand- ably, is willing to admit its own unques- tioned contributions to br inging Amer- ica to its present low and dangerous estate; no candi date of a major Party offers to slam on the brakes, clean out the Communists and fools and knaves, and move quickly and decisively away from what more and mor e people can see coming. When the ship of state is headed full tilt toward a reef, "modera- tion" is out of place, and a phil osophic al distaste for "r eaction" should not over- ride the common-sense comma nd of "f ull speed astern ." There is a great deal of discussion, once again, of the place of "Third Party movement s" in American hi story. On the whole, they have not had a sanguine history in our republic, yet both present- day major Parti es were once "Thi rd Par ties." Mr. Wallace of Alabama thus sees no reason wh y hi s T hird Party should be for edoomed, and there is cer- tainly no law of nature to that effect. Clearly, Governo r Wa llace has a firm regi onal base, and sufficient national ap- peal to "shake the eye teeth of the 'Lib- erals,' " as he so often expr esses a desire 25 to do. The Wallace Part y could succeed. Still, the two-Party system, in general, se:ved the nation well, though cer- tainly It was not conceived by those who drew up the Constitution of the United States. To the extent that both Parties did str ive to include in their ranks, and reconcile the interests of, the widest spectrum of American society - and then win or lose on the basis of how well they could satisfy the greatest num- ber of - ideological, regional, and factional dissensions in the nat ion were kept to a dull roar , except for the period during the War Between the States' . one civil war in nearly two cent unes IS a record that most civilized societies cannot ma tch. However, the functio n of "loyal opposition" is impor- tant, too, and we have been deprived of that for too long. What has happened is that the smooth, smart Liberal Est ablishment long ago captured both Parti es and im- posed a hidden one-Party system on us - it been mainly engaged, ever sxice, In keeping the American people from discovering that we are a one-Party Stat e. Poor Barr y Goldwater had to be smashed, in 1964, at whatever cost to the cardboard facade of the Re- publican Party, precisely because he of- fered "a choice, not an echo"-a revival of an actual two-Part y system on the na- tionaI level. The Wallace "Third Party" movement today is simply another at- tempt to our traditional two-Party system; It I S attacked by the Establish- men t in a fur ious effort to maintain the one-Party system. George Wallace is criticized for sens- and responding to the smouldering discontent of a sizabl e portion of the electorate. Why should the "Liberal s" suddenly find this subversive and dia- bolically evil? Is it because "Liberals" do not want the working, tax-paying, portion of the U.S. pop- to have any effective leadership? Ve ry likely so! But it is right that loyal, 26 law-abiding citi zens be offered honest represe ntation and leadership; that is the classic symbiotic relationship be- tween the citizen and the seeker of po- litical office in a representative form of government. When candidates who are nothing but mouthpieces for the cabal running our one-Party Establishment declare publicly that they refuse to have any dealings whatsoever with Wallace, they are the ones who are behaving in a sub- versive manner. Why? Because they are relegating to the status of political un- touchabi lity that large portion of our citizenry which supports what George Wallace stands for. They are trying to do nothi ng less than disenfranchise mil- lions of Americans, make them aliens in their own country, merely because they "dissent" from "Liberalism"! Wallace tells the peopl e what they wan t to hear. That is true . But, it is not because of him that they want to hear it! George Wallace simply happens to express aloud what so many peopl e think, but cannot - or often dare not- say for themselves. He is standing up for what he himself sincerely believes, and asking for the support of those who agree with him. He senses the under- current, and naturall y wishes to capture the votes which are available . And vet, he knows perfectly well why there so littl e comp etiti on for so many millions of votes. It is because the guns of the Establishment are trained permanentl v upon that particular position of leade;- ship, and they have kept it neutralized by blasti ng into political oblivion any- one who has dared try to occupy it. I GEORGE CORLEYWALLACE was born in 1919 in the village of Clio, a little cross- roads near the Pea River in southeastern Alabama . His forebears are best de- scribed as "old American stock." They aren't pedi greed, nobody knows from which boat they debarked, or when, or AMERICAN OPINION where, and none of them ever before made a place for hims elf in the history books. They have just been here, for as far back as anyone can trace - the Scotch-Irish Protestants who were "the people" since before the United States of Ameri ca was even invented. They have cleared and worked the land, kept store in the small towns, served in the ranks in our wars, and filled the blank spaces on our maps. Whatever variety and embellishment has been added, for good or ill, over the nearly two centuries of this nation's existence, the base fabric of the country has been composed of "j ust folks" like Wallace's folks- never rich though sometimes poor, neither dis- tinguished nor no-account, neither saints nor criminals. Their collective virtues and vices, their attitudes, values, ambi- tions, and activities might be termed the ballast and keel of our ship of state, keeping us in the water and more or less on course regardl ess of foul weather, heavy seas, or attempts to steer us in radical directions. Those for whom ideology serves as a religion tend to glorify "democracy" and "the common man," and ought therefore to be delight ed when leaders arise from the common people. Some- how, in the case of George Wallace, they are not. H Wallace happened to be a qu itter or a whiner, he could easily qualify for some sort of federal grant these days. He could claim that he was so "de- prived" that he never even tried to make it, realizing that everything was against him from the start. George Corley Wal- lace isn' t that kind of man . Frankly, he doesn't understand those who are. George is the eldest of four children of an Alabama dirt farmer, and it is ex- tremely likely that the fami ly's cash in- come, even converted back to dollars of the 1920's, "fell below the poverty line" most of the time! He spent the fi rst twelve years of his life in a "run-down" house with "i nadequate sanita ry Iacili- SEPTEMBER, 1963 ties" and without electricity. In 1931, a "rich uncle" left his father the fantastic sum of $5,000, and thi s was used at once to build a new brick house with indoor plumbing and electricity. But that was the end of the "affluence" for a good long while, though his father hung on- to his land in the teeth of taxes and mortgage payments until his death in 1937, with the country still mir ed in the Depression. After that, there was no way to meet payments any more; the Wallaces lost their land . Fortunately, the house was separate and paid for, but the widowed Mrs. Wallace started look- ing for work - and has been employed ever since, incidentally. The family "made out," and George Wallace did not have to quit college. He did have to work his way through -but from the beginning he had never had any illusions to the contrary. We may safely assume that , by today's standards, whatever public schools Wal- lace had attended were appalling. The South did not fully recover from the Civil War and years of vicious Recon- struction until about 1940, and it was never onl y the Negro schools that were poor. The money just wasn't available, that's all - not for the white children either. On the other hand, higher edu- cation wasn' t an entirely new thing for the Wallace family. George's grand- father, who had an important influence on him, was a doctor who practised faith full y in rural Alabama until his death in 1948; both of his parent s had also attended college for a whil e, al- though neither of them graduated. But , in those days, nobody thought that going to school, at any level, was incompatible with useful labor. Everybody worked, and thought it normal to do so. There are suggestions that George Wallace was not overly fond of farm chores, and like many a boy before and since he may even have tried to duck them - but they were hard to avoid. On his own, and obliged to work, he 27 sought the kind of jobs he found mor e congeni al - that is, those involving contact with people; humble jobs like selling magazines, waiting on tables, or driving a taxicab. But if he had to drive a dump truck for thi rt y cents an hour, or risk his fro nt teet h in a boxing match for fifteen big dollars, he did that too. T he trouble seems to have been that th ere just weren 't enough agitators around in those da ys. Nobody ever told Geor ge Wallace that he was so pr ecious and beau tiful that the rest of the world sho uld pay him just for existing, like some ki nd of a pedigreed pet. Nobody ever exp lained to him about th e negat ive income tax or the g uara ntee d annual income or his "ri ght" to be support ed for as long as he chose to dawdle in the Halls of Ivy. George Wall ace's father and grand- fat he r bot h dab bled in local politics, as good citi ze ns are supposed to do. H is g randfather, th e countr y doctor, didn't have much stomach for it and quit after a term as a count y judge. In hi s fath er's case, app ar ently the spirit was there but persistent ill health kept him down. H e got as far as the county board of reve- nu e, that was all. H owever, Geo rge Wall ace seems to have been a " natu ral" all along, and the childhood excit ement of vot e-counts which would decide whether hi s fat her or grandfathe r had won or lost fed his interest in politics. H e freely admits to having wanted to be Governo r of Ala- bama si nce he was a child. It is, after all, not an especially sinf ul aspiration. Wal- lace won his own fi rst "elect ion" at the age of fifteen, when he "campaigned" in the halls of the state senate for a sho rt-term job as a page during the 1935 session of the legislat ur e. Gregarious and active, he enjoyed doing wh at poli- ticians do to get elect ed. The personali ty, aim, and dri ve wer e there. H e reali zed early enough that hi s fir st big job was to get a law degree, which is a not-quite compulsory prer eq- 28 ursi te to a career in pol itics. So Wallace went up to th e Uni versity of Al abama in 1937, and stayed there even after his fath er died that November, because it wasn't strictl y necessary for him to drop out. Wallace is not the academi c type. H e prefers peopl e to books, action to con- templat ion, the practical to the theor et- ical. He had to work, to hustle a living on the side, and he wanted to be out and around, in sports and in campus politi cs. H e was so st rap ped for money that in some years he couldn't even af- ford to bu y hi s text books. Bu t he had enough honor an d inte llige nce and grit to settle down and "grind" to success- fully complete th e necessary courses, i I'l - stead of whining and quitting. On campus, young Geor ge Wallace was handicapped because his basic in- come was from a job which paid fifteen do llars for fifty hours of waiting on tables, and one of his employer's reg ula- tions forbade joining frat ernities. H e tried bucking the powerful frat ernity system in campus politics. and had to cha lk up one of his rar e defeats. In high schoo l, Wall ace had been cap- tai n of the football team, and twice won th e Alabama Bantamweight Boxing Cha mpionship. H e was also on the box- ing team during all of hi s four years at the Universit y. What he lacked in height, reach, and shoc k-absorbing bulk he mad e up for by being fast , sha rp, aggressive and tenacious, and he won- six times out of seven . George Wallace received his law de- gree in 1942, ear ly in Worl d W ar II. H e enlisted at once in what was then the Army Air Corps, but was not called up for pilot t rai ning un til 1943. It was du r- ing this unc ert ain year that he scrounged a living tryi ng to run a boa rding-ho use, the n driving a dump truck. H e also happened to meet the girl he lat er mar- ried , the beautiful Lurleen Burns. She was clerking in a dime store at th e time, because - a brilliant st ude nt - she had AMERICAN OPI NION George and the late Lurleen Wallace with their children (L.-R.) Peggy Sue, George Jr., Lee, Bobbi Jo. graduated from high school at fifteen and was too young to get into the nurs e's training progr am she wanted. When Wallace finally entered flying school in Arkansas, the camp was struck by an outbreak of spinal meningiti s. Many of the young men died; George came close to it. When he was finally out of the hospit al, he came home on a brief leave and took the opportu nity to ma rry Lurleen. Eventually, the Air Corps decided to train Wallace as an aircraft mechanic, and then as a B-29 fligh t engi neer. Al- though it was near the end of the war before he saw action, and flight engi- neers rarely win medals, nobody has ever claimed that those who flew thousands of mil es to bomb the fur iously-defended Japanese home island s, and coaxed their shot-up planes back afterwards, wer en't pull ing their weight. Near the end of 1945, Wallace was discharged with a ten percent disability pension, due to the effects of the spinal meningitis. Thus, it is clear that befor e beginning SEPT EMBER, 196 8 . his political career in 1946, at the age of twenty-seven, George Wallace had shared the experiences of men of his age in America. He had grown up with- out a taste of "affluenc e" or "pr ivilege" or even "permissiveness." He had grapp led with real-life probl ems in a period of "hard times" from earliest adulthood; he had taken what work was availabl e to him, in order to earn his living and at the same time get an edu- cation. He fought for hi s country, and did not return from service unscathed. There was no whining or demanding pr ivileges or threatening the security of his neighbors or throwi ng infantil e tan- trums; a man does what life demands. The tougher the fight, the more pride there is in winning. Wallace didn' t al- ways win, eit her - nobody does, in real life. But he alwa ys tri ed. No opponent has ever beaten him without knowi ng he' d been in a fight, whether it was in the boxing ring, the hustings, or the courts. II IN 1946, George Wallace went home 29 to Barbour County and campaigned for a seat in the state legislatu re. He cam- paigned wit h enthusiasm and pent-up energy, and won election handily. In the same elections, a new political grouping swept into office in support of the flamboyant Governor "Big Jim" Folsom, generally described as a "South- ern Populis t." Wallace was loyal to his Party and hence a strong Folsom sup- porter during his years in the legisla- ture; as such, he voted for somewhat open-handed spending which inevi tably led to higher taxes - a perennial dilem- ma for politicians. T he expensi ve pro- grams gene rally involved such things as schools and highways, and the need for emergency improvements was undoubt- edly great after long years of economic depression and the diversion of resources to World War II. While Wallace supported some meas- ures which conservatives woul d disap- prove, his specific efforts were focused on the need to build up Southern indus- try - to provide trained manpower and a favorable climate for investment so that factories would locate in Alabama, thus creating jobs for those displaced from agricul tural work, and increasing the tax base in the state as a whole. The Wallace Industrial Act was a long step in this direction. Later, as Governor of Alabama George Wallace's efforts to encourage investment and ind ustrial de- velopment succeeded so well that Ala- bama's rate of development was among the highest in the nation. Wallace first made himself known in the national Democrat ic Pa rty dur- ing the tumultuous 1948 Convention wh ich resulted in the so-called "Dixie- crat" revolt. The battle lines were be- gin ning to be drawn on "states' rights," which happens to be a principle of American government, not an epithet. The Far Lef t's campaign to render the states impo tent in their own right was moving into the open. A struggle de- veloped in the Democratic platform 30 commi ttee whi ch eventually led to a walkout by some of the Southern dele- gates. Although Wallace was not among them, on that occasion, he had fought hard for the Southern position, both before and after the walkout. It is in- teresting that Hubert Humphrey was the leader of the "Liberal" and Party- machine group which once more com- mitted the Democratic Party to the Left- ist course. It was the first time that Wal- lace and H umphrey came into conflict. It will not be the last time . In 1950, George Wallace was re- elected to the legislature, but in 1952, in the middle of his second four-year term, he decided to run for the post of circui t court judge in his home three-county district. He won that election as well, and vacated his seat after six years in the statehouse. Wallace moved his fami ly to Clayton, Alabama, and settled int o a somewhat more stable, prestigious, and better pay- ing position for the next six years. He decided many hu ndreds of cases, of the wide variety which are brought to the lower courts, and 'the experience con- stituted a valuable post-graduate course in law - and life. Wallace, in common with most Southerners, still hotly resented the as- sault being conducted on local autonomy and the Southern way of life by the federal government. T here seemed to be little he or anyone else could do about it - especially in the long years bet ween elections. However, much of the attack, in those years, was being carried on t hro ugh the courts . From his relatively weak and insignificant position as a state judge, George Wallace could man- age lit tle but delaying actions, mean- while trying to draw public att ention to what was happening. Occasionally, as in 1953 and 1958, he drew national attention, but his rather consistent op- position to federa l edicts was better ap- preciated within the state itself. By 1958, with his six-year term on the AMERICAN OPINION bench drawing to a close, Wallace en- tered the race for the governorship. In the first contest, he came in second in a field of ten. In the end, however, he lost to John Patterson . Wallace, as usual , had fought to win, and this loss con- demned him to several years of political limbo, since his term on the bench ex- pir ed soon after the election. Mor e than that, he had so irked the federal gove rn me nt that he was bein g charged with contempt of court by Fed- eral Jud ge Frank M. Johnson. During 1958, the federa l Ci vil Rights Commis- sion had demanded that the county voter records be turned over to them in Montgomer y. Wallace recognized this as a political move, of course, and as another intrusion by an administrative agency in Washington into local affairs. It also happened that Alabama law for- bids the removal of votin g records from the county. Therefore, Judge Wallace impounded the records, and later turned them over to a Gran d Jury, even after the Civil Rights Commission demand had been reenforced by a federal court order. For thi s, Jud ge Wallace was charged wi th contempt of court. By the time the court got around to deal ing with him, Wallace had been de- feated in the guberna torial race and his term as judge had expi red. The spot- light was off, and Wallace was a defi nite un derdog in the upcoming figh t. But , as usual, he mu stered his formidable str ength and fought as hard as he could . He said he was not guilty of contempt, even though he had not obeyed the court order, because he had acted with- in the law and wit hi n his authority and responsibi lity as a state judge. Wallace st ubbornl y and loudly made an issue of thi s positi on, and the federal court was soon looking for a face-saving way out of the conf rontation it had created. Those who bothered to follow the ac- tion were soon tr eated to the curious spectacle of the court tr ying to prove Wallace not guilt y of what the court SEPT EMBER , 1968 had itself ch a rged him with doing. In the end, Wallace was found "not guilty." In George Wallace's view, this merel y proved that determined and hon- orable opposition need not be hopeless. III IN 1962, George Wallace achieved his lifelong ambition at last; he was elected Gov ernor of Alabama aft er a long, hard- fought campaign, He brought renewed energy to the capit al, and busied him- self at once with domestic state prob- lems, such as swift expansion of trade- schools to train workers in skill s needed by Alabama's growing ind ust ry, and the creati on of new junior colleges all over the state, so that anyo ne, for the price of a bus ride, could be wit hi n reach of either vocat iona l or higher educ ation. However, at the national level, the Far Left had by no means succeeded in its conquest of the South, and the game of "confrontat ion" was due to be played in Alabama, wh ether Al abami ans liked it or not. The Liberal Establ ishment is at an overwhel mi ng adva ntage in this ga me. Fi rst, the initiative lies with those who are doi ng the attacking; they are the ones who choose the time, the place, and the means, and who are able to concen - trate their forces on one point , rather than having to defend every point. Sec- ondly, the Establishment has the enor- mous pol itical power and economic re- sources of the federal government at its disposal, not to menti on the ge nerous assistance of the tax-free foundations, whic h can play polit ics wi th assets rang- I ing into the billio ns of doll ars. As long I as their politics are "Liberal ," they need fear no harassment from the Internal Revenue Service. Thirdly , the Establish- ment incl udes in its ranks most of the mass medi a; "Liberals" can rely on the . television networks and most newspa- I pers and mass-circulation magazi nes to I back any and all "Liberal " propagan da drives. I 31 The game of "confro ntat ion" is often played by stagi ng dr amatic producti ons, a kind of "t hea ter in the round," com- plete with scripts, stage- ha nds, a "s tar system," a paid rabble of "ex tras," cam- era men , and of course producers and di rectors. After all, the "Liberals" have domi nated the theat er, motion-picture, and television industr y for longer tha n an yon e can even remember. They cer- tai nlv have the "know-how" to create theatrical "ha ppe nings" to be presented to the publi c as ge nui ne, spontaneous occur rences. As in all theatri cal produ c- tions, there is the cha nce that a show may flop, or that it will have to be tinkered wit h at the last minute. Ther e is also, admitt edl y, an added risk in the . ga me of "confrontation. " The vict ims of the performanc e may not react in pre- cisely the manner int ended. Ge nera lly, however, these sterling students of hu - man nature and political tact ics and strategy have had am ple time in which to plan a situa tion wh ich will block all but the desired reactions before th e emo- tional head of steam bursts fr ee. A great dea l of the Far Left' s "civil rights" st rategy in the South was based 0 11 a belief that whi te and Negro Southe rne rs could be prodded int o a bloodbat h, or at least that wh ite South- erners, noted for their stubborn and prick ly pri de and sup posed ly hot tem- pers, could be provoked into open rebel- lion and the n crushed. Eve rything pos- sible was done to outrage the pri nciples and sensibilit ies of Southerners- whi ch is one reason wh y the most bla tant pub- lic immoralit y was always a part of t he "show." For insta nce, considerab le pho- tog raphic evide nce exists of perverted sexual act ivity being engaged in by dem- onst rators, out in the st reet in bro ad day- ligh t, and of mass public mict ur itions being staged outside the sta te capitol bu ilding in the course of these "demo n- st rations." The mass media never failed to screen out such scenes, wh en "cover- ing" these affai rs nationa lly, but they 32 were ready and wainng to show the world any out raged reactions on the part of the local peop le. It is almos t impossible for the chose n victims of such a perf ormance to defend themselves successfullv. T he care fullv- planned "con frontat io;1s" are created ~ o tha t the victim loses no matt er wh at he does - he can either take the bait bv reacting normall y, and get clobber ed fo'r it, or he can refus e to take the bait, and get walk ed ove r wi thou t putti ng up any resistance. On two notable occasions, Wallace tried to counter the "confrontation" game . H e couldn't win on eithe r oc- casion, but he did succeed in raising the pri ce of victory for the Commu- nist and "Liberal" cabal assaulting hi s state. These occasions were the dispute over admissions policies at the U ni- vcrsity of Al abama in 1963, and the demonstrations and marches staged by Martin Luther King at Selma and Montgomery in 1965. In these cases and many others, Wal- lace's first job as Governor was the relati vely unpopular one of restraining Alabamians from playing into the hands of t he "Li berals" and Co mmunists bv reactin g in the natural way. The Left- ist playwrights and stage- m a nagers wanted mob scenes, acrimony, confli ct, and violence. Peopl e ar e naturall y at- t racted to scenes of activity, places wh ere poli ce and newsmen are mus- tered. Sout herners wer e of course un- sympathet ic to the aims of the demon- st rators, and often outrage d by their methods, which included defiance and baiting of state and local law-enfor ce- ment offi cials. With enough peop le arou nd to provoke, and enough out- rageous conduct, the Leftist conspira- tors were confident that sooner or later they could get some goo d thea trics out of it. W hat with editi ng and com- mentar y supplied by the media "Lib- era ls," the whole up roar could be, and usuall y had been, transforme d for view- AMERI CAN OPINION ing audiences into a crude morality play, with the saints, crusaders, and lovers-of-mankind on one side and the brutal, racist Southerners on the other side. It was done so well, in fact, that the American people outside the South ha rdly questioned army occupation of cities and communities in the South from time to time. They never guessed that their turn was coming. In June of 1963, George Wallace's alm a mater at Tuscaloosa was about to be converted to Nicholas Katzenbach Universit y, as Katzenbach was sent down from the Attorne y General 's of- fice in Washington to escort a pair of handpicked students through the regis- tration procedures, even though the University had rejected them for ad- mission. It had boiled down to a simple matter of who was running the Univer- sity of Alabama-Alabama or Wash- ington . Washington won, of course. What Wallace tried to do was to play "confrontation" a bit more cleverly than had been done the year before at the University of Mississippi in Ox- ford. He wanted to forestall a situation which would almost inevitably degen- erate int o the desired scenes of wild disorder and conflict. Wallace was per- fectly aware of the nasty streak in cer- tain "Liberal" humanitarians, who de- lighted in creating situations wherein federalized Nationa l Guardsmen, under strict military discipline, could be forced to turn their bayonets against their relatives and neighbors, in support of edicts and forces they all despised. What Wal lace hoped to do was to take ad- vantage of the nationwi de publ icity to present his own case* as dramatically as possible, but legally and without *I n the 1964 election, the Republican presidential candidate, Barry Goldwater, carried the South with the Vot es of peopl e who, f or the past four gen- erations. had never dreamed of vot ing Republican! It marked the end of blind support for the Democratic Party, which had done so much to ent rench t he Liberal Establishment, and which in turn had rarely concealed it s hatred of the South. SEPTEMBER, 1968 violence. In addition, he figured that it might be possible to evade the most unpleasant aspects of "mili tary occupa- tion" whil e allowing the federal offi cials to harvest the widespread revulsion every use of armed force agai nst the South engendered. This was the reason for Wallace's famo us "stand in the school house door." When Katz enbach and his charges ar- rived, and the cameras were massed and grinding away, Mr. Katzenbach discovered to his considerable annoy- ance that this was going to be Gov- For t he Wallaees-c!evotion, honor, a nd patriotism. ernor Wallace's big scene, not his. Wal- lace kept Katzenbach standing there, looking rather silly, while he read his speech agai nst the "illegal usurpation of power by the cent ral government," and then Katzenbach was ingloriously sent on his way. Of course, he returned in no time wit h an army at his back - the federalized Alabama National Guard-but there was no drama and violence as a result-just the sort of news which caused Pr esident Johnson to lose Southern votes as never before . 33 Then, at the beginning of 1965, more than a year aft er Army offi cers had "cased" the city to plan an occupa tion, Marti n Luth er King arrived in Selma, Alabama, with his usual entourage of hired marchers, idealists, beat niks, and Reds assembled from all over the nation for another game of "confrontation." This time, the imp resarios of Li ving Theater expected to push th rough the Civi l Rights bill with it, and they suc- ceeded. Backed by unbounded resources, hundreds of "demonstrators" did their thing in and around Selma for months on end, disrupting and provoking as best they could, and occasionall y, need- less to say, they managed a few mob scenes despite the general attempt to ignore and isolate the repulsiv e strang- ers. The best anyone could do, really, was to restrain the local population from turning violence on the int er- lopers-who were clearl y "asking for it"-and eventually to force the federal government to pick up the tab for some of the protection and other services which the Communist "marchers" re- quired or demanded. Alabamians tri ed their best to pub- licize, nationally, the law violations, int erference with normal life, and fre- quent public exhibitions of depravity taking place in Selma, but they never really succeeded, despite the abundance of photogr aphs and eyewit ness reports. After the Selma-to-Montgomery march, the crowd indulged in a mass urin ation as another unique form of "protest," but somehow what the cameras re- corded did not make its way into the evening news broadcasts across the na- tion. If the people of Montgomery had reacted in understandable fur y, how- ever, you can bet that we would have heard about it. George Wallace had kept the situation from bursting into holocaust. The more spectacular events from 1963 onward first proj ected Governor George Wallace into the public eye 34 on a national scale. He himself had not really looked beyond Alabama for the fulfillme nt of his politi cal ambitions, and of course the "image" of Wallace which was being presented to the nation was not likel y to enhance his popu- lari ty. He was the "heavy," the "bad guy," the trouble-maker. the moral mon- ster around whose neck every real and phony charge agai nst the Sout h could be convenien tly draped. Af ter the "schoolhouse door" episode in 1963, Wallace began to receive heavy mail from all over the country-a strik- , ing amount of it favorable. That favor- able mail came from people who were just beginning to feel the claws of bureaucratic and judicial oppression in their own lives and neighborhoods. They were beginning to recognize that television does not always struggle to tell it exactly like i t is, for instance. Wallace also began to receive speak- ing invitations from all over the United States and even western Canada. In many cases, he was not invited by sym- pathetic gro ups at all; probably most of his collegiate invitations were from groups who thought it would be fun to pillory the Governor in person, or sponsor some sort of freak show. Nevertheless, George Wallace took the opportunity, from 1963 onwa rd, to speak his piece before both friendly and hostile audiences. In the course of so doing, he soon learned how "Lib- erals" treat guests who don't think right. Organized silence was occasionally tri ed, but thi s has too many dr awback s -it requires great discipline, it's no fun at all, and it allows the speaker to be heard. Organized heckling, chant- ing, stomping, name-calling, and the emission of obscenities and animal noises are activities having none of these drawbacks. Ordin aril y, such ac- tivities would call int o que stion the motives, int elligence, and upbringing of those who engage in them, but as most people must have noted by now, AMERICAN OPINION everything depends upon whether the misbehavior is in support of "Liberal" causes or in opposition to them. Actually, verbal abuse is the mildest and most bearable manifestation of "Liberal" displeasure. Some of the gentle, tolerant folk who maunder on about "love" and "peace" have formed groups intent upon dismembering Wal- lace on the spot. The "pacifists" at so- phisticated Dartmouth battled police to a standstill, and rocked, dented, and nearly overturned Wallace's car - after he had come in response to their invita- tion! The urbane, open-minded Har- vard men were so infuriated bv the presence of an Unbeliever that W'allace had to escape his hosts through the utility tunnels. "Liberal" professors, helpless to flunk Wallace in class for not regurgitating the "Liberal" line, have been known to lose their cool and surge down the aisles screaming for blood, instead of reasoning together, negotiating, and compromising with him. After George Wallace spoke this spring in Omaha, Nebraska, of all places, there were two nights of rioting. Recently, Wallace was unable to ad- dress nearly eight thousand sympa- thizers in Minneapolis, Minnesota, the bastion of "Liberal" tolerance, due to rioting by folk who were probably par- tisans of Hubert Humphrey or Eugene McCarthy. Wallace was unable to set foot in Philadelphia, a year or so ago, because the chief of police said he probably could not handle the Leftist riots which were being planned. The sort of people who plunge lighted cigarettes into Wallace's hand when he offers it are precisely the people who prattle endlessly about our "sick society" and the "atmosphere of hate and vio- lence." Meanwhile, Robert Kennedy, who was hardly the most popular man in Alabama, could speak there without incident. SEPTEMBER, 1968 IV WALLACE'S DECISION to enter some of the Democratic primary races in 1964 was a sudden and impulsive one. He wanted to prove that a large segment of the electorate was being systemati- cally deprived of any opportunity for representation, because candidates dared not buck the Liberal Establishment. So he entered the Wisconsin primary first. He had no organization, little time and money, and a very shaky knowledge of which end of Wisconsin was up. He was confronted by the massed scorn and vilification of Wis - consin's politicians, pulpit Leftists try- ing to date the Great Society back to Saint Paul, labor leaders, and mass media. Wisconsinites were informed that they would disgrace themselves and the state, and probably go directly to Hades into the bargain, if they voted for that candidate. But thirty-four percent of them did. The "Liberals" were incredulous. Wal- lace had proved his point, drawing one vote in three. Next came Indiana. The Democratic machine, ~ h a k e n and grim, gave Wal- lace an interesting post-graduate course in thumb-in-the-eye politics. But he got thirty percent of the Democratic vote anyway, and carried the urban-indus- trial counties, not the half-Southern rural counties along the Ohio River. Manipulators of the "labor vote" real- ized that they were losing their grip- and, gasp-to a states' rights anti-Com- munist. Wallace's third and biggest triumph came in the Maryland primary. As a monstrous interloper, George literally walked away with the white vote in Maryland; he carried twenty-three counties, losing to Maryland's own Sen- ator Brewster the heavily Negro Bal- timore and heavily "white Liberal" Montgomery and Prince George's coun- ties, outside of Washington, D.C. Wal- lace received forty-four percent of the 35 Maryland Democratic vote; "Liberals" were aghast. Barry Goldwater was a front-runner in the Republican race by mid-su mmer of 1964. Wallace had proven his point and didn't want to divide the con- servat ive vote, so he withdrew hon- orably from activity on the nat ional scene after the Maryland race. His am- bit ions were not personal but ideologi- cal-patriotic, if you will. In the 1964 general election campaign, Democrat and Republican "Libera ls" joined forces to crush the conservative Republican nominee. The other un- precedented spectacle was that of a (choke ! gasp!) Republican carrying the deepest of the Deep Southern states. Southern voters finall y brok e an old habit which had long since ceased to serve their int erests. Things were shaking loose and George Wallace had shaken them. Wallace went back to running Ala- bama, but he had become a national spokesman for the anti- Communist, de- centralized point of view which he now knew was widely shared in the nation at large. As Barr y Goldwater gave up and chose to fade awav as a conserva- tive leader, the field lay' open . However, the renewed "Liberal" grip on both majo r Par ties made it un likely that the "Goldwater phenomenon " could be re- peated in either Part y in 1968. Back in 1966, however, Wallace faced a tough polit ical probl em at home. The Al abama Constitution forbade a gov- ernor to succeed himself. Wallace needed the political base which the governorship afforded, and he was pop- ular enough to keep it easily, if the state constitution could be amended to permit this. His campaign for amend- ment , fought in the legislature, met opposition which was to some extent legitimate and understandable. But the firmest and loudest opposition reflected a heavy investment of effort by in- terests outside of Al abama determined 36 only to sink Wallace for good, and eliminate him from the political scene. The federa l gove rnment's participation was not unnoticed. The amendment was blocked, and the "Liberals" relaxed to toast each other in victory. Then the Wallaces decided that Mrs. George Wallace would run for Governor of Alabama. Wallace's oppo nents were first stunne d, then ner- vously amused. Finally, as the awful trut h dawned that Lurleen Wallace was going to win and George Wallace's political power was undiminished, "Liberals" learn ed again that he is just not that easy to discour age or to dis- pose of. Governor Lurleen Wallace's tragic death, in the spring of 1968, was a per- sonal and political blow more power- ful than anything Wallace's enemies could mu ster. His beloved wife's long illness, and the terr ible period of mourn- ing afterwa rds, subdued the candidate considerably, and of course interrupted and finally suspended Wallace's cam- paigning. He was not able to resume it until June of this year. But, resume it he did. Lurleen had wanted it that way. She had told George that this was no personal contest-this was a crusade for every moral principle in which they both believed. Whatever happened, she said, George must con- ti nue. And, he has remained faith ful to that task. Even in those terrible days as the end approached for the wife that was for him the most precious thing he had ever had, George Corl ey Wal- lace gave his word that he would con- tinue. V WALLACE IN ACTI Ol", in the flesh, does not seem at all extraordinary. At forty- nine, he looks like a classic man-in-the- street-of medium height, trim, dark- hair ed, neith er handsome nor ugly. He has an athletic vigor about him still- he is quick and decisive in his move- AMERICAN OPINION ments and gestures, restless, and an utterly tireless campaigner; he seems to draw strengt h from crowd contact, rather than be exhausted by it. He has always been gregarious and has always "identified" with "the common folks." Face to face, he communicates some- thing they want , and they respond to him to a degree which has never ceased to dismay his rivals. Wallace knows that he has to go directly to the people, no matter how hopelessly enormous the country is, because he can never match the cost of mass-media exposure , and because the magic just doesn't quite come across any other way. Wallace always seems to draw an en- thusiastic overflow crowd; at a speech in Maryland , for instance, ther e were not only five thousand people inside, but another twenty-five hundred stood outside in a downpour to hear hi m speak. T hat sort of thing turns rivals gr een with envy, and adds a distinctly nervous quaver to the "Liberal" chorus of belittlement. Still, it is almost im- possible for Wallace to draw the suppo rt of professional politicians. It is not merely that, for most pros, going on- ward and upwar d in the Party is the safest road for plodders to plod; the pros are also well aware of the artillery which is trained on anyone who makes non-"Liberal" noises. They find it safer to serve the Estab lishment than to repr e- sent the mi llions victimized by it. The pros are willing to "win wi th" the Devil hi mself, if it comes to that, rather than lose on the side of the angels; since the choice is never that clear-cut , there is no need to lose a wink of sleep over it. The odds being as terr ibly long as they are, the year 1968 is not likely to see any thundering stampede of "Op- portunists for Wallace." Such being the case, Wallace's professional cadre is limited to long-time personal aides whose loyalty he considers reliable, and who are willing to go for broke along with him. T his is too small a group to run a national presidential campaign, as every member of the group is no doubt painfully aware. Financing is hand-to-mouth, run ning along largely Wallace regularly challenges th e Press fo r failure to report Communist hands behind race riots . SEPTEMBER, 1968 37 on small donations mailed in by the "little people," while even sympathetic potential large contributors tend to hold back-by definition, they have some- thing to lose, or they wouldn't be po- tential large contributors, and they fear the vengeance of the Establishment. In this case, expediency is the synonym they use for cowardice. The long, hard struggle to meet what- ever the legal requirements for getting on the ballot may be, in as many states as possible, has spurred efforts to or- ganize a semblance of a Party structure all across the country. Considering the resources available for this effort, it has been remarkably successful. And yet, there is already some grumbling and dissension in the new-formed ranks. There is a tendency, many complain, to insist upon tight control from the Wal- lace headquarters in Montgomery, what- ever the cost in local support. It is also unfortunate that at a time when Wal- lace can least afford to trust strangers, he most needs to recruit new people, to reach out beyond the comfortable but totally inadequate bounds of a few lifetime comrades and develop a real, nationally-based organizational struc- ture and staff. It is said that Wallace is not a good organizer and hates detail work. That sounds like the usual pro- paganda. But, he cannot seriously chal- lenge the entrenched, perhaps over-or- ganized and overstaffed, national Par- ties with little more than a roomful of long-time friends to do the top level staff work. Too much just does not get done, period, and the effects of that are cumulative. VI OKAY, but where does Wallace stand? What does he say and do? What does he represent? Wallace's stand has been remarkably consistent throughout the years in which he has been nationally in the public eye. He is generally labeled, by 38 his foes, as a "racist" and "segregation- ist." He is not a "racist," but he is a "segregationist." (So-called "black na- tionalists" are much more outspokenly "segregationist" and distinctly "racist," but they are never labeled with either term. Curious, don't you think?) Wal- lace plays down his segregationist views outside of the South, knowing that he is not going to win points that way. He merely insists that the people of each state have the right to arrange their educational system according to their lights-and, he is right. While the South might never again have so rigid a system as previously, there is no doubt that Wallace is fighting for the right of Alabama and other states to have at least the recently "outlawed" school system called "freedom of choice." He points out that "freedom of choice" was struck down by the Supreme Court because the people did not freely choose to go the "Liberal" way. In truth, Wallace could not care less whether New York adopts the wildest schemes the mind of man can conceive, as long as they are not dic- tatorially imposed on everyone else. "Liberals" are appalled to discover that this view is rather widely shared. Wallace also stands very stoutly against the continual encroachment of centralized federal power, especially the the administrative and judicial power which is farthest removed from popular checks, and which has been developed by the Liberal Establishment into a fine-honed, efficient, and effective tool for what can only be described as op- pression. Wallace lashes out especially hard at the "guideline writers" who feel that their sacred mission in life is to homogenize the old folks' homes in the South, check up on who showers with whom in the factory washrooms, and whether everyone is integrating properly at the bedpan level in the nation's hospitals. Only a fanatic fringe really cares, yet somehow the whole AMERICAN OPINION country is at their mercy. This is not normal, not sane, not right. It's not even legal, in fact. Yet George Wallace is the only presidential candidate in the race who dares to speak out against it in plain, strong language . There is an ever-broadening wave of discontent over the shameless hy- pocrisy of so many "Liberal" leaders, and candidate Wall ace delights in dancing on the exposed nerve-endings of such leaders. He points out that about one big percent of our Congress- men-six out of 535, to be precise-en- trust their offspring to the tumultuous and even dangerous "showcase" school system they have created in Washing- ton, D.C. Whether whit e "Liberals" or Negroes of varying degr ees of mili- tancy, our mor e strident leaders tend to place their children in safe, selected schools congenial to their beliefs. The increasingly low-gr ade, strife-torn pub- lic schools, which these same leaders are so diligentl y convert ing into brain- washing academies, schools for hood- lumism and crime, cent ers of social experimentation, and arenas in which partisan political gangs can engage in clawing and biting contests-these are reserved for the peasantry! Parents of any race, if they cannot afford a private school or a flight to the suburbs, are simply forced to send their children out, day after day, to schools which resemble nothing mor e than poorly- run houses of detention. No candidate but Wallace offers them relief. The "law and order," or "crime in the streets" issue is the hottest thing in the campaign this year-so hot that not even the most "Liberal" candidate can slide by without mumbling some- thing favorable about "law and order," between proposals for discrimination- in-reverse and appeasement of revolu- tionaries by bribing them with mi nd- staggering sums of money. Wallace is not the man to tell his audiences that more people are running SEPTEMBER, 1968 I more wild every year because they are poor or unemployed, or have been traumatized by the sheer horror of life in the United States of America. People -including Wallace's family, friends, and neighbors - were really poor and unemployed during the Depression, but they did not see insurrection and an- archy as the solution to their problems. And it is curious to note that those who claim that living in America shouldn' t happ en to a dog never seem to leave, to seek a better life just any- where else. No, Wallace just comes out and blames the breakdown of law and order on chicken-livered politicians who "re- strain" the police, on courts which make it either futile or impossible to enforce the law, and on febrile Leftist ideologues whose life work consists of spreading lies, discontent, and sedit ion. Even those who read no more than the headlines, the comics, and the sports page understand Wallace's vivid and folksy version of these facts of life. Wa llace wouldn't really drive right on over those famous anarchists who lie down in front of cars; and, maybe soldiers five feet apart with two-foot bayonets, to make the streets of Wash- ington safe again, would seem a bit impractical after a day or so-but those oft-repeated remarks in Wallace's cam- paign speeches draw cheers from every crowd. They know he'd do something, and something needs to be done. Wallace is also the only candidate in the race who is genuinely, out- spokenly anti-Communist. He doesn't approve of-or make the slightest ex- cuse for-Communist racial agitators, student revolutionists, traitorous pro- fessors, or Communist defense-plant employees. He's against them all, and leaves no doubt in anyone's mind that "Li beral" permissiveness toward them would come to an abrupt halt if he ever got into the White House. He is fond of qu oting a banner carried reg- 39 ularly by a Negro newspaper in Ohio: "In America our first job is to stop and rout the Communists. Then all other problems, including racial prob- lems, can be worked out in peace and freedom." Wallace is not as strong as he might be on foreign affairs- he is still dis- covering America, as a matter of fact- but the princi ples of politics are uni- versal. He senses without difficulty that America had better quit trying to pur- chase "love" and start re-establ ishing a position in the world that will be based on healthy respect from friend and foe alike. He favors laying down the law to our "allies" (and debtors) who support our enemi es, and serving notice on pipsqueak critics that they had best start worrying about our opinion of them. He wants all Ameri- can aid and trade with the East Eu ro- pean count ries supplying the Vi etcong stopped and stopped cold. Although he says almost nothing about defense policy, he has made it clear that he woul d not wager the sur- vival of our nation and people on the presumed "good intentions" of the world's leading mass-murderers in Mos- cow and Peking. As for defense, the hor- rible truth is that former Defense Secre- tary Robert S. McNamara's years of studied, met iculous "bad judgment" have left us behind the eight-ball, not only in the field of nuclear weapons and our phased-out first strike with inter- continental missiles, but in missile de- fense and a nuclear-powered fleet. Then, too, the multi-billion dollar flop of McNamara's "flying Edsel," the F-l11 (nee T .F.x.) leaves an enormous, jag- ged, gaping, and long-predicted hole in our defense system, whi ch now has nothing with which to replace destroyed or obsolete aircraft of the many types the F-l11 was supposed to replace. Wal- lace has not yet mentioned these prob- lems, preferring to fight on his chosen ground of earthy domestic issues. The 40 move is purely tactical, not ignorance. Wallace started out, not to take on the ent ire Liberal Establishment singl e- handed, but to get in a few licks for his constituents, who were being run over roughshod by rather int olerable enforcers of the Fa r Left's doctrines. The Bantamweight boxer did not climb in there with the big boys and expect to get away unscathed; Wallace knew he might get pret ty well thumped before the thin g was over, but he has I always been a courageous, opti mistic scrapper. So, even when he didn' t win, he managed to surpri se the dickens out of his opponents and get carried clear to the Capit ol on the shoulders of his fans. The performance pleased larger crowds than he had expected, and at the same time, Wallace was discovering certain points of vulnerabilit y in Go- liath's massive but somewhat flabby anatomy. He was able to do what very few other politicians in the game have the courage to do- he was able to take the heaviest barrage of smears and vilificat ion without giving up, or even making a quie t little deal in ex- change for an improved "image." Wallace being a tough, practical poli- tician, one does not expect quixo tic crusades from him, or fanatical suicide attacks. Yet here he is, staking just about everything on a campaign which every political pundit insists is abso- lutely hopeless, useless, a waste of time. And yet, if Wallace is worried about wasting his time, he doesn't show it, and, meanwhi le, there is the powerful smell of fear in the frantic attacks on him. Win, lose, or draw, whatever hap- pens, George Wallace is goi ng to knock the Establishment's neat little plans base over apex. They find this prospect utterly intolerable. It's so good for that small, collective Establishment soul to get the devil knocked out of it. It's so very good for America! - - AMERI CAN OPINION [))JE I L l l ~ l R l l McCarthy by Roy COHN. New American Library, New York, N.Y.; 292 pages, $5.95. IT IS A MEASURE of McCarthy's his- torical importance that books about him since his death have been as con- troversial as opinions about him during his life. There can hardly be a "defini- tive" biography of Joseph Raymond McCarthy until the issue he raised is resolved - until, indeed, the Chair- man of the Universe rules on the Wis- consin Senator's "point of order." McCarthy told Americans that their government was infiltrated by Com- munists - as, of course, it was, and is. The trouble was that so many Amer- icans promptly believed him - and that was what provoked against him such an unparalleled ferocity of retalia- tion. Well , I should not say unparallel- ed. There is a parallel in the book of Acts, chapters six and seven, in the story of Saint Stephen and the "syria- SEPTEMBER, 1968 gogue of the Libertines" - the latter being parallel to the National Council of Churches. You will recall that when "they were not able to resist the wis- dom and the spirit by which he spake," that "they suborned men . . . and stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes . . . and set up false witnesses" who accused him of blas- phemy. Saint Stephen's defense was simply to recite to them much history, all of which was true, and with which his accusers were in their hearts quite familiar. The Scripture gives the sequel: "When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth.... Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord." So complete was this hysterical ac- cord in the modern instance that it fixed the dictionary meaning of the term McCarthyism, defined as follows in Webter's Seventh Collegiate: "a mid-twentieth-century political attitude characterized chiefly by opposition to elements held to be subversive and by the use of tactics involving personal attacks on individuals by means of widely publicized indiscriminate alle- gations, especially on the basis of un- substantiated charges." Millions of us prefer the Senator's own definition: McCarthyism: The Fight for America. One thing is certain-the charge that McCarthy made unsubstantiated charges is unsubstantiated. I remember when McCarthy was at the peak of his paradoxical influence-notoriety of, say, 1952-1953. I was living in the Washing- ton, D.C. , metropolitan area and both my children were in high school. They were, I am proud to say, McCarthy fans. Observing that not everybody was, they set out to conduct a poll. Of teachers, neighbors, classmates, and 41 strangers on the street they asked thr ee questions. The remarkable thing about this poll was that t he results were unan- imous. Fi rst question : What do you think of Senator McCarthy? Answers (100 percent): I like what he is trying to do, but I don't like his methods. Second question : Wh at are his meth- ods? Answers (100 percent, after a cer- tain hesitation, which was also 100 per- cent): He smears innocent people. Third question : Which innocent peo- ple has he smeared? Answers (100 per- cent , after hesitation): I don't know. Had my children moved then in more sophisticated circles, as eventually they would do, they might have re- ceived the answer, Owen Lattimore, or - a year or so later - Annie Lee Moss. Both answers would have been false. As the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee was to make plain, Owen Lattimore had all the innocence of a king cobra. As for Annie Lee Moss, the Negro woman employed in the Pentagon Code Room, whom the McCarthy Committee identified as a Communist, and whom Senator Stuart (Sanctimonious Stu) Symington per- sonally offered to employ, such was his confidence in her - well, Annie Lee Moss turned out to be a Communist, just as Committee Counsel Roy Cohn said she was. There was no mistaken identity, there was no error of any sort by McCarthy's staff or McCarthy him- self, except the error of underesti- mating the brazen effrontery of the Sy- mingtons, the Ed Murrows, the Drew Pearsons of this world . If ever a man was the victim of "widely publicized indi scriminate alle- gations," it was McCarth y himself, and documentation to prove that assertion is solidly presented in Roy Cohn's book on his most distinguished employer. Roy Cohn is an historically impor- tant person himself. Brilliant , preco- cious (he was a law-school graduate be- 42 fore he was old enough to vote) , un- tiring, and audacious, he was onl y twenty-six years old when in 1953 he became Chief Counsel for Senator Me- Carthy's Investigating Subcommitt ee. He already had a reput ation as a Com- munist-fighter, for in 1951 he had been one of the Government's prosecuting attorneys in the trial of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, the "atom spies." To his credit, he was so disliked by Bobby Kennedy that the latter resigned from McCartli y's comm ittee staff when Cohn was put in charge. It must, how- ever, be noted that Cohn 's "method" of working with and for his friend David Schine furni shed the pretext for the Eisenhower Administration' s lynching party which, with 'the unani- mous support of Minority Leader Lyndon Johnson's Democrats, "con- demned" McCarthy in December 1954 by a Senate vote of sixty-seven to twent y-two. (That sixty-seven was forty-four Democrats, one Independent, Wa yne Morse, and twenty-two Repub- licans; the twenty-two pro-McCarthy votes were all Republicans. Eisenhower split his Party right down the middle, and Minor ity Leader Johnson resound- ingly carried the day.) Actuall y, the preposterous "charges" on the basis of whi ch McCarthy was "condemned" were not the Army's alle- gations that he and Cohn had used im- proper influence in behalf of Cohn's friend , and the Army's draftee, Mr. Schine. The Republi cans stuck together and "cleared" McCarthy of those ac- cusations. But the televised "Army- McCar thy Hearings" immediately pre- ceded th e Watkin s Committee hearings on "censure" and provided the public confusion in the midst of which half the Republican Senators were per- suaded it would be to their political ad- vantage to help Lyndon cut Joe's throat. Sad as it is to think of the personal AMERICAN OPINION inj ust ice done Joseph McCarthy by his colleagues, it was from the national point of view even more ominous that the United States Senate should in the "censure" vote on McCarthy reveal it- self, as it did, as a body completely without moral principle. Not that every individual Senator was without princi- ple. Probably all who voted for Me- Carthy were sincere (since the pressure was the other way), and some who voted against him were since re. But the swing vote was corrupt. "McCarthy t old me," Cohn writes, "that Symington visited him in his home du ring the censure hea ring, and said he fel t terrible about it. So did ot he r senators, but all had to vote strict- ly along party lines. [This was non- sense, for the Republicans split down the middl e.] 'Symi ngton told me [this is McCarthy, quoted by Cohn] he hoped I don't get sore at the individ- ual s participating because there was nothing anyone of them could do about it.' " McCarthy told me that at least twelve others had said much the same thing to him while the hearings were in progress. N ot one claimed to be moved by principle, or that he would vote censure becaus e h e bel ie ved McCarthy had brought the Senate into disrepute. 'Each of them said, "Look, Joe, this is the story. You know it as well as I do. This is a top-level deci- sion."'" ( Page 239, italics added.) Of course, in nocent students of the Consti tution bel ieve that the Uni ted States Senat e is the top level of the Legislat ive Branch, which is supposed to be "firs t among equals" of the three bran ches of our government. Pres um- ably, however, the top level referred to meant Eisenhower and Johnson - and the Establishment which controls them. You understand tha t the decision made was to condemn the outstanding oppo- nent of Communism in the world at that time. SEPTEMBER, 1968 I shoul d say that despite certain am- biguities, both of conduct when he worked for McCarthy and of writing in the present book, Roy Cohn does un- derstand what McCarthy stood for, and how the ground was cut from under him. Also Cohn's appreciation of the essential magnificence of McCarthy's stand, an d of the viciousness and/or meanness of his enemies, is positive if, as it is in my judgment, a bit too "ob- jective." (Maybe I'm' being too "objec- tive" about Cohn, but I never worked with him.) Here is part of Cohn's sum- mary judgment of the pivotal figure in contempor ary American history : Looking back with whatever ob- jectivity I can muster, I believe that even after all the excesses and mis- takes are counted lip, Senator Mc- Carthy used the best methods avail- able to him to fight a battle that needed t o be f Ollght . . . . The " methods" attack on McCarthy sllf - fers f rom a credibility gap because of the double standard of many crit- ics, particularly the press, radio, and television . . . . He may have been wmng in de- tails, but he was right in essentials. Certainly f ew can deny that the Gov- ernment of the United States had in it enough Communist sympathiz- ers and pro-Soviet advisers to twist and pervert American foreign pol- icy for close to two decades. * * * * W hat is indisputable is that he was a cOllrageolls man who f Ollght a monumental evil . He did so against opposition as determined as was his own attack - an opposi- tion that spent far more time, mon - ey, and print seeking to expose him than Communism. Since his day, Cuba has fallen to the Communists. The free u/orld was rocked in 1967 by the Harold Philby revelation of Communist infiltration 43 in high Gouernment seCl/rit)' posts. Nuc lear explosions echo over China and the Soviet Union. American men are defending the borders of Soutb Vietnam against Communist aggres- sors. North Korea has laid down the gauntlet to us. Has not history already begsn his vindication? Such an appraisal of McCarthy does much to vindi cate Cohn, who after all can plead yout h at the time as an excuse for having had a high opinion of an old mountebank like Joseph N. Welch - and for having made a deal with him, the details of which are part of the unfailingly interesting material in this book (material not onl y of histor i- cal import ance but also of human in- terest in the glimpses it gives of Me- Car thy's character, and of Cohn's too, for that matter). This is a book that very much needed to be written, and for which we should be very grateful , though it is far from the last word on McCarthy. As an al- most random example of omissions, there is no ment ion in the book of Howard Rushmore, the pictur esque ex-and-anti-Communist who prior to working for McCart hy in early 1953 had been a reporter for the New York Journ al-American, who after working for McCarthy became editor of Confi- dential magazine, and who eventually shot and killed his ex-wife and himsel f in a taxicab in New York . It was in Apri l 1953 that Howard Rushmore, then on McCarthy's staff, told me : "We are really going to go to work on your friend Oppenheimer." (He knew what kind of friend of mine Oppenheimer was.) Nothing about the McCarthy Committee is more interesting than the fact that it did not investigate Dr. Julius Robert Oppenhei mer, and I think there were good reasons for that - for Me- Carthy woul d not have laid off Oppen- heimer unless he had been convinced 44 there were good reasons to do so. Cer- tainly, however, as Chief Counsel for the Committee, and as an anti -Com- munist hero of the Rosenberg atom-spy case into the bargain, Roy Cohn could well have touched on this subject. I do not find Doctor Oppenheimer's name anywhere in the book. Forgive me for saying that I find such an omi ssion more than mildl y curious. But it is ill-natur ed of me to com- plain of a book which is certai nly one of the most interes ting and important published this year. No student of con- tempo rary history can afford to miss it. It is at once a primary source and a significant commentary . It is the be- gi nning of the restorat ion of McCarthy - which I think is a necessary part of the restoration of Amer ica, for if we have not the national character to re- pent of the inj ustice we did him, nor in high places the intelligence to see that he was right, then it seems unlike- ly that we can or ought to survive. The reassurance is that the majority of Americans did not reject McCarthy, though they tolerated too many Sena- tors and a President who did so. Most Americans intuitively knew that Me- Carthy was right, just as George Wallace's cabdriver knew that Castro was a Communist. But most Americans have of late been too deferential to the experts - to the "Establishment," to the "Academy." Senator Joseph R. McCarthy became involved - after World War II, which, comparatively, was a breeze - in three tough fights : with the Communists, with the Establishment, with the Acad- emy. The significant fact is that only against the Communists was he the aggressor. He jumped the Communists, the Establishment and the Academy jumped him. I just read that last bit to my wife. She said, Yes, he stepped on the rattle, and was struck by the fangs and the ven om .-MEDFoRD EVANS AMERI CAN OPI NION America Is In Danger by GENERAL CURTIS E. LEMAY. Funk & Wagnalls, New York, N..; 346 pages, $5.95. I HAVE the reprehensible but ordinar- ily handy habit, when reading a book for review, of turning down corne rs of pages and scribbling not es in margins for ready reference and reminders while writing. I have just about ruined this book. Almost destroyed the useful- ness of my system, too, for when you mark something on every other page as especially important you still have a prob lem of selection when you want to quote or cite wit hin limited space. Of course, wha t Genera l LeMay has to tell is not entirely new. Eighteen mo nths ago General Nat han F. Twi- ning, in his book Neither Liberty nor Safety, mad e many of the same points and essentially the same overriding point, that America is indeed in danger. Very shortly before that, Indianapolis. N ews editor M. Stant on Evans de- scribed the hobbles in which our mili- tary men have had to work , in his sharply focused analysis, The Politics of Surrender. Reviewing Twining's and Evans' books in A ~ I E R I C A N OPINION for January 1967, I referr ed to their "emphat ic agreement on the catastroph- ic incompetence of the pr ev a il ing leadership in Washington." Earlier criticisms of identical th rust could be cited, going to the classic comment by General Douglas MacArthur regarding Korea: "Never before has thi s nation been engaged in mort al combat with a hostile power without mi litary ob- jective, wit hout policy other tha n re- strictions governing operations, or in- deed without formally recognizing a state of war." (Quoted by LeMay, Page 224.) It is possible, however, that of all the soundly based and well aimed at- tacks to dat e on the "Potomac Pretend- ers" (as another military man, General SEPTEMBER, 1968 Edwin A. Walker, has called them) none has been more devastati ng than this book, this megaton salvo, by the creative first commander of the United States Strategic Air Command, Curtis E. LeMay. America Is In Danger pounds relent- lessly at (1) the physical danger result- ing from our critically inadequate system of national defense , and (2) the fiscal danger. This grim play on phys- ical and fiscal should be blamed on me, not General LeMay, but I do not apol- ogize for it if it jogs memory. The fiscal danger of total bankruptcy, of course, results from extravagant commitments (such as Vietnam) and gross tact ical mismanagement (such as using B-52's to bomb single-lane makeshift bridges in the Asian jungle) . T he physi cal danger comes from the fact tha t, as things are now run from the Pentagon, we simply cannot win any war (for to win would be contrary to policy) and we are therefore liabl e to sustain total defeat whenever we are massively and abruptly attacked by an enemy who does intend to win . Meanwhile, an ap- parently aimless operation such as our anomalous venture in Vietnam affects our nat ional vitality prett y much as phlebotomy would affect a victim of anemia. The dr ain in blood and treas- ur e is more than any nation can In- definitely stand. The third, and greatest, danger in- dicated by General LeMay is that of leaving national power in the hands of men who deliberately incur the perils of bankruptcy and impotence wh ich menace America NOW. It is impossible to tell whether this danger grows out of ineradicable pub lic folly or excusable and remedi able public ignorance and confusion due to delib- erate deception and misinformation from such official spokesme n as Arthur (Right to Li e) Sylvester and his master, Robert Strange McNamara. If, as hope must have it, it is the latter (i.e., igno- 45 ranee, not folly) then forthright books such as this one by Curtis LeMay, with appropriate consequences at the polls, can yet salvage the situation. General LeMa y has obviously pro- ceeded on the more optimistic assump- tion; if you and I don't heed him and spread the word, the American people are very likely to re-establish an Ad- ministration in Washington which , whether Democratic or Republican, will perpetuate the doctrine and con- tinue the policies leadi ng to an "end to nationhood." That last phrase comes from Wal t Whitman Rostow, who, to be sure, is now the right- hand national- security man of Lyndon B. Johnson, but who was - various high-level lies to the contrary notwithst anding - an und ercover C.I.A. operations chief (his cover, a professorship at M.LT.) in the Eisenhower Administration. I'm sure I don't have to remind you that Wa lt Rostow said that an end to nat ionhood would be a good thing for the United States. With national-security experts like that, who needs traitors? No use kidding ourselves, a nation is a war-making body. If you reject war entirely, you are not just a pacifist, you are an anarchist. Believers in world government may say they reject war, but they simply incorporate the war- making function into the police func- tion. As John Locke said, government may be defined as the custodian of the right to kill. A national government which is not capable of making sucess- ful war against its enemies will cease to exist. (So will any government which is not capabl e of maint ainin g order within its own boundaries.) With the foregoing und erstood, we are ready for the following basic paragraph from General LeMay : At the very heart of u/ariare lies doctrine. It represents the central be- liefs for waging war in order to achieve victory. Doctrine is of the 46 mind, a network of faith and knowl- edge reinforced by experience which lays the pattern for the utilizat ion of men, equipment, and tactics. It is the building material f or strategy. It is [nndamenta! to sound judg- ment. (Page 23.) Having thus established the primacy of doctrine, LeMay proceeds to dissect in detail the false doctrines which have dominated defense strategy most of the time since World War II . General Le- May has an understandable preference for the Eisenhower Admin istration over the - as he calls it - "Kennedy- Johnson" Administration; but, that what is involved is not Party politics is plain enough from the fact that Le- May's own career was at its brilliant best in the T ruman years, when he mastermi nded the Berlin Airl ift and - most important - forged the sword that was the Strategic Air Comman d. My own belief is that the same forces were at work throughout the years from World War II to the present, that they scored solid anti-American points both under Truman - e.g., "civilian control" of atomic energy - and under Eisenhower - e.g., a moratorium on nuclear tests in 1958, two years after Ike had been re-elected on a platform that included denunciation of Adlai Stevenson for having proposed such a moratorium. However, the almost final victor y of these indefatigable forces was not achieved until the Kennedy Admi nistration, with the establishment of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency in 1961 and the ratification of the Nuclear Tes t Ban Treaty in 1963. Then, of cour se, wit h Lyndon came the debacle. The "arms controllers," as LeMay sarcastically calls them, got to the top under Kennedy-Johnson, but they had been climbing upward ever since the conclusion of World War II . The fallacious doctrines which Gen- eral LeMay refutes most fully and AMERICAN OPINION forcefully are those of "Deterrence" and "Limited War." Both are based on what seems to be a psychopathic fear of nuclear weapons - psychopathic be- cause the doctors in question are sup- posed to be Americans, and it is Amer- ican nuclear weapons which they seem to fear most. Granted that their op- position is to their own country's nu- clear weapons which, as LeMay says, "constitute our greatest capability for military victory," if one assumes that their opposition is not psychopathic, one realizes immediately that it is kinder to suppose that it is. It is, one immedi- ately understands, not necessarily psy- chopathic. It may, in fact be of the highest order of revolutionary intelli- gence for an American to gain such control of America's most important arms that he can guarantee they will never be used - if he is one of those Americans who believe that what we need is an end to nationhood. This be- lief could sustain such an unwilling American in whatever deception of the American public was necessary to keep himself in office. But so far none of this type has been found capable of deceiv- ing former Air Force Chief of Staff Cur- tis E. LeMay-which doubtless explains why he is a former Chief of Staff , Lyn- don having got rid of him on February 1, 1965, just as the expensive (in blood and materiel) "escalation" was about to get really under way in Vietnam. "Deterrence" by itself is an ambig- uous word. It may, when used by a loyal American, mean deterrence of any aggressive enemy of America, most pre- sumably at this stage of the game, the Soviet Union. Such use, joined with willingness to fight if deterrence fails, expresses a legitimate U.S. military con- cept. But in most of the more sophis- ticated literature of the "defense in- tellectuals" the use is otherwise. In think-tank circles the idea is not for the United States to deter the Soviet Union, but for America and Russia to deter SEPTEMBER, 1968 each other. To a certified Santa Monica or Cambridge doubledome, America is more to be feared than the Soviets be- cause, frankly, America has more nu- clear capability than the Soviets and thus we (no trickier word in the Eng- lish language than we - never mind about my identity or your identity, the real crisis of identity these days is: who are 1/ we"? - we are the ones who upset the balance, who may fail to be deterred. Maybe you don't realize how dread- ful we Americans are - but I'm sure you do, since you've read Fail-Safe and Seven Days in May and other such elaborations written by Americans, oddly enough, of what may be called the anti-LeMay thesis. That thesis is that America is not in danger from the rest of the world so much as the rest of the world is in danger from America, and shouldn't we Americans do something about that, such as may- be whooping it up for the Vietcong or denouncing all American generals ex- cept Maxwell Taylor and James Gavin. I know that Fail-Safe and Seven Days in May were not written by certified defense intellectuals, but by certified literary hacks; however, they got the ideas from the think-tank boys who are themselves not quite sure whether they are unwilling or unable to com- municate with the masses. Mutual deterrence of America and Russia is, or has been so far, to Russia's advantage, since if both give up use of their own nuclear weapons America is giving up more than Russia is. Should the time ever come - and in Gen- eral LeMay's opinion it is approaching - when Russia has as much nuclear superiority as we have had in the past, then the Left will quickly revise its position on deterrence. We shall then hear advised the most solemn respect for the inviolability of Soviet sovereign- ty. The only consolation of the mutual- deterrence, nuclear-stalemate, balance- 47 of-terror propaganda is that so long as we keep hearing it we can be sure America still has superiority in nuclear hardware - for all the good it does us, since we cannot use it. The mutual deterrers do not want us to have a greater nuclear capability than Russia's. They want parity. Gen- eral LeMay is solidly opposed to such military nonsense, and wants America to have clear-cut and decisive military superiority over Russia or any other potential enemy. To this end he maxi - mizes the estimated nuclear capability of the Soviet Union (but his maximiza- tion is legitimate, not fraudulent), and he shows that Robert McNamara has (fraudulently) maximized reports of our own opera tional nuclear capability. General LeMay accepts a high esti- mate on Russian capability; he discounts McNarnara's estimate on American ca- pability. Now with all due respect, I think General LeMay knows more about McNamara than he does about Russia. In fact, I think he knows just about all he needs to know about Mc- Namara. And Lyndon Johnson. And the "defense intellectuals." Me, I'm for LeMay. But it may well be asked how I, who have for years declared my skepticism concerning Soviet (not to say Red Chi- nese) nuclear capability, space-Sputnik capability, apartment-elevator capability, just about every kind of precision-indus- try capability - how I can now so fer- vently endorse the overall judgments of even a great Air Force General who states flatly, for example, that "there are thousands of high yield nuclear weapons in Soviet arsena ls." How can an l-just-don't-believe-they've-got-it nut like me go along with a guy-patriotic general or what have you - who says a thing like that? Well, I do, strategically speaking, go along with him, and I'll tell you why: (1) I never said the Russians cannot have a formidable nuclear arsenal. I 48 said they cannot have produced one, un- aided, from their own industrial re- sources. This was also true of jet air- craft, but they got considerable aid, and they have jet aircraft. Unfortunately, they can have a formidable nuclear ar- senal, though until our "Disarmament Lobby" (to use M. Stanton Evans' phrase) has been at it a bit longer, I don't see how Russia can have anywhere near the equivalent of our inert nuclear arsenal. They can have a lot of stuff that they have begged, borrowed, or stolen from us and from Western Europe- or had thrust upon them by "peace- loving" scientists "who have known sin" -but they can hardly through these channels have yet achieved physical parity. (2) The essence of General Le- May's position is that we should cease to be shackled by phobias such as "De- terrence" and "Limited War," and move confidently to achieve and maintain clear Military Superiority. In a brilliant passage he writes: As to the question of escalation to general nnclear war, it would seem that this is a matter which should concern the Communists more than it does the United States, provided, of course, we maintain superior over- all fighting capability in the strategic nuclear area, and provided also that we express determination not to yield where the nation's vital interests are at stake. With United States saperior- ity, the crossing of allY threshold of escalation presents an outcome pro- gressively worse fOI' the Communists. Lacking a capability to fight and win a full- fledged war with the United States, they are obliged, in their own interests, to keep allY tuar at a low level of intensity. If we are determined to lise it, our milital'J strength gives liS the means by which to control the course of any conflict. With that control we can establish the level of conflict at which AMERICAN OPINION we can achieve our objecti ves. And by a pllnishing retaliation we can in- hibit the enemy f rom carrying the conflict to higher level s. With an over-all f orce superiority we can thus lise escalation as a tool f or achieving 0 111' own objectives, while denying it to the enemy. (Chapter VI, "Lim- ited War," Page 160.) Notice that General LeMay's couns el assumes a decisive U.S. superiority in nuclear capability, which we should maintain, increase if necessary, and ex- ploit . If his recommendati ons as to the desirable exploitation are corr ect (and I certainly believe that they are) - if they are correct on the basis of his own assumptions about Russian capability- then they are simply the more readily prac ticable on the basis of my somewhat different assumptions. I could go on indefi ni tely (being a bit prolix by nature anyhow) extolling and promoting Gen eral LeMay's book. Best you should just get it and read and study it for yourself. If, that is, you are a serious and studious type (which you must be, or how would you have got thi s far in this review?). On the other hand, if you just happened to start read- ing at this point and are too frivolous and ligh t-hearted (bl ess you!) to read reviews like thi s or even Gener al Le- May's book, then promote the book anyhow. It is great. Get others to read it. But you can read the following. Everybody can read these concluding paragraphs of America Is In Danger. And should. And should take them to heart: The measures we must take to re- gain and maintain 0111' military snperi- ority are crystal clear. The ver y first step, of course, is to rid onrseloes of those false prophets who have de- ceived ns and who have gllided liS into the dangerous waters where we now fi nd ourselves. They have been SEPTEMBER, 1968 responsible for placing America in danger, and each day that they hold high office America comes closer and closer to oblivion. The defense of our country has never been easy. Bnt it has been worth any diffi CIIlty. And it is worth it to- day. N o hardship is too set/ere, no ex- pense too mucb, and no life too deal' to def end this America, the greatest collntry the world has ever known.' That 's a student of war that wrote that. And a fighting American. - MEDFORD EVANS Manhattan Project by STEPHANE GROUEFF. Little, Brown and Company, Boston and Toronto ; 372 pages, $6.95. CONSIDERING turnover and subcon- tracts, a million people worked on the wartime atomi c bomb - while 179 mi l- lion Americans knew nothing about it. Of the ma jority in this case I cannot speak, but for us million secret workers I will say that Stephane Groueff has written a fascinating book . You are th ere - if you were ever there. ( And if you were not, it's hard to tell you about it anyhow.) You who were at Oak Ridge will read here of familiar things : cemesto houses design ed by Skidmore, Owings and Merrill; prefabs hauled in on trucks; Alpha racetr acks at Y-12; the castle and Townsite; K-25, X-lO, and S-50; con- struction contractors such as Stone and Webster and J. A. Jones; operating con- tractors such as T ennessee Eastman and Carbide and Carbon Chemicals Corpo- ration, a subsidiary of Union Carbide. The full name, of course, was never used. I remember the newly arrived wif e of an Eas tman employee, puzzled and somewha t distur bed to hear , You can't get any of those houses; th ey' re 49 going to put Carbide into them-never daring, because of "security" to ask what that meant. Oak Ridge was for several hundred thousand people the adventure of a life- time - vast, turbulent, mysterious, and charged with purpose. Some may, how- ever, be moved to sarcasm by part of Groueff's list (actually quite an accurate list) of site characteristics which prompted General Leslie R. Groves to put the "Clinton Engineer Works" at this particular Tennessee location: "It answered all the necessary requirements for the future atomic plants: an isolated area with plenty of electrical power, abundant water supply, almost no pop- ulation, good access by road and train, and a mild climate that permitted out- door work the year round." Power from TVA, yes - though at that Groves soon had to order construc- tion of the world's biggest coal-burning. steam-generated electric-power plant. Water, yes, illimitable water, down your neck and under your feet; it was nice to know, or suspect, or hope, that it was helpful to the project. As for "al- most no population" - you didn't tell that to the natives. They were, by met- ropolitan standards, few in number, but extraordinarily sturdy. There was popu- lation in Dogpatch before the longhairs came - or even the construction work- ers. But "good access" and "mild cli- mate" - brother! Though it did permit outdoor work the year round. In the miserable cold mud and winter drizzle, that was the damnable part! Just a little bit worse and you couldn't have worked. Same with the two-lane black- top roads to the Area gates (quaint names they had: Elza, Oliver Springs, Solway, etc.). Any worse roads, and 75,000 ridge-hopping daily commuters couldn't have gone to work at all. It was really great. And this book brings it all back. Oh, does it ever. The same goes, I'm sure, for Hanford 50 (State of Washington) workers. About Los Alamos I'm not so sure. There they had a special breed of cats. Much smaller total numbers, far higher percentage of longhairs (scientists, to you). I visited Los Alamos, lived in Oak Ridge. The latter much bigger, the former quite deadly. Reminds me (I read Orphan Annie) of Punjab and the Asp. Of course, it was Daddy Warbucks who built the Manhattan Project-using the technical genius of American industry supported by the vast capital resources of our free economy. Just that is the salient point of Groueff's book. "The magnificent sci- entific discoveries leading to the first nuclear chain reaction," he writes, "are by now relatively well known.... on the contrary, the public still [does] not know how the first bomb was built, by whom and under what circumstances. It was surprising to me that the Amer- icans themselves were still unaware of the prodigious adventure into which their country's industrial power was launched, secretly and boldly, at a co- lossal cost and with an unprecedented effort, in order to produce the bomb." (I must say it is surprising, and gratify- ing, to me that Groueff, a Bulgarian by birth, expatriated since the Communist takeover of 1944, knows so much of our enterprise.) The story of the industrial giants- DuPont, General Electric, Eastman, Union Carbide, Allis-Chalmers, West- inghouse' Stone and Webster, and the others - this is "The Untold Story of the Making of the Atomic Bomb" (the book's subtitle). Not just intrinsically fascinating, Groueff's work has this overriding historic implication: Nuclear science, theoretical and experimental, has been and is international; but the variety, flexibility, and power of Amer- ican industry which translated that sci- ence into production are not matched elsewhere in the world . - MEDFORD EVANS AMERICAN OPINION A1r(QVlE ILllJEIRllS The Last Unicorn by PETER S. BEAGLE. The Viking Press, New York; 218 pages, $4.95. WE SUFFER today from the Outer Conspiracy of collectivism and the In- ner Hypnosis of nihilism. The Con- spiracy can never fully be defeated and abolished until the Hypnosis is broken and dissolved. A certain obsessive mood that combines a false "philosophy" with a sick "art" has made men subject to a bleak "Liberal" conformity that is sel- dom challenged and more seldom tran- scended. In literature, the dominant creed is one of unscientific "science," unrealistlic "realism," and a barebones, cadaver negativism that knows nothing of truth. We and the world need most a bold, non-conformist, imaginative, myth-making art of transcendence, of joy, of color, of the glory of Romance where magic casements open on the foam. This book is a bugle (if not a trum- pet) blown before the walls of Jericho. SEPTEMBER, 1968 It amazes me, it heartens me, it opens for me a magic casement, it breaks the pattern of conformist "realism" and of fashionable skeletal existentialism. The book is a noble, daring commando raid by Romance, into the dull dreary Valley of Dry Bones where Norman Mailer (et al.) lies in a sprawl of sun-bleached ribs. There are certain noble symbols that are forever eternal truths. Such is the word, such is the symbol: Unicorn . J. B. Priestley, in one of his finest essays, "The Unicorn," writes: "the Unicorn, just because he is not a creature of this world, escapes the withering process of time. Unlike the Lion, he is young as ever he was, as swift and strong; his eyes are undimmed; his single horn as tense and unyielding as it was many centuries ago. He was magical then, he is magical now." And Priestley con- cludes, "The only future we can have worth living in is the one we greet, bravely and triumphantly, riding on a Unicorn." Unicorn, indeed, is a great word, a great reality, a creature of legend that we should feed on pure grain in an ivory manger and on a golden forage of daffodils. Here Peter Beagle boldly introduces us to that legendary, noble creature: The Unicorn lived in a lilac wood, and she lived all alone. She was very old, though she did not know it, and she was no longer the careless color of sea foam, but rather the color of mow falling on a moonlit night. But her eyes were still clear and unwear- ied, and she still moved like a shadow on the sea. The Unicorn suddenly realizes that she is alone - the last of the unicorns, but that she should not be alone. For there had been hundreds of unicorns once in the world, and unicorns are immortal . . . so they can not be dead. Where are they? (And where, in our 51 world, are they?) Her heart is lonely for unicorns; and the world is perishing for the beauty and wonder of unicorns; and so she sets out on a one-unicorn quest of the last unicorn for the lost unicorns. That quest leads her through many adventures. She is captured by a witch- in-charge of a circus, till she is freed by a good magician who too often doubts (and so destroys) his own power. She finds Molly, a faithful woman of the woods, who accompanies and succors her. And she finds that the unicorns whose wonder and beauty could save the world are herded into the surf of a desolate sea in the Kingdom of King Haggard (a sort of fungus land where men grow old and dead), by a Red Bull who is the outward arm of Haggard whose soul is an inward sick- ness. I believe that Beagle makes no conscious realization of the Conspiracy and the Hypnosis - but what matter? He writes from the super-conscious, whence come eternal truths; and he is nobly right in making the blind brute - a Red Bull! The style here, after the sawdust-and- lysol of most corrtemporary, and all con- formist, writers today, is beautiful like the perfeot curve and the gorgeous colors of the rainbow. Savor the phrases : "After these came the slower heights of summer and the baked plains where the air hung shiny as candy . . . the vast form of the Red Bull came charg- ing out of the moon. . . . Fear and hunger have kept me young . . . a small copper-and-ashes cat with a crooked ear. . . . It was a small smile, like the new moon, a slender band of brightness on the edge of the unseen the daylight gaiety of his voice " And, of the Red Bull: "A terrible light poured from him like sweat, and his voice started landslides flowing into one another. His horns were as pale as scars...." But anyone who loves a pen from which flow beautiful phrases can find 52 them for himself on every page of Mr. Beagle's book. Yet I must quote a passage where beauty of style coheres with wisdom of vision - Prince Lir's words, thus: "Anyway, since you and I must ohoose one road to follow, out of the many that run to the same place in the end, it might as well be a road that a unicorn has taken. We may never see her, but we will always know where she has been." One thing here is so rare and so mag- nificent that it is unique in "modern" literature. The magician, suddenly seized by a power beyond himself, calls forth a processional of figures - Robin Hood, Maid Marian, Friar John, Allan- a-Dale, and all the rest go marohing, taller than men, nobler than men, through the greenwood. The shabby "real" robbers of the wood first pursue to join them, then return to deny and curse them as shadows . But Molly says: "Nay, Cully, you have it backward ... there's no such person as you, or me, or any of us. Robin and Marian are real, and we are the legend!" This is spiritual dynamite under "realism" and existentialism and egalitarianism: The shabby "factual" figures that claim to be "real" are actually legend, and the great noble archtypes of essential man - poet and hero and prophet - are reality. I have always believed this, but I never expected to live to find it in contemporary literature! There is a beautiful love story here. To save the Unicorn from the Red Bull, the magician turns her into a lovely human girl. She cannot quite forget, she longs to be the Unicorn again, but she more than half falls in love with Prince Lir - who falls wholly in love with her. Yet only as a girl can she love him ... and she is essentially - uni- corn. The end I will not tell, for - past all sentimentality and higher than all happy endings - that wonder of grief and glory must be yours to read. Amid all the political victories of the AMERICAN OPINION Conspiracy and the Hypnosis that dis- figure and dismay, here is a brave trum- pet blown by a new Roland before the Dark Tower. Here, to hearten and de- light us, is myth and beauty and Ro- mance. This is a rare and beautiful book that all conservatives should read. And one final loveliness, after the Red Bull is routed and King Haggard over- thrown, is this marvelous saying: "They will need time to feel comfortable with flowers, he said." Let us cherish this and know that after the Conspiracy and the Hypnosis are broken, the world will indeed "need time to feel comfortable with flowers."-E. MERRILL ROOT The Accidental President by ROBERT SHERRILL. Pyramid Books, New York; 251 pages, 95. Ir's REFRESHING now and then to read a book where both Leftist author and Leftist hero talk and act like knaves. Such a treat is The Accidental Presi- dent, by a seasoned old Washington hand-a Left hand. If you would enjoy a banquet of ill-disguised hate, it's set out for you here, on the damask of an able writing job, and composed of vic- tuals that will satisfy the hardiest con- servative appetite. Many people, I imagine, would buy this book for the fun of being told that our retiring President is every four- letter word in the language. But as the story unfolds the reader discovers that Mr. Johnson may not be quite so much of a bum as the man who is calling him one. Mr. Sherrill's skill in associating his victim with every conceivable shady deal, is unquestioned. But it is worth the ninety-five cents to find him, I am sure without his intention, condemning himself with his own radical hate. It is hard to read the book without visualizing it as a grudge job. Spraying nasty cracks like a machine-gun, the author drops a whole lot of big game SEPTEMBER, 1968 beside Mr. Johnson. I seem to detect, in Sherrill's resentment, the surprising idea that the President is really a fascist, involved with grand schemes which in- clude just about every industrialist of note in Texas. The author readily ad- mits that the Lone Star State is a' poor pasture for "Liberals"; Br'er Johnson is The Fox, in a country of foxes, that has things his own way. I get from the account of all this the author's concern that the one unbeatable tyrant in America will turn out to be a two-headed monster composed of Texas tycoons and Johnson-type politi- cians. If the Communists are in it at all, Mr. Sherrill is mighty careful not to mention it - suggesting perhaps where his own sympathies lie. This sinister combine, he says, owns all the means of production, all the political influence, not to mention all the cash to make it churn. According to this biographer the President, and before him the Senator from South Texas, single handed, managed the whole thing, all the way from those eighty- seven votes that put Mr. Johnson in the Senate in 1948, to the monstrous farce in Vietnam which we are told LB.J. arranged because he loves to do things big. All this his doing. Well, I sup- pose the Far Left needs a fall guy as much as anyone, and Sherrill is certainly the four-letter master craftsman to make the story plausible . It's more; there's a sort of Through The Looking Glass magic to the narra- tive, with the reader taking the part of Alice, shuttling back and forth between that chess game and the Mad Tea Party. Thus, we have the dual delight of con- demning L.B.J. and his tormenter as smearer and smeared change back and forth, each hoist with his own petard. It's not so often that a seasoned writer goes gunning for ducks and comes home in the bag with the birds. But this one does. I recommend The Accidental President. - DAVID O. WOODBURY 53 BULLETS Mankind has lived in violence for six thousand years-or, if one is a believer in evolution, for more than a million. So now, Johnson is going to find out what causes it and send the bill to us. David O. Woodbury
To admit poverty is no disgrace to a man, but to" make no effort to escape it, is indeed disgraceful. Thucydides
Our greatest national problem today is erosion, not erosion of the soil or erosion of the national morality-erosion of tra- ditional enforcement of law and order. The Honorable Ezra Taft Benson
Listening to some of the faculty in our colleges makes a fellow think we should raise the voting age-maybe to somewhere around forty. Ben Levy As soon as you can say what you think, and not what some other person has thought for you, you are on the way to being a remarkable man . James M. Barrie, Tommy and Grisel * Cleanness of the body was ever deemed to proceed from a due reverence to God. Francis Bacon, Advancement of Learning, Bk. II Isn't it revealing that Liberals, in the General Assembly and out , can mouth the platitudes of individual freedom in one breath, and agitate for a compulsory school attendance law that would coerce children in the next? Richmond News Leader We finally got our color TV and I have discovered what's wrong in Wash- ington-we have a green President. The Restless Quill 54 Many economists recently have spoken out in favor of a guaranteed annual wage. If such an unsound socialistic pro- gram is adopted, we will be in great danger of losing our "guaranteed an- nual America." George H . Wagner Jr.
A bachelor is like a detergent; both are fast workers and neither leaves a nng. Old Maid
At the rate we are going, the meek will not inherit the earth, they will over- run it. Alice Barbee
Since we have a government with an insatiable appetite, we have a govern- ment with a much-abused Constitution. John McLeod
The only kind of labor which gives the workingman a title to all its fruits is that which he does as his own master. Pope Pius II
Hang yourself brave Crillon; we have fought at Argues and you were not there . Henry IV of France Those who plot the destruction of others often fall themselves . Phaedrus, Fables: Appendix Unemployment as a mass phenom- enon is the outcome of allegedly "pro- labour" policies of the governments and of trade union pressure and compulsion. Ludwig von Mises In the U.S.A. the "poverty level" is $3,000 a year. In the rest of the world the annual income doesn't average much above $100 a year. J. Kesner Kahn AMERICAN OPI NION FROM SCIENCE DAVID O. WOODBURY My WIFE and I sat in quiet anonym- ity, not long ago, at a luncheon at the Massachusetts Institute of Technol- ogy, celebrating the completion of the Institute's latest skyscraper , the new Space Laboratory. The affair was in- deed an exercise in cordial hosting - shall we say brainwashing? - of the individual alumnus, of which I am an example. Beautiful decor, lovely food, sparkling conversation with experts. It was a momentous occasion, and a portent. If there was a sense of doom present it was not the fault of my alma mater. Not alone. You could blame it better on Bigness, stalking like a modern Gargantua through the hall. These brilliant people had started something tremendous, and were shouldering it into the mainstream of American affairs. But they came on light feet, softly, in the guise of the leaders of a new civilization. With a very good lunch tucked un- der our belt s, we watched the two or three hundred guests settle down to a mutual admiration part y between M.LT. and the Space Agency, N. A.S.A. for short. We were at first charmed with honeyed words, then alerted with the sense of urgenc y that flowed there, and finall y we began to be concerned. Here was emerging the precisely drawn blueprint for the future: science, indus- try, and government building a worl d of their own devising, in which us chick- ens would be roosting in a vast struc- ture, with every perch numbered, every moment accounted for. Pr incipal speaker at the affair was N.A.S.A.'s Head Boy, James Webb - the man who will soon be administering the moon and the territory beyond. His SEPTEMBER, 1968 talk began as a fulsome eulogy of the great technical establishment on the Charles, which does, after all, supply the government with more newl y solved secrets of nature than any other factory of ideas in the country. But soon he got down to cases. Here, for a moment, we saw the Space Agency in a fish bowl. Humbly, it was admitting that it, and all of government, must rely wholl y on the giant industrial complex of America and upon the M.LT.s which supply the raw brain production that is to make our future civilization run. It sounded grand and it sounded sinister: The Plan by which we shall solve all our shortcomings and all our ills. The feeling of ultimate and overwhelming power was driven home by one little remark that Mr. Webb made in modesty or satisfaction : Don't think, said the speaker, that N.A.S.A. or anybody else really makes decisions. No, whoever you are, how- ever high, there is always a man who looks over your shoulder, telling you exactly what to do, and how. It was as simple as that-the picture of a tightl y integrated cartel, a monop- olistic structur e composed of the peo- ple who make things go in the world. But at every level up to the Top, in every branch and nation, there would be a ladder of authori ty going up (the audience instinctively looked at the ceiling here) . It was startling because it was so gentle, yet so final. You could see that everyone in the audience accepted it as trustingl y as oxygen in the air. The three colossi of the American scene are lockstepping toward total cont rol of all human existence. They are government, big business, and 55 scientific genius, wit h the inevitable taxpayers, thrashing in the waves, going down in a sea of frustration. This is the pattern for tomorrow- an all-embracing dictatorship of once- free citizens by the small minority of those who can think up progress, who can turn it into useful hardware and then enforce its ironclad rules. Hidden in it somewhere, of course, is the Money Source, vital to the plan. The speaker seemed comfortable about that . But it won't be the old-fashioned taxpayer any more. The majority on the production line won't have any money of its own, just the use of a share-cropper's fraction of a new kind of financial stream which circulates like water in the plumbing, lubricat ing and facilitat ing existence, no more. There is nothing new about this. as a dream, but the meeting at M.LT. did firmly undersco re its final approach to reality. And with it a smugness, an inevitability, yes, a complacency that warned the listener that we are far along the road toward the Age of a Technological Big Brother who wears a locomotive engineer's cap and gog- gles and drives the only engin e on the road-the One World Express. I don't believe these good people have the foggiest idea where their Ex- press is taking us all. The trip is to them a scenic journey through a con- stantly unfolding Wonderland that has no limit. Within their framework they are intensely practical, yet seem to have no hold on reality at all. They seem incredibly ignorant of people- strikes, the fligh ts of poetry and music, the heights of exaltation and the dis- couragements of ordinary freedom. For all these thi ngs must be left be- hin d when the Express gets underway. To this new species of dreamers, ap- parently, there is Utopia ahead for everyone. The technologist'S idea is frightening: everything gigantic, every- thing at supersonic speed, everything 56 automated and computed and cata- logued, the only tool a push button. Man's only friend: the personality that stands behind him with a hand on his shoulder. In this fast-dawning world of mecha- nized collectivism, there may be only one hope : it may not work! We can imagine that in the Twent y-First Cen- tury or the Twenty-Second, if people re- gain their courage reluct antly, it wiII have become clear that there can't be civilization without viable human beings in it. Robots driven by pushbuttons and discouragement won't be enough. Un- able to fall any lower, men and women will begin to arise, stand up, stiffen their backs and fight. It wiII be seen then that the beauti ful planners and givers of commands hadn't had their way because of their courage, but only because, armed with endless machines, it was so easy. Sudden ly it is easy no longer ; sud- denl y, to maintain their authority it is difficult , and soon impossible, for them to deal with aroused human will. At that moment the last pushbutton wiII be pushed, and a normal and individual world wiII dawn again . It is a tragic thing that , by going only a little wrong just now, by accepting too much shi ny tinsel and too littl e obligation to decency, we of today can't seem to learn the lesson contained in those two lost centuries. If mankind could choose the good leaders instead of the bad; if it could aspire to a firm moral position instead of to no position at all; if it could, in short, simply use plain common sense, the horrors of slavery to machines and to the mechan- ics who will operate them, could be avoided. Particularly, it is the mechan- ic, not the hardware, that is dangerous. The machines, once abandoned by thei r masters, would stand mutely by while their new owners destroyed them. There was a powerful warning at that luncheon in Cambridge, but the three colossi didn't see it. Shall we? AMERICAN OPI NION PRINCIPLES OF ECONOMICS HANS F. SENNHOLZ 'REINHOLD NIEBUHR, the towering teacher of Christian ethics from Union Theological Seminary, identifies him- self as a "Christian realist" who seeks to put "political realism into the service of justice." Let's take a look. "Christian Realism" Professors Harry R. Davis and Robert C. Good, the authors of Rein- hold Niebuhr on Politics (Charles Scribner's Sons, 1960) describe the master 'as a realist "except when he is flaying the realists for the failure to un- derstand the normative dimension of life," and as an idealist "except when he is scoring the idealists for their fail- ure to assess the resistance of all men to the normative dimension of life." To an unbiased observer, whether he be a monist or dualist, idealist or materialist, metaphysician or positivist, the political writings of Niebuhr reveal a philo- sophical eclecticism which is the most common body of thought in our times. When Niebuhr discusses the disor- ders of a technical civilization he seems to echo the bitter criticism of the mate- rialists, whether they are Communists, socialists, or Great Societists. Accord- ing to him, the advancing technic, our modern methods of production, consti- tute the root of much political and so- cial disorder. In the words of Davis and Good, "we have not been able to devel- op political and social instruments which are adequate for the kind of so- ciety which a technical civilization makes possible and necessary. . . .The ever increasing introduction of technics into the fields of production and com- munications constantly enlarges the in- tensity and extent of social cohesion in modern man's economic life; and also SEPTEMBER, 1968 tends constantly to centralize effective economic power. . . . The effect of tech- nics upon production is to create great- er and greater disproportions of eco- nomic power and thus to make the achievement of justice difficult." In international affairs, according to Niebuhr, European technology gave rise to European imperialism which in two World Wars "came in conflict with each other over the spoils of their impe- rial thrusts." The economic and politi- cal injustices committed by the Europe- an powers created resentment, opposi- tion, and rebellion in the African and Asian world. The instruments of a technical civilization thus gave birth to the anarchy of our times when the sins of our fathers are visited upon us. In our domestic affairs modern tech- nology, according to Niebuhr, has "made the worker powerless, except in- sofar as common organized action has given 'him a degree of social and politi- cal power. . . . Consequently a virtual civil war between the new industrial classes and the more privileged and se- cure classes and landowners and own- ers of industrial property tended to destroy the unity of industrial nations. . . . The total effect of a rise of a tech- nical civilization and an industrial so- ciety has been the destruction of com- munity on the national level and the extension of conflict on the internation- al level." (Page 6.) It is obvious that Niebuhr uses ma- terialistic arguments in order to con- demn modern capitali stic society. "Ex- istence is dependent upon matter," says the materialist. "Whatever mental pro- cesses man experiences, although such entities truly exist, are caused by mate- rial processes in general, and environ- 57 mental forces of production in particu- lar." What distingui shes Dr. Niebuhr 's concept of mat erial process from the Marxian concept of "the mat erial pro- ductive forces" ? Very little, indeed! The state of pract ic al technical knowledge or the t echnical quality of the tools of production is the essential Marxian feature of historical evolution. It uniquely determines economic activ- ity and thereby the stage of political and social progress. Marx and Engels enthusiastically awaited new inventions and te ch no l ogica l improvements which, they were sure, would bring them nearer the realizat ion of their hopes, the evolution of socialism. Of course, Dr. Niebuhr does not share their hopes for socialism, merel y their philosophical and epistemological argu- ments . Christian idealists deny the validity of these mate rialistic trains of thought. We believe that technology is merely a product of a man's thought and ideas. True, tools and machines are mat erial, but their creation is a mental process. Modern t echnol ogy is the fr uit of Western man's init iative and freedom, enjoyed for nearly two hundred years. Thoughts and ideas pertaining to the political, social, and economic structure of society induce man to expand his division of labor, and form capital for employment and production. They made him fight for indivi dual freedom and enterprise which are the inescapa- ble prereq uisites of technological and economic progress. History is not moved by man's tech- nology, but by his ideas and actions. Hi stor y is a sequence of man's actions and reactions, reason and prejudice, wisdom and blindness, which are char- acterized by their singulari ty. To condemn European colonialism on grounds of exploitation and injus- tice, and explain the World Wars in terms of competitive conflict "over the spoils of their imperial thrusts" is to 58 repeat t he flagrant accusations made by the exiled V.1. Leni n more than fifty years ago. In reality, the European ac- quisition of most colonies was moti- vated by mercantilistic ideas dur ing the age of Mercantilism. But during the Ni neteenth Century of capitalism, the most peaceful century of Western history, the Europeans brought law, order, and the light of Western civiliza- tion to the dark continents, invested many billions of thei r funds in back- ward regions, raised economic produc- tion and standards of living all over the world, and created a world econo- my with an ever-expandi ng interna- tional division of labor. Their retreat and the corresponding a dva n ce of Asian and African collectivism during the last two d ecades hav e ag a i n dimmed the light of civilization. The two World Wars have merely hastened the Weste rn decline, which followed in the wake of collectivism in the guise of nationalism and political, social, and economic statism. The de- cline of the West is tantamount to the decline of the ideas and values on which its civilization was built. "Chr istian realism" obviously fails to shed light on the crucial probl ems of our troubled age. It merely muddles the fundamental differences between the thought and ideas of Western civili- zation and the world view of socialism and commu n ism. In the name of "Christian realism" its advocates are peddl ing mat erialism, the sociological doctrines of class and race conflict, of exploitation and depri vation. They in- cite discontent and hatr ed, civil disobe- dience and disorder. They preach envy and covetousness, and threaten to dis- rupt the free society unl ess it changes to their image. T he ideal world in the eyes of "Christian realists" differs little from that of Marx and Lenin. Of course, it would be run by ordained ministers rather than atheist commissars. . AMERI CAN OPI NION CONFETTI .. An Ame rican and his Cockney friend were walking down the street of a mid- western town one night when an owl set up his ancient "W-h-o; W-h-o! W-h-o!" Puzzled, the Engli shman scowled : "What is that ?" "Oh, that ? An owl," answere d the American casually. "Well," stormed the insulted English- man, "I know it's an 'owl. But what the 'ell is it that's 'owling ?" .. .. .. If reports are true, the late Senator James Watson (R.-Indiana) was one of the wittiest and most colorful men ever to sit in the Senate. Winding up one campaign, he concluded: "Now I've given you the facts. You know exactly where I stand on the issues. You can vote for me or you can go to the devil." Calvin Coolidge, whose humor paral- leled that of the Senator, heard of Wat- son' s final remark. Looking out of the window toward the Capitol, Mr. Cool- idge said: "Watson left them a difficult alternative." .. .. Joseph T. Meek of the Illinois Retail Merchants Association report ed a short time ago that his group has become con- cerned over the way history and politics are being taught in high schools. After receiving results of a recent history test, his concern was int ensified. The last question read: "The Declaration of In- dependence was written by " One student filled in the black space with the word, "candlelight." .. .. Many years ago Prince Otto von Bis- marck challenged a German professor to a duel because he did not like a crit- icism made by the learned pedagogue. Being astute, the latter waved aside the customary dueling pistols. "As the challenged party," said the SEPTEMBER, 1968 professor, "I have the choice of weap- ons. And," he smiled as he placed two sausages on the table, "I choose these. One sausage is infected with lethal trichinosis. The other is not. I ask that your Excellency choose whichever one you wish. I will eat the other." Exploding in frustration, Bismarck began to laugh and the duel was called off. .. .. Recently a sheriff in the western part of the country confiscated a number of slot machines . He did so, he explained, on the basis of a law banning the use of steel traps for catching dumb animals. Cowboy : "What kind of saddle do you want , one with a horn or without?" Dude: "Without, I g ues s. There doesn't seem to be much traffic on these prairies." .. .. "How did you enjoy your horseback ride?" the Westerner asked the newly arrived Easterner. "Frankly," replied the Easterner, "I never thought anything filled with hay could be so hard." A nervous but determined rookie sol- dier was on guard for the first time in his life. A dark form approached him. "Haiti " he cried, in a menacing tone. "Who goes there?" "The officer of the day." "Advance! " The officer advanced, but before he had proceeded six steps the sentry again cried, "Halt!" "This is the second time you have halted me," observed the officer. "What are you going to do next ?" "Never you mind what I'm gonna do. My orders are to call ' Halt' three times, then shoot! " 59 FROM LONDON FRANK MACMILLAN WHEN ARCHEOLOGISTS uncovered the ruins of Pompeii during the last cent ury, they discovered what appeared to be the charred remai ns of a Roman soldier who had been on sentry duty when the volcano erupted above the town. This discover y inspired a famous paintin g called "Faithful unto Death," which shows the young sentinel looking up at the erupting lava, armed wi th weapons whi ch can do nothing to stave off the coming disaster . . . but nonethel ess holding faithfully to his post. Such a situation well illustr ates the cur rent attitude of many observers of British politics. The electorate has in local elections shown massive distrust for Childe Harold's Government ; and, in Pa rliamentary elections this year, constituency after constituency which had for generations been Labor strong- holds (aye, even castles) has fallen to the Tories. Yet, Chi lde Harold continues on his way, his pipe smoki ng like the volcano, wh ile Britain is being buried in the ash and lava of economic disaster. Of course, the Childe has not lost every castle. He still holds Barbara Cas- tle, his Minister of Emp loyment and Product ivity. Mr s. Castle is a vivacious red-head, elegant, good-looking, and a dedicated Socialist.To raise her to her pr esent position, Childe Harold had to remove Mr. Ray Gunter, perhaps the only gen uine Cabinet-level representa- tive of the Trade Union element of the Labor Party. As Minist er of Labor, Gunter's success was generally grea ter or less according to whether Childe Harold kept out of negot iat ions or per- sonally intervened to foul up. Mr. Gunter' s most memor able con- tributi on to the wit and wisdom of our times was his famous speech early this JUNE, 1968 year when he tr ied to convi nce the Trade Union body to persuade "our comrades" that the concept of a business making a profit is not to be regarded as something worse than incest and lechery. That was enormously funny - at the time. But , funny though it was, Gunter was one of the few men who could argue that point of view in an industrial dispute and tell the Trade Union bosses to grow up! Still , as he was neither an int ellectual nor a Wilsonite he had to go. As he revealed ingenuously on TV, he wasn 't even told the real reason for the shif t, getting onl y the usual Wilson doubletalk about his own Min istry of Labor being "re- str uctured, etc." So Ray Gunter was moved aside for the promotion of the Red Queen. And do you know what Barbara Castle did? Wi thin weeks she had gro unded every airflight in the nationalized British Eu ropean Airways and British Ov erseas Airways Corporation - because she wouldn' t even listen to the requests of the Bri tish Ai rline Pilots' Association. And, what is more, she managed to antagonize the highly skilled mem- bers of the small labor union wh ich mans our locomotives (the Association Societies of Locomoti ve Engineers and Footplatemen) and the entire body of less-skill ed railway employees (the Na- tional Union of Railwaymen) . As a result, our skies have been emptied and enormous numbers of trains cancelled or worked onl y on a "go-slow" basis. Dynamic, for ward-looking, eager Bar- bara had done all that! What was interesting about Gunter's shor t letter of resignation was its blunt- ness. He wro te to Wilson: "I no longer desire to be a member of your Govern- 61 ment." This recalls the phrasing of George Brown's resignation as Foreign Secretary, when he said that he was resigning because he didn't like "the way we come to decisions." In other words, Wilson is running a Presidential Government - not the constitutionally British Cabinet-type Administration. Worse, Chi Ide Harold's Castle is now managing to prepare the way for a cosy little police state in which Union leaders can be fined for daring to cross Wilson in industrial disputes - that is, if they don't come to heel quickly enough to please the Chi Ide. Naturally enough, there was a considerable revolt of the Trade Union representatives in the Commons over this matter and at one stage of the fracas the Government's majority dropped to a mere eighteen votes. But this wasn't the only trouble buoyant Barbara stirred up for herself. When the Chairman of Hambro's Bank announced that his firm was going to increase its contributions to the Tory Party from a mere $2,400 to $24,000 be- cause Harold Wilson "is the worst Prime Minister since Lord North," Barbara briskly declared that her De- partment would be investigating the "inflationary" rise in salary recently voted by the bank to its Chairman. Almost immediately afterwards, when the question arose of appointing a new General Secretary of the Labor Party (which is independent of the Parlia- mentary Party) the awkward fact emerged that the man whom Harold Wilson wanted to see nominated, Housing Minster Tony Greenwood, thought the salary offered was too small - which it certainly is! Thus it quickly became obvious that, if the Labor Party organization decided to raise the salary of its General Secretary, breezy Barbara would also have to threaten her own Party with investiga- tion. In the meantime, Britain continues 62 to slither quietly towards a second devaluation. The excuse this time is that after the weeks of chronic disorders in France which preceded the French General Election, and which had a catastrophic effect on industrial produc- tion and the tourist industry, de Gaulle may devalue the franc - which would eliminate the advantages supposedly gained for Britain from last year's de- valuation. This could be true, of course - as far as it goes. It is, however, primarily a pretext, for the last de- valuation of the pound was a botch from every technical viewpoint. It was seen to be inevitable; it was denied; then, when it was obviously and officially imminent, it was delayed for four days. When it eventually took place, of course, it was insufficient - and, more important, it was not followed up with proper economic measures. That failure to gain advantage from the devaluation is among the many reason Britons haven't been seeing much of Childe Harold on our TV screens lately. His public relations ad- visors tell him that he is strictly poison, and the opinion polls reiterate it. All of this provided the background for a double-barreled trap set by two mischievous Tories just before the summer recess. One asked whether it would be appropriate for the Prime Minister to make a "massive explana- tion" on TV of the worsening balance of payments, the mounting overseas debt, rising unemployment, and Cabinet resignations. Chi Ide Harold came back with mouthfuls of statistics showing that everything is lovely in the English country garden. Then the trap was sprung. The second Tory sweetly agreed with the Premier that maybe this pro- posal for a TV appearance could be put off till some later date because, at the moment, it would be "a melancholy example of the unpopular explaining the unacceptable to the unbelicoing"
AMERICAN OPINION FROM AFRICA CiEORCiE S. SCHUYLER REMINISCENT of the Hitler-Stalin ex- change of bill ingsgate prior to the 1939 pact whi ch launched World War H, has been the recent and equally fraudu- lent propaganda war between Peking and Moscow. Nowhere is the Red im- post ur e more evident than in Africa where both Peking and Moscow co- operate for mu tual conquest of the hap- less cont inent . The most gla ring show- case is Zanzibar . In the lO20-square- mile terr itory, consisting of the two islands of Zanzibar and Pemba, a population of 300,000 hapless inhabitant s is rul ed by Tanzania's First Vice Pr esi- dent, the dicta tor Sheikh Abeid Karu me - with the help of the Soviet Union, Red China, and East Germanv . . . all working toget her for the c o m ~ o n ill. Ten years ago it was recognized by the Int ernational Communist Conspira- cy (just as the Egypt ians, Sumerians, Indians, Persians, and Ara bs before them) that whoever cont rols the East Coast of Africa, and especially Zanz i- bar (Zenj Bar means Negro Coast) cont rols the Open Sesame to the wealth of Af rica. The first wealth was gold, ivory, and slaves, which enric hed Asia from Bagdad to Peking; and the slave trade continued into the late Nineteenth Cen tury. T he current wealth is the al- most inexhaustible mineral resources of Zambi a, Rhodesia, the Congo and Southern Af rica, and the vast reservoir of black labor to exploit them. At the beginning of the Sixteenth Cent ury the intrepid Portuguese naviga- tors broke up the Arabs ' train in East Africa, only to be deposed in the Seventeenth Century by the Omani Arabs, who in turn came under British protection in 1890 and proceeded to abolish the lucrative, centuries-old slave SEPTEMBER, 1968 trade. The last of the great traditional slavers was the resourceful T ippu Tib, one-time admi nistrator of King Leo- pold's Congo preserve, who had a statue erected to him bv Zanzibar 's gratef ul Arabo-Af rican ar istocracy. Zan- zibar's other claim to fame was the rich clove ind ustry, manned by the African majority (eigh ty percent) . The Communist deus ex machina was Abdubrahman Babu, an adroit hustler who in 1957 rose to prominence in the Af ro-Shirazi Part y (A.S.P.) as General Secretary and immedi ately appealed demagogically to the black majori ty. The black A.S.P. quickl y won over the Zanzi bar Nationalist Party, controlled by the brown elite. Babu, a known Communist, ran a newsletter called Zanews on behalf of the New China Agency (Sin/wa) , reportedly receiving considerable loot from Peking. When Babu's more overt appeals to racism could not win the approva l of the A.S.P. executive committ ee, he re- signe d and promp tly formed the Com- munists' terrorist U.N.M.A. Party. The latter group infi ltrated the A.S.P., especially its youth section, and wooed the Zanzibar Federation of Progressive Trade Unions, calling for African So- cialism. Thus, on the eve of indepen- dence in Januar y 1964, the island was torn with dissension between the A.S.P. and the Z.NP., and the revolutionary picture looked bright. T he Af ro-Shirazi Part y was backed by Moscow whi le Peking used the Zanzibar Nationalist Party. This was a deal that would have made Mr. and Mrs. Jack Sprat envious. Funds having been made available from you-know-who, "experts" were tra ined in Moscow, Peking, and Havana for the new world a'cornin. T he Brit ish, 63 eager to get the lodestone from around their incr easingly scrawny imperial neck, ignored the warning of their police officers that a coup was coming. On Janu ar y 9, 1964, the tipoff came when Ko Liang, Babu 's Red Chinese "advisor" crossed the forty miles from Dar es Salaam to Zanzibar. On Janu ary eleventh came Der Tag. The Commu- nist "Fi eld Marshal" John Okello, a Red origi nally from Ugand a ( where another Red, Dr. Milton Obote, now holds sway as Pr esident by virt ue of a later coup that claimed fifteen thousand lives) , seized power with six hundred guerrillas, mostly from Tanzani a. A Revolutionar y Council was set up com- posed of A.S.P. and U.M.M.A. Part y leaders and a People's Republic was pro- claimed. Karume became Pr esident and Babu became Minister of Foreign Affairs and National Defense. A fort- night later , after ten thousand were slaughtered by the Red Gu ards, the British High Commissioner and the American Charge d' Affair es were ex- pelled and whi te newsmen ousted. The peace of the cemetery prevailed. About this time an attempted mut iny fome nted in neighbor ing Tanzania (t hen Tanganyika) was thwarted by the int ervention of British troops as a gesture of Commonwealth solidarity. T his even extended to Zanzibar where Britain recognized the bloody Revolu- tionary Council and extended economic aid, even though the deposed Prime Minister and nine of his Ministers, elec- ted by the peopl e, had been thrown into prison-without trial, of cours e-where they still vegetate Four months later came the union of T angany ika and Zanzibar, although the latt er has largely honored it in the breach , and visitors are now barred - especially newsmen. Censorship is understandably rigid. The prisons are packed with two thousand people from the "wrong" side and subjected to typical Red tortures. Where the old, bad 64 colonialists never had more than two hundred administrators on the two islands, their successors have installed 600 Ch inese, 190 East Germa ns, 100 Russians, and some Bulgar ians. There are four thousand men in Karume's army, trained by an 150- man Chinese mil itary mission, wh ich also sends instructors of subversion and guerr illa fighting to adjoining countri es, and offers postg rad uate courses in Com- munism and the wr itings of Mao Tse- tung. The Red Chinese have not only imported quantiti es of ligh t ar ms but also numerous Chinese lady Comrades to be marri ed off to likely Zanzibaris. and they all diligentl y study Swahili. The Russian Comrades control the Zanzibar defenses, which is fitting in view of Soviet plans for domination of the Indian Ocean. Lik ewise they control the harb or and inspect all imports and exports. Their man Friday is Abdulla Hanga, former Vice Pr esident of Zan- zibar, and so pro-Soviet that one of his wives is Russian. How fare Zanzibar and Pemba after four years of "independence" ? Hunger is endemic, except among the Establ ish- ment cadres and the Communist inter- lopers, with bananas up from two shi llings to fifteen shillings a bunch and baskets of cassavas risen from three shillings to over fifteen. Salt is very scarce. So is meat (so much so that Karurne had to send to Tanga to pur- chase fresh beef for hi s son' s wedding) . . Forced labor is the rule on both island s, and peopl e in their seventies have to hit the ball - or else. Many Pemba people spend their nights in the bush for fear of the customary midnight arrests first popularized by Stalin. Having given orders to "kill all white pri soners," and having declared that there will be no free elections for fifty years, Karume has furt her advised the devout Moslems to quit praying to Allah, who can't hel p them, and to bow to Mao Tse-tung, who can. - - AMERICAN OPINION FROM LATIN AMERICA HAROLD LORD VARNEY THE STATE Department has long been dangling a Latin American Com- mon Market as the next important step in our plans for Latin America. In 1961, we promoted the launching of a pilot project called the Central Amer- ican Common Market, putting $52 mil - lion into the experiment - at least a third of its initial resources. Early in July, President Johnson's vacation in Tex as was interrupted by a distress call from President Fidel Sanchez Hernan- dez of EI Salvador. The news was bad: T he Common Market was staggering on the ropes, and unless mor e U.S. money could be pumped into the thing it might very well collapse. President Johnson agr eed to make a trip to San Salvador to meet with the five Central American Pr esident s. He brought with him a contribution for the Common Market amounting to $30 mill ion and a pledge of $35 million in loans. Still, the trip amounted to no mor e than another of Mr. Johnson's public relations gestures. It solved ab- solutel y nothing. You see, the problem in Central America (and South Amer- ica as well) is not high intramural tari ff barriers, but low world prices for export commodities (coffee, cotton, sugar, and bananas) . What the five Central Amer- ican nations were really worr ied about was America's announced trade quotas which wi ll squeeze them out of the rich U.S. ma rket. Thus, President Johnson's visit did no more than sweep the real dust under the rug. Of course Mr . Johnson did have an opportunity to deliver anot her of his speeches on the need of U.S.-style "de- mocracy" in Latin America. The Cen- tral Americans listened, but they know they can't eat democracy. Adding to the SEPT EMBER, 1968 absurdity of the matter is the fact that three of the five Pr esidents who faced Mr. Johnson owe their offices to do- mestic military upri sings. All the gung- ho boasts of the Pr esident and Ambas- sador Sol Linowitz about the "economic democracy" of the future sounded pret- ty foolish at El Salvador, and the glam- our of a Common Market for South America is growing very dim indeed. Uruguay: The "Liberal" Welfare State is having rough going these days. Even in England, its Old Wo rld citadel, it is tottering. Harold Wilson, sitting in the chair of the Winston Ch urchill who once declared that he had not come to power to preside over the dissolution of the British Empire, is now officiating over the dissoluti on of Great Britain it- self. In the Western Hemisphere, the sick man of "Li beralism" is Uruguay. Once a rich country, Uruguay has long been gr ipped by the madness of Fabian concepts. One of these has been a dangerous euphoria concern ing Com- munism. Accordingly, Uruguay is one of the few South American countries whe re the Communist Party has not been outlawed. It has members in the National Assembly; it has been allowed to establish a tight control over the Na- tiona l Workers Confederation, Uru- guay 's trade union movement; and, Montevideo has long been a sanctuary for agents of the International Commu- nist Conspi racy, and a dist ribution point for Red publications . The Communists are now moving most effectively to take advantage of Uruguay's economic crisis. They are playing on the fact that Uruguay has established such a heavy overload of Stat e emplo yees and Welfare benefi- 65 ciari es that the countr y is collapsi ng at the strain : Some 250,000 of Uruguay's 900,000 wage earners are employed by the State or by State-owned industries; inflat ion is eating up the nation 's econ- omy ; and, d uring the past year, the cost of living has risen 130 percent. The death of President Oscar Gestido last Decembe r aggravated the situation. His successor, Jorge Pacheco Areco, took over a derelict nat ion on the ropes. Lacking Gestido's prestige, Pacheco has been unabl e to enforce the austerity pol- icies necessary to prevent total economic chaos. The politicians in the Assembly, like their prototypes in Washington, are fearful of the political reaction of the nation's army of pensioners and relief- ers. On July first, President Pacheco de- clared martial law. The Communists ignored it and instituted a one-day gen- eral st rike of the National Workers Federation . Meanwhile, law enforce- ment has broken down and a nihilist revolution has begun in the streets of Mont evideo. Guatemala: The terror has eased in Guatemala, although it may be onl y a temporary lull before the holocaust. Pr esident Cesar Mendez Montenegr o, who in March declared a state of siege and suspension of the Constitution, has now revoked his emergency measures and even successfull y dismissed three top officers of the Army who repre- sented a threat to his Revolutionary Part y. Apparently Mendez now feels sure enough of himself to attempt to deal with the Communist guerrillas without an overt Army alliance. But, as there is nothing in Mendez' past to in- dicate that he has sufficient fortitude to effectively deal with the Commu- nists, this is very perilous indeed. Brazil : The New Left student upri sings whi ch have thi s year swept through many other parts of the world have now struck Brazil just as we predicted in our 66 SCOREBOARD issue. Leftist students have been chafing under the strict controls which the Administrations of President Humbert o Castello Branco and now of Arthur Costa e Silva have imposed on the uni versiti es - controls which have prevented Communist-led student or- ganizations from functioning openl y on the campuses. To get around these requirements, Communist and other Lefti st students have formed ad hoc organizations built around specific educational grievances. Politics and anti-regime activities have been bootlegged through these unoffi- cial organizations. The particular target has been Mini ster of Education Tarso Dutra. By mid-June, the New Left organiza- tions felt strong enough to go into the streets with turbulent demonstrations. The worst of these was in Rio de Janeiro where the demonstrations took an ugly anti-American form, with two thousand students marching to attack the U.S. Embassy and being detoured by the po- lice. Some damage to the Embassy was done, and onl y mass arrests of students prevented the rioters from setting up barricades in the center of the city. On June twent y-sixth a march of ten thou- sand Leftists was staged on Avenida Rio Branco, wit h many teachers and priests among the demonstrators. The Government did not interfere, but the Army was alerted and in readiness. All thi s agitation has not weakened the anti-Communist position of Pres- ident Costa e Silva. He has the solid backing of the armed forces and, as long as they stand firm, the Far Left in Brazil can only fume . The same wave of student protests has also spilled over into Argentina, though the demonstrations there have not been as bold as in Brazil. Anti-re- gi me marches, mostly by students, have been staged in Buenos Aires, Cordoba, and Rosario. They have as yet had lit- tle influence on the Government. - - AMERICAN OPINION FROM WASHINGTON REED BENSON AND ROBERT LEE THE GUN-cONTROL legislation which has been promoted by the anti-gun ele- ments in Congress reminds us of the Chinese proverb which suggests that it is foolish to run when you are on the wrong road. Those who claim to be- lieve that gun registration or licensing will significantly relieve the burden of crime in our nation, or prevent the as- sassination of political leaders, are travel- ing the wrong road. And not only are the proposals they advocate foolish- they are dangerous as well. Gun-control laws simply tend to de- crease the ratio of lawfully-held fire- arms to illegally-held firearms, and the reason is quite simple: Law-abiding cit- izens abide by laws, and criminals do not. Scripps-Howard reported recently that in Great Britain, where hardly anyone owns a gun, an amnesty was declared in 1961 during which those who possessed guns illegally could turn them over to the authorities without being prosecuted. Approximately seventy thousand guns were surrendered. Four years later, in 1965, another amnesty was declared, and forty thousand additional guns were turned over. That means that, as a mat- ter of public record, in tiny Britain which virtually prohibits private gun ownership, at least a hundred thousand guns were being held illegally . It is of some significance to note that it is not even possible in some instances to keep guns out of the hands of hard- ened criminals already in jail. Not too long ago, for instance, two murderers escaped from the maximum security area of San Quentin Prison using a machine-gun they had clandestinely manufactured inside the prison. And more recently, on June 11, 1968, four SEPTEMBER, 1968 convicts in the Atlanta Federal Peni- tentiary, one of the nation's three max- imum .secur ity penal institutions, were able to keep police at bay while holding twenty-three hostages at gun-point fol- lowing an attempted escape. Now, you just know that there are gun-control laws in effect at the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary! In areas where there are gun restric- tions on law-abiding citizens, the crim- inal element can, if nothing else, resort to the manufacture of home-made "zip" guns. This has been more than illus- trated in the State of New York, which has perhaps the strictest gun-control pro- visions of any state in the Union. As Senator Roman Hruska (R.-Nebraska) pointed out on the floor of the Senate on May 15, 1968: .. . the New Y ork State Legisla- ture' s joint committee on crime re- ported that in 1966 the use of home- made zip gll11S exceeded the misuse of rifles and shotguns in murders, robberies, and assanlts in N ew Y ork State. Misuse of rifl es and shotguns in crimes totaled 705 as against a zip glm total of 976. This is a State which has had the Sullivan Law for over 50 years. And a further indication that crim- inals simply ignore licensing and regis- tration requirements is contained in the following statistic cited by Congress- man James B. Utt (R.-California) in a House speech on June 17, 1968: In New York Cit)', which also has one of the strictest gun control laws in our Nation, requiring a police pel" mit to possess a handglm even in yOIIY 67 and twenty-one are fully qualified to prop erly exercise the franchi se to run our nation. Curious. Ve ry curious. As another illustrat ion of inconsisten- cy, note that Attorney General Ramsey Clark has called for the registration of all firearms and the licensing of all owners, because-he alleges-it will re- duce the crime problem. But the At- torney General has also called for com- plete abolition of capit al punishment, and has publicl y refused to enforce pro- visions of the ant i-crime bill which make it possible, under court order, to use wiretapping against hardened criminals and members of the crime synd icate. He says he fears that such a measure may invade their privacy. Attorney Ge n- eral Clark apparentl y has no such reser- vations about invading the privacy of the milli ons of law-abiding Americans who lawfull y and Constitutionally pos- sess firearms for sport or self-defense. When the gun-control "Li berals" tell you that their real concern is the re- duction of crime in America, don't you believe it! Their gun-cont rol proposals represent just anot her step on the road to peopl e control in America. Our Founding Fathers inserted the Second Amendment int o the Bill of Rights for a reason. As Pro fessor Susan Huck has put it, "They were not afraid to trust the people with firearms because they were not selling out their country." Gun-control proposa ls such as those being forwarded by the Admi nistration and Senators Thomas Dodd (De-Con- necticut) and Joseph Tydin gs (D.- Mar yland) should be opposed vigor- ously. As one of our AMERICAN OPINION colleagues has said : "A blast aimed at criminals which hits maybe fift y mil - lion law-abiding citizens is a sorry piece of marksmanship on its own." own home, in 1966 not one of that city's gun-involved homicides was committed by a licensed f irearm. So you see, gun registration affects law-abiding citizens - not criminals. It is somewhat analogous to the gov- ernment's attempts to control narcotic s. Robert Welch has not ed: "The Federal Government cannot even pr event any- body willing to pay the price from get- ting heroin, when there is almost no legitimate use of heroin to be considered in connection with law enforcement. Yet, we are to believe that it can stop criminals from obt aining guns, when the legitimate uses for firearms are legion. " Now, here is an excellent poi nt to keep in mind when you hear the anti- gun lobby claim that a gun-control law would have saved the life of Senator Robert Kennedy: Congressman Utt pointed out in that key speech to the House on June seventeenth that the ac- cused assassin of Senator Kenn edy vio- lated at least five section s of California's stringent gun control law. W hat we need is not stricter laws but stricter en- forcement of the laws we already have. The hypocrisy of those promoting fed- eral gun controls is flagrant. For ex- ample, the gun-control provision of the omnibus crime bill wh ich is now the law of the land prohib its the sale of handgu ns to persons under the age of twent y-one, presumably on the grounds that persons under that age are not re- spons ible enough to handl e such fire- arms. But many of those who voted for this provision are now leading the fur ious cl amor for a Constitutional Amendment that would lower the vot- ing age to eighteen, pr esumably on the ground that persons between eighteen CRACKER BARREL------------ EAGLE ROCK-Befor e you decide to marry a genius, remember th at t he wife of Leo Tolst oy had to copy his immense novel, W ar and Peace, in long hand- seven ti mes. EAGLE ROCK- Ins tead of campaigning on ocher polit icians' st upi dities , a candidate should try t o get elected on hi s own. -JAC K MOF FITT 68 AMERICAN OPINION FROM THE SOUTH TOM ANDERSON THERE ARE so many images of Rich- ard M. Nixon: the anti-Communist hatchet-man who believes that the end justifies the means; the ruthless cam- paigner with an instinct for the jugular; the sweet and pure, considerate, moder- ate, indefatigable statesman; the pal of the late Scottie, "Checkers," whose TV appearance (Nixon's, not Checkers!) so unfairly prevented him from winning elections. Which is the real Nixon? The answer IS simple. There ain't no real Nixon. Having once been a Republican for twenty-four hours, a skeleton in my closet to which I made public confession in AMERICAN OPINION for November 1966, I suppose I automatically qualified for Richard Nixon's mailing list. For a year or so, or so it seems, I have received a form letter once a month from Nixon. With it there has regularly been a "bal- lot" asking us recipients to vote on where we stand on the issues of the day. How else can Mr. Nixon make up his mind? This sort of thing indicates only too well that Richard Nixon is not a statesman but an I.B.M. machine; not a moral man seeking to choose right over wrong, but a computer calculating the angles. Of course, like the I.B.M. computers, there's a "new" model Nixon every now and then-an improved calculating ma- chine in the same plastic package. Re- member the "old" Nixon on his first TV debate with John Kennedy? He's the one who said: "Senator Kennedv and I agree on most of the issues, w ~ just disagree on methods. " Nixon lost it right there. Those two agr eed on more things than any husband and wife I ever met. Remember how in 1960 both Nixon and Kennedy proclaimed that one an- SEPTEMBER, 1968 swer to our farm problem was to sub- sidize needy industries like General Motors to permit them to start factories in rural areas? A Nixon man I know told me he was going to get into that himself, manufacturing the front end of horses and shipping 'em to Washington for final assembly. Despite the fact that in 1960 Mr. Nixon waged the most famous me-too campaign since Brutus answered "me too" to Ceasar, I have a few friends who seem to honestly believe that the new Nixon won't do that! Maybe so. Maybe this time Dicky won't make a midnight ride to New York and then wat er down a conservative Republ ican Platform to suit Rockefeller. But, don't bet on it. Here in the South, folks figured it was the same old Nixon when he joined the mob of Yankee riffraff, carpetbag- gers, political prostitutes, scalawags, and crooks who descended upon Atlanta on April ninth to capitalize on the murder of Martin Luther King. Few failed to notice that "the new Nixon" also marched off for a political performance at Robert Kennedy's funeral-just like the old Nixon would have done. Of course, "the new Nixon" did not attend the funeral of Governor Lurleen Wal- lace! With Dick, it was politics above honor as usual. Some come to funerals to mourn and others come to make sure, but in Nou- o veau Nixon's case, he went to the King and Kennedy funerals to make votes. He ignored the Wallace funeral for the same reason. But "the new Nixon" must still be using the old computer, because the voters in the South are now firmly convinced that where "grave" decisions are concerned Richard Nixon has shown himself to be gi ven to the same old ex- 69 pediency for which he is so justly fa- mous. He missed the wrong funeral. I used to say the Republican Party could be saved, hut that saving the Dem- ocrat Party was sorta like trying to make a lady out of Liz Taylor : It's too late now. I still think the Republican Party can be saved. But not by the likes of Richard Nixon. Depending on Nixon to restore our Constitutional Republic is like depending on the National Coun- cil of Churches to reverse itself and de- fend Christianity. Okay, so Nixon is less evil than John- son. Practically everybody is! But what have these lesser-of-evils ever gotten us? I'll tell you. Lesser-of-evils got us Eisen- hower , who Norman Thomas said brought us further toward socialism than even Harry Truman. Vife are too far gone for foot-dragging or small vic- tories. We must win or lose on prin- ciples, something that most politicians of both Parties consider as irrelevant as the Hairy Ainu. Richard Nixon is no conservative. In domestic affairs he supports every col- lectivist scheme known to man. When it comes to foreign policy, Nixon is farther to the Left than was even the late President Kennedy. The day before the fourth debate between Vice President Nixon and Senator John F. Kennedy, the Senator made a strong statement calling for United States aid to anti-Communist Cubans willing to free their homeland. Nixon called Ken- nedy's recommendation "dangerously irresponsible," and said: "If we were to follow that [Kennedy's] recommenda- tion. .. we would lose all of our friends in Latin America, we would be con- demned in the United Nations.... The charter of the United Nations, its pream- ble, Article I and Article II, provide that there should be no interference by one nation in the internal affairs of another." In other words, Nixon obviously thinks that in dealing with the Com- 70 munists the United Nations Charter should determine our foreign policy, overruling our own Constitution and Congress and preventing us from de- fending ourselves against a threat on our doorstep! Pretty conservative, right? And, it was no fluke-he meant it. When Senator Barry Goldwater advo- cated an unequivocal program to bring about the downfall of Castro through a complete economic blockade of Com- munist Cuba, Nixon declared: "It is foolish to talk about an economic block- ade of Cuba unless we can convince our allies to go along with us." What allies? By allies, of course, Dick may have meant Russia. He has even said, accord- ing to an Associated Press dispatch of February 3, 1964, that Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev is without qualifica- tion the most able all-around world leader today. Khrushchev was responsi- ble for more murders than Hitler, but apparently Nixon's computer wasn't programmed for morality. Yes, Nixon has experience. So has Lyndon Johnson. Our crying need is not experience but integrity! It reminds me of the time when General-pardon the expression-Grant expressed his con- tempt for a certain officer. and another general protested that the man in ques- tion had been through ten campaigns. Grant replied: "General, so has that mule yonder, but he's still a jackass." This time, folks, you anti-Commu- nist patriots don't have to vote against somebody. You can vote for George Wallace. The perennial "aginners" are like the bar fly who fell asleep in his chair. Another drunk rubbed a bit of limburger cheese on his moustache. The limb urger victim awoke, staggered up to the bartender and whispered : "Ain't it awful? The whole world stinks!" George Wallace smells good. Especial- ly after a whiff of warmed-over Nixon and the ripe odor of Lyndon and Hum- phrey Dumpty. AMERICAN OPINION FROM POETRY EDITED BY E. MERRILL ROOT GEORGE HERBERT (1593-1632) is one of England's great Christian poets. His religious insights into the nature of man's soul in its relation to God are unique and subtle; his poetic magic in casting the golden net of beauty over the golden bird of life (so wild, so shy, so elusive) is superb. For the conserva- tive his vision of reality and his noble and timeless art are precious and pro- found: God must have thanked George Herbert for such lyrics; and we can thank God for them and for George Herbert. THREE POEMS BY GEORGE HERBERT Virtue Sweet day, so cool, so calm, so bright- The bridal of the earth and sky! The dew shall weep thy fall tonight, For thou must die. Sweet rose, whose hue angry and brave, Bids the rash gazer wipe his eye, Thy root is ever in its grave, And thou must die. Sweet spring, full of sweet days and roses, A boxwhere sweets compacted lie, My music shows ye have your closes, And all must die. Only a sweet and virtuous soul, Like seasoned timber, never gives; But though the whole world turn to coal, Then chiefly lives. The Elixir Teach me, my God and King, In all things Thee to see; SEPTEMBER, 1968 And what I do in anything To do it as for Thee. All may of Thee partake; Nothing can beso mean Which with his tincture, "for Thy sake," Will not grow bright and clean. A man that looks on glass, On it may stay his eye; Or if he pleaseth, through it pass And then the heaven espy. A servant with this clause Makes drudgery divine: Who s'weepsa room as for Thy laws, Makes that and the action fine. From "The Flower" And now in age I bud again, After so many deaths I live and write: I once more smell -the dew and rain, And relish versing: 0 my only Light! It cannot be That I am he On whom Thy tempests fell all night. COEXISTENCE In this garden so many feet have walked with mine! Under these very trees, over these stones . . . I have seen the sky in the evening, and at sunrise Warming with its crimson this house now called too old. Not only old . . . too large for two alone (How magically bulldozers change one house to five! . . . Shall we accept a newer house and call it home?) In time we might forget the fragrant white 71 And the caged bird sang, still sang; But her not es grew hard and pale As sometimes the summer rain Congeals into stones of hail. But there are signs a rising storm May blow the sand away! -JAMES SA NTORELLI But Joy flew singing back To fold her wings and rest In my heart , my opened heart: Her cage became her nest. - E. MERRILL R OOT "I have lost her forever," I said. Yet I would not close my heart: How could I close it again With its red walls rent apart? So I prisoned the free bird fast In the coil of those crimson bars. (I s not the earth so held In her vaster cage of stars?) Then Joy flew toward the sun (That fountain whose waters are light) : She sang in a shadowless dawn Past t he shut tle of day and night. The bird still sang, though caged; But her song was not a song, As the music of rain is changed When 'the hailstones beat and throng. THE OPENED HEART The heart is a crimson cage For Joy, the bright-plumed bird ; Should I open the red bars wide ? Being fearful , I said "Absurd! " At last, lest her heart should break, I broke my own heart wide: "The sky is your home. Go free. Fl y where you will," I cried. Of lemon bush . .. the purple-clustered VIlle Of grapes . . . the hordes of apricots all golden As the apples of He sperides, and as rich with pride, For Atlas never loved a garden more, we know. The Press heaps sand to blind their eyes, The T.V. sand is gray; CRACKER BARREL-------------:- But a mocker sings from the top anten- na-WIfe . .. The fragile scarlet pimpernel still grows Beside the pool where moon and stars at night Reflect their peace on coexisting tree and stone Of this old home that we have loved a while. - E M M A L'HoMMEDIEU F ROST SING ME A ROSE While warning thunders roll from the drum The wind is beating; While to the fortr ess of the earth Red leaves are fleeting; While from the barr en battl efield Sun is retr eating; And before advancing Winter Begins repeating Hi s iron-knuckled prose. . . . Love, sing me a morning rose Whose flame of courage will Be light frost cannot kill. -MARY M. P RONOVOST OSTRICHES The ostrich is a foolish bird That hides its head in sand; And "Liberals" are much like this In our Great Wonderland. I EAGLE ROCK-{;etting a candidat e t o take a sta nd on t oday's issues is like r rying to nail a custar d pie t o th e wall. -JACK MOF FITT 72 AMERICAN OPINION FOR STUDENTS On Black Flags And Red Flags E. Merrill Root is the brilliant author of two best-selling books, Collectivism on the Campus and Brainwashing in the High Schools. Professor Root may also be America's greatest living poet. His work has ap- peared in Human Events , Christian Economics, Blue- book, National Review, Freeman, New York Times, Lit erary Digest, New York Herald Tribune, and elsewhere . WE LIVE in an hour when the youths who make the publicity of TV and the headlines of Life and Look are those who fly, over the Sorbonne or over Columbia, the Red Flag of Marx or the Black Flag of Bakunin. There are, fortunately, other young Americans who devote themselves to sanity and free- dom ; but, of them, one hears hardly a whisper in the kept Pr ess of the Estab- lishment. What you are about to read is add ressed to all of these-to the young who seek a "brave new world" that is actually a cliched old world of slavery, and to the young who seek a renaissance of the timeless spirit of essential reality. Perhaps it is naive to suppose that the devotees of the Black Flag and the Red Flag will read my words, or will heed me if they do. They seem, alas, to tolerate nothing but the image of their own dated perver sion. Nonetheless, we do not exclude them. As for those young Americans yet devoted to sanity and freedom, I hope that they will find in what I am about SEPTEMBER, 1968 to say here something to nourish and strengthen them, though I know that, being individualists, they will (and should) differ in some things and bite each idea to test its mettle. Most especially, I would write to un- committed youth , to youth in search of reality, to youth who would find some coherent pattern amid the mist and hum of this lowland of modernity. I would write to you all as one man to another, as one mind to another, as one who seeks truth by exploring what is real. And I would ignore, as I hope you will ignore, all mechanical criteria I of mere youth or mere age, never assuming either that life begins at forty or that life ends at thirty. I say to you young people of America and the world: Let us forget all superficial tags of "young" or "old," let us even forget the easy labels of "Left" and "Right," and let us seek together what all men of good will and clear reason should seek : The thin gs that are, the truth that abides. I WE HEAR MUCH today about the "ge nerat ion gap." That gap, however, is too often made a thing of mere quantity of years, not a thing of quality of being. The quanti ty of years a man has lived means nothing till the ancient questions are answered : "What have you done with those years ? What have those years done for you ?" The quality of our years is what matt ers. A teeny-bopper who goes int o a tizzy over the Beatles or the Rolling Stones does indeed find a gap between himself and Rembrand t or 73 Goya; but it is a gap not of quantity of years but of qualit y of being. "Ripeness is all," as Shak espeare says. And, though Sidney Lani er and John Keats died "young," there was no "generation gap" between them and Shakespeare or Goethe who lived to the fifties or the eighti es. There was no such "gap" be- cause they all lived in the realm of time- less qualit y. The wise and humorous "old man," who lives with every inch and ounce and atom of his being, is closer to the wise "young man," who lives with the arterial blood of body and mind, than he is to the "senior citizens" who play shuffleboard in the retirement colonies of St. Pet ersburg or subsist on Scotch in the saloons of suburban Da rien. The "gap," you see, is not deter mined by the qu antity of years but by the qu ality of t he human beings invol ved. There is a gap, irr espective of age, but it is between the fool and the wise man , between the brash and discourteous and the courteous and humble, between the human mistakes and the human achieve- ments. In the life of a great people whil e its life is valid, as in classical Chi na, the gay young blade, Li Po, who waded into the river to clasp the moon (though he could not swim) and died with the moon in his arms, could understand and be understood by the poetical old- ster, Chang Chi-ho, who was known as "the old fisherman of the mists and wa ters" and who put no bait on his hook, "his abject not being to catch fish." Fire is fire- no matt er how long it burns . T he "old" fire on the tomb of the unknown soldier is closer to the "young" fire kindled for their country by American soldiers fighting and dying with honor in Vietnam than either waft of flame is to the ersatz incendiarism of, say, the Pr esident of the National Stu- dent Association. Even the "now-rest " of the Now Generation would find a tri p with Socrates at fift y more int eresting 74 than a trip with a fool of fifteen . . . I unless they were fools too. Any "gap" between the ge nerations is as foolish as a "gap" between the blossom of May and the apple of September. Actually there is a greater gap between the "sophisticate" of eighteen and the unspoiled child of five than ther e is be- tween that child and a William Blake at fifty. It is as William Saroyan, in his one indubitable masterpi ece, Th e Hu- man Comedy, wrote of little Ul ysses: He came qllickly and qltietly and stood beside her, then went to the hell nest to look f or eggs. He [onnd aile. He looked at it a moment, picked it lip, brongb: it to his mother and very carefllily banded it to her, by which he meant what no man can g1leSJ and 110 child can remember to tell. There is the very magic and lost Ede n of childhood - and how far, how far, how far it is from the sophisti- cated artificiality of the professional "flower child" ! The "sophisticate" of eighteen may have grown "knowledge- able" and smart and clever at the ex- pense of his direct spontaneous self, and be an insufferable mental brat-but this will be as apparent to the unspoiled child as surely as to the vital old man. Note that the teeny-bopper gone to college calls it a "poem" to write : Only knowing that within will lay what witholtt I have not . . . and there shall be no satisfaction no de- pnration nor sal vation - for the withi n continually moves [urtber toward a distant internal . . . .* But the child of three speaks simply in poetry from the living "wi thin" of his being - "The noise went by so fast *From Death : kinds , two, by Sean O'Toole, The Campus Forum, EI Camino College, Cali- fo r ni a, Issue No.2, March 30, 1964. AMERI CAN OPINION I couldn't see it. .. ," or "The puppy wasn't biting me at all - he was just tasting me." This is not a matter of age; it is a matter of something lost out of life - and something added of syn- thetic smartness and neon lights. Some- thing has happened to youth (from the outside), something intellectualized (yet minus intellect), something artifi- cial. The child's conscious and sub- conscious are integral and harmonious and one; life speaks directly to him and through him. But the teeny-bopper gone to college has fractured and splintered consciousness from subconsciousness (and superconsciousness) and tortured life into artificiality by draining the blood from the mind and making in- tellect kosher. The gap is not a necessary adjunct of "age" but a loss and a destruc- tion that has fractured quality. The trouble with life today is that this slick artificiality, begun among col- lege teeny-boppers, persists as a per- petual adolescence in people who are older. It is the great deficit of the Now Generation. It is not due to quantity (or lack of quantity) in years, but to a lack of quality in being. C. G. Jung puts it best. He asks of the psychological counselor what he can do when "he sees only too clearly why his patient is ill; when he sees that it arises from his having no love, but only sexuality; no faith, because he is afraid to grope in the dark; no hope, because he is dis- illusioned by the world and by life; and no understanding, because he has failed to read the meaning of his own existence ." (Modern Man in Search at a Soul, Pp. 225-226.) That is the gap that divides the Instant Generation from Timeless Man. It is not a gap in age; it is a gap vital and psychological. It is the modern distemper of splitt ing mind from soul. Even D. H. Lawrence, in his genuine but darkly seen way, saw this sickness of modern man - the fracture between abstract cerebral mind and the instinc- SEPTEMBER, 1968 tive wisdom of "the dark blood." He says, in Studies in Classic American Literature : "You can idealize or in- tellectualize. Or, on the contrary, you can let the dark soul in you see for it- self." Exactly! The soul, of course, is light as well as dark; but it is surely dark in its mystery, its magic, its depth, and it should be left alone and not tortured into artificial cleverness by psychedelic lighting and a perverting electric amplifier. And today it is so tortured among the college teeny-bop- pers. That is the true gap in the lives of the Now Generation. You want integrity? So do I. But in- tegrity means wholeness, and wholeness is a quality of the soul (which modern man must find if he is to survive), of the Inner Kingdom, of the fruitful union of sub-and-super-consciousness with the serene reason of the true consciousness . This has been rendered difficult for us largely by the Freudian superficiality that saw the "subconscious" as some- thing rather dirty and bestial and dark (yet something to which we should give full play), as the nether stew of ir- rational impulses, as something nasty and base. On the contrary, the sub-and- super-consciousness, as in the instincts of the vital animal and the intuitions of the child and the genius, is a noble and fruitful thing that should and can work in harmony with the reason of the sur- face consciousness. The child so lives; the philosopher (not the "professor of philosophy") so lives; the poet or the saint whose roots of genius go down into the depths so lives. The man who really lives finds his center in his protopsyche, But you will never find integrity when you live by rationality instead of reason; when you libel the dark side of your own moon, yet give its splinter aber- rations full whim and license; when you split yourself into discord . The real gap is not between the generations but be- tween modern man and timeless man. The "generation gap" as such is a cliche 75 to excuse arrogance and ignorance on the one side or to excuse patronage and arrogance on the other. "The generation gap ?" Let 's discard that stupid phrase, that hoary super- ficiality, that easy escape from thought, that pother of nonsense! Seek rather the integrit y that binds the generations into the noble search for life and life ever more abundantly. If you must stress the generation gap, you narrow and destroy your own life. If you are to be useless and untrust- worthy once you pass thirty, you had better get a pistol in spite of Senator Dodd, to celebrate the dawn of your fourth decade not with a whimper but a bang. But this denies all richness, all depth and width and inner wealth in your life. It might even deprive you - and the world - of the glory of a Shakespeare. After all, Shakespeare had not written King Lear or The Tempest when he was thirty.... II FORGET AGE and concentrate on ti me- less reality. The questi on is - wha t do you truly seek? If your adventure is to fly the Red Flag or the Black Fl ag, you seek to wallow in cliches, in old gags, in the outmoded and the reactionary. You think I am prejudiced ? Listen, then, to a darli ng of the Left , to Bertrand Rus- sell, who visited Soviet Russia and summed it up in such postjudices as these: . . . a closed tyranni cal bureancracy wi th a spy system more elaborate than th e Tzar' s and an aristocracy as in - solent and lInfeeling, composed of A me ricanized Jews [sic !). No basis of liberty remai ns, in th ought or speech or action. . . . Imagine you r- sel f go vem ed in every detail by a mix - tnre of Sidney If/ ebb lind Rufus Isaacs, and )'OU wi ll have a picture of modern Russia. 76 And if you say: "But this is the old age of Communism, and China and Cuba are not so!" - you mistake the truth. For he so wrote when Commu- nism in Russia was "young," just after World War I. And it is necessarily so. For ownership in common as an ideal, and dictatorship of the few in practise, are very, very old concepts. They go back to pr imitive tribes, to aboriginal peoples, to corruption of life into collectivism, which goes sadly back across the centuries. And as for anarchy and the Black Flag, that goes back to the origin of the perennial scourges of all history, the Catilines of histor y, the nihilists who live on loot as long as it lasts and pre- pare the way for the repressive emperors who as men on horseback liquidate the men they have driven into the gutters. The Red Fl ag in modern times is as old as that mid-Victorian with whiskers , Karl Marx; the Black Flag is as old as Mikhail Bakunin, Marx 's contemporary and enemy (who sought the same Com- munist ends in a different mood and by different means) . To seek either is to go back, to go backward, to retro- gress to the chaos of anarchism or the ancient nigh t of Communism. Free men and sane men wish, rather, to transcend time and so to create eternal thi ngs within time. The men who discover fire and invent the wheel , who fashion speech i nto the alphabet, who with Pasteur conquer rabies, who as law-givers create a Constitution to keep men free, who freeze music- into the architecture of great buildings , who create beaut y on canvas or preserve wisdom on vellum, who know with Archimedes that given the proper lever and a place to stand one can move the world , who with Atlas bear the world upon their shoulders . . . these are neither "old " nor "young" nor "Left" nor "Right" - they are t he integral s and the cr eators. But the nihilists, or the monolithic spiders of the Total Stat e, the Bureaucrats and the Power Boys, AMERICAN OPINION are old, old, old - cliches ambulant, old gags who reckon themselves real, hoary cobwebs rampant. T hey turn their faces away from "Eternity's sunrise" (as William Blake put it), they splash the world with the blood of the Red Flag, they call in the croaking ravens of the Black Flag. And, carr ying this to its conclusion of logic, those who march under these flags of reaction are not preparing or welcoming a brave new world, but wrapping their hate in the flags of savages. III IT IS GOOD for youth to desire a fairer world. l am as much against the present status quo of the world of man as any rebel anywhere. I do not uphold-s-what civilized mind could uphold ? - the status quo of man today - the mega- lopolis of Mayor John Lindsay or of Professor Harvey Cox, the smog and legislated poverty of Welfare, the crime made legal if committed by the "black" or the "poor," the alcohol and sleeping pills and LSD and "pot," the vapid TV and stultifying commercials, the slick sophistication of the Brainy Boys among "capitalists" in Playboy and Look and Lif e and Esquire and Fortune and the New Yorker, the compromisers who seek coexistence wi th Slave States like Soviet Russia and who lust to loose troops on free Rhodesia, the lakes fouled into cesspools of deat h, the men t urned out to past ure at sixty-five when their unique wisdo m is most needed in Aca- deme, the mass-univ er siti es where classes of a thousand are "lectured at" by invisible prof essors or subjected to audio-visual aids, and where "teachers" are shunted into "research," and instruc- tors still raw from graduate schools are turned loose on students, th e wars that we are forced to fight but not allowed to win, all the lies and cruelties of the Liberal Establis hment. . . . Carthago delenda est! SEPTEMBER, 1968 But wha t is the climate of t hat Est ab- lishment that I dislike as much as you do? It is rationalism, pragmatism, exis- tentialism - materialism and obsession wi th the Temporal Now uncriticized by God's Eternal Now - positivism and the worship of the Big and the Clever and the fashionable and the temporal and the secular. It is the climate of the rootless ignorance that supposes that history began with "science" and "democracy." It is the climate of forced integration of "races," willy-nilly, no matter what either race wants, but never the integration of mind and soul within the individuals of all races. It is the climate of belief t hat matter is a period after mind, not mi nd a question-mark after matter - physics but never meta- physics, biology reduced to necrology, chemis try that supposes it "expla ins" consciousness and is ignorant tha t consciousness discovers chemistry. It is the climate of the superficial fashion- able Camus who declares categorically : "I continue to believe that the world has no ultimate meaning." Yet, such is the "spiritual" climate of the status quo . And how can you create a fairer world of man until you find the potentia qua of living Nature and beyond it of the living God? You cannot criticize the Establi shment if you accept the invalid "values " of the Establish- ment . To criticize what is wrong and to create what is right you must tran- scend this world and enter the King- dom that is not of this world. Ratio nal- ism, relativism, existentialism, mate rial- ism - such are the valueless "values" that have resulted in the human "world" for which some yout hs blame their elders. But if these same yout hs still accept and carry out even more brashly these same "va lues," how can they create a different world? Ph ilosophy, met aphysics, the spirit , or their absence - these always determine the outer world. Until and unless you find the ageless and eternal spiri t of the potentia 77 qua , everything that you do will only italicize all that you rightly loathe in the status quo of human society today. To fashion from wreck and sediment a fairer world you must begin with light, with philosoph y, with coherent thought. And so I say to you: Discriminate, dis- criminate, and again discriminate! Be fastidious. Choose. Select. You see, the beginning of a true society lies not in society at all, but in the individu al. We have sought for some decades to cha nge society - and look at what we have done to society, look at the society we have - atoms, hard grains of glaze-pointed sand, fragments! As we have fractured mind from soul, so we have fractured society from com- muni ty and nation. Only individual s who feel responsibility and seek not "ri ghts" for themselves but right for their country can restore us to the "blissful seat of Eden." We have splintered the nation into what the Founding Fathers called "fac- tions" - into classes, fissured minorities and selfish, blind, mob-majorities, pres- sure groups, labor union or manufac- turers' associations, etc., etc. . . . Where is the one nation indivisible? Grains of sand, grains of sand . . . atoms . . . splinters . .. and the great winds blow, and we are blown with them. Only living individuals with living souls, who know t he integrity of noblesse oblige, who seek right more tha n "rights," who impose upon themselves responsibilities, who pursue the impossible dream in themselves, and not the unattainable world of treacle that is supposed to make "society" happy, can restore the nat ion and create a viable "society." Ortega y Gasset in his magn ificent Revolt of the Masses reveals the truth and the way: For tbere is no doubt that tbe most radical division that it is possible to make of bumanity is that which splits it into two classes of creatures: those 78 who make gl'eat demands on them- selves, piling up di f f iCltlties and duties; and those who demand nothing special of themselves, but f ol' whom to live is to be eoery moment what they all'eady are, with- ant imposing on themselves any ef f ol't tou/ard perf ection; mere blloys that fl oat on the waves. One need only add that these human buoys are forever calling on a perpetual was t guard to come and tow them ashore to Lollipop Land. And you do not "impose on yourself any effort toward perfection" by cultivat- ing off-beat beards, and letting your hair grow long, and drifting int o a psychedelic Nirvana, and indulging in vagrancy and flagrancy, and aping the compulsive masquerades of conformity to t he Now Groups. That is the stat us qu o of the off-beat. It is the playboyism of Shriners stand ing on their heads. True individuality will not come through eccentric habit s or gar bs or manners. Dress as men normally dr ess today, because your search is for inner differences and so you scorn outer dif- only distract from what is important about you. And do not join "groups" to "sit in" or "love in," the gang conformities of the pathetically unsure. Be alone, be alone, in the crowded city or the thronged college library. The way to the creative society is to shun mass, to avoid "social" groups and "reforms" and panaceas, but rather to seek within yourself the cosmos that is the healing of the chaos without you. Once a wise Indi an guide, sur prised by a blizzard while mil es from camp, told his despair- ing client : "Indian not lost: wigwam lost! " As long as the Indian is not lost the wigwam can be found. Let it be so with you in your wider world yet similar predicament! The world of "society" today is a chaos? - then be, yourself, a cosmos! AMERICAN OPI NION And if you are a cosmos, you are a center of light and life and love, a sun that, like all suns everywhere, makes light of his despair and so brings light to all his planets. "Shoulder the sky, my lad. ..." The great benefactor to society is not the activist for "social justice," but the individual who is justice in all he says and does. T he greatest benefactor to the life of the Negro was not Nat T urner, the revolutionist (God forgive him - I cannot), but George Was hingto n Car- ver, alone in his labora tory, discovering and using the secrets of Nature; alone in the fortress of his soul and his geni us. Alone, alone with Nature: alone with God ; alone, alone! Only so can you be with ot hers, creating for others; only so are you a cent er of light and power by which the world may live. Because he was alone, George Washingt on Carver could help his people, the A merican people. How much we owe him! But we wou ld owe nothing to him, and Ame rican Negroes would owe nothing to him, if he had been another busy- body, anot her "social" agitator, another Father Groppi in ebony. He helped society, as we too must, by finding himself. As Goet he said, you mus t be somebody before you can do anything. If yout h would have meaning for the world, it should go into the mountains and the deser ts and the islands and dwell there alone until it has something to give. Not the mountains and the deserts and the islands of geography, necessarily, but those of psychography. How wise was Zarathustra! - W hen Zaratbustra was thirty years old, he lef t his home and the lake of his home, and went int o the moun- tains. There he enjoyed his spirit and his solitilde, and f or ten )'ears did not weary of it. But at last his heart changed,-and rising one morning with the ros)' dawn, he went before the Still and spake linto it : SEPTEMBER, 1968 Thou great star.' What would be thy happiness if tbou hadst not those f or whom tbo sbinest! And so, like the sun, having generated his wealth of light and become himself a sun, he went back to the world to give what he had first created in himself, saYll1g : Lo.' I am weary of my wisdom, like the bee that hath gathered too much hone)'; I need hands out - stretched to take it . I ioould fain bestow and distribute, nnti! the wise have once more become joyous in their f olly, and the poor happy in their riches. But Zarathustra had gone first into solitude, and in his loneliness he dis- covered himself and so became not an ink-blot but a sun. And so must youth today. In patience, in loneliness, in soli- tude, in silence, youth must discover itself and learn to be. Only so, after apprenticeship to the years, after creation of quality, in its wisdo m and its power, perhaps it may do. Only from the fully charged clouds fall the lightnings of great deeds; only from the garnered and deep fountains can flow the rivers that never fail. IV L ONELI NESS AND ISOLAnON are a pre- requisite of our eventual communion and fellowshi p. But that loneliness is not a tearin g up of roots (the rose, the wheat, and the frui tful tree live by roots) , but a thrusting of those roots ever deeper int o the earth. In our deserts, our mountains, our islands (geographic or psychog raphic), we must draw our life from our land. The noble conti nent tha t is ours , the America that is the land we love, the mountai ns and the prairies and the oceans white with foam, these must be a living part of us; they nourish and 79 support and inspi re and give us a valid strength and joy. There is a mystical communion between the land where you live and the soul which you are. Your land is an alma mater, a cherish- ing mother, and it is ever wit h you, and about you, and in you - if you break your communion with it, you wither and die though you go on "living." "Starting from fish-shaped Paumo- nok," and loving "million-footed Man- hattan" and the lilacs that bloomed in a million door yards, Whitman nourished his genius . Poe filled his strange deep-purple poems with the landscapes of t he South. Sidney Lanier found his way to God t hrough the unique and mysterious marshes of Glynn. Winslow Homer nouris hed his genius on Caribbean wat ers or the surf- assaulted gray rock bastions of the coast of Mai ne. T horeau found his true phi losophy not in "civil disobedience" but in the Concord and Merrimac rivers and in the beloved waters of Walden. You may differ (as 1 do) wit h the contemporary politicians who disfigure contemporary politics. But the continent and the land that transcend them, and the generations of the great dead who are part of your love of America, and the traditions and the garnered wisdom and the genius that are a part of our heritage, these remain and abide. And these are the basis of what we call patriotism. If you, as yout h, wave the Red Flag or the Black Fl ag you are alienated from your land, from the genius of your land, from the great dead of your count ry. So you become thin and febrile and petul ant and queru lous and rootless; your leaf, then, withers, and you do not bring forth your fruit in its season. To lose patriotism is to lose the very sources of your life, the very fountains of your being, the deep roots of your soul. It is a part of the fragmentation that is the curse of modernity. It is a par t of the fracture between mind and 80 soul, between the beneficent buried sub- conscious and the surface consciousness that must never be severed from the whole and the integrity of being. Professor Eliseo Vivas, in his splendid "Apologia pro Fide Mea" (The Inter- collegiate Review, October 1965) sees the chief lack of the "liberal intellect ual" - and this must include the radical in- tellectual - in his loss of piety. Piety, says Professor Vivas, in the old Roman sense, means that "a pious man is one who has grati tude and reverence for the sources of his being, reverence and gratitude for parents, ancestors, country or people, earth, uni verse." The Romans, indeed, spoke reverently of, and loved, the Lares and Penates, the household gods. And all great people have known that the great dead who cannot die, the geniuses who have spoken the genius of their people, the frui tful loam and the stern rocks of their land, are a part forever of somethi ng that far transcends any "Now Generation." The eternal being, the timeless fabric of life that embraces all times and all generations, these are the love of the "pious man." And unless you have this, you are not really alive, and you are so poor in memory, so underprivileged in soul, so destitute of the wealt h of life, that you are to be pitied. And thus comes, in Spengle r's sense, the decline of the West. Thence comes the end of a culture. And then ? Then the terrible night. 1 believe that you, as youth, do not want this. I believe that you want life to go on living. I believe that you want a fairer worl d and a tru er life. And so I believe that youth, vital youth, valid youth, will not long wave the Red Flag and the Black Flag, that it will im- plement again the great Roman word, Pietas, and that it will live for and by its land, and the eternal verities, and meaning, qualit y, and value. Then, and then only, wi ll youth find and fulfill its destiny! AMERI CAN OPINION POOR EXCUSE It Was The Flood This Time Medford Evans, a former cotlege pro- fessor and once Administrative officer on the U.S. atomic energy project ( 1944- 1952), hol ds his Doctoral de g ree from Y ale Univer- si ty. D r. Evans' work has appeared in H arper's, Sewa- nee Review, Human Events,National Re- iii' view, and elsewh ere. H e has long been an AMERICAN OPINION Cont ributing Editor and regular correspondent. LAST FALL the most notori ous liar in America had a drea m. T his spring the dr eam dissol ved in disillusion-not be- cause the dreame r died, for dreams out- live t he dr eamer many times, but be- cause in the sequel the substance of the fantasy was false. Mar tin Luther Ki ng planned a "Poor Peop le's Campaign," but the people were not poor, they di d not cond uct ( in any rat ional sense) a campaign, and a cynical onlooker could have said in his haste that he doubted whether they were people-paralleling Volt aire's observation of the Holv Ro- man Empire that it was neither 'Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire. David Gumaer's report in THE RE- VIEW OF THE NEws-and other con- firmi ng journalistic accounts - caused many of us who wer e spared any actual visit to "Resurrection City," or as some called it, the Bay of Pigs, to wonder whether these were men or Mangalit za; George Schuyler's early iden tif ication of the mess on the Mall as "Insurrection City" reminded us that it was chiefly SEPTEMBER, 1968 the haunt of the spectre of Commu- nism, and certainly Gumae r docume nte d and proved that beyond any doubt. Okay. Then wh y was this most dismal of swamps such a failure? As an in- veterate addict of the conspir acy theo ry of history (indeed, histor y is largely a record of various conspiracies), I am tempted to sugges t that the failure was deliberate, that Ralph Abernat hy cold- bloodedl y avoided seizing the District of Columbia on June 19, 1968 in order to soften us up for a more total take- over at some subsequent dat e. (I am tempted, but as a matter of fact, I resist that tempt at ion rath er readily.) Alter- nat ely, I mi ght argue that the crusade coll apsed, to use David La wrence's langu age, because def iciencies in con- spiratorial technique turned the opera- tion into wh at the Wall St reet Journal's Monroe Karmin called a "mammoth misadventure." Yet, the highly success- ful "sit-ins" of the years 1960-1961 were hardl y the resul t of "complete staff work" ; King himself, with whom, aft er all, Aberna thy went every foot of the way to the mountain top, if not over the preoipice, seems to have played mostly by ear. He was a lucky if well- supported improviser, till he took a room at the Lorraine Motel, and there his luck died wi th him. Ralph Abernathy had quite possibly felt many t imes prev iously that he was the one who did the hard work; he was to discover in the next ten to twelve weeks that Martin had indeed been a useful member of the partnership. When the divinity that had hedged King wi th- drew, he took tha t old black magi c with 81 him for sure. When Martin went to jail, as periodically he did, the nation was in crisis. Now Abernathy is in jail (isn't he ? - I don 't really know, do you ?) , and nobod y cares. Okay, so what was it ? It was really the rain that ruined Resurrection Cit y. Washingt on had never known so much rain in May. You going to blame the rain on the conspiracy? The good Lord sent it, man, the good Lord sent that rain. "He sendeth rain on the just and on the un- just." Well, actually, in those terms Resurrection Citv was rather homo- geneous. But the'stars in their courses fought against the phony poor. T he mule train which kicked off the affair left Marks, Mississippi, in the rain. A cloudburst. As an honest old Negro said, it come a chunk-floater. And in Washington "t he windows of heaven were opened, and the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights." Or so, at least, it seemed. From May tenth (when the Nat ional Park Service's nonreflecting permit for a re- flecting-pool shantytown was issued) to June nineteenth (when the whole misadventure dissolved in the fiasco of the "Solidarit y Day Mar ch") was indeed exactly forty days, like the action in Noah's flood, but the rain was not really uninterrupted in Washington through- out that period. There were just days like May twenty-seventh and twent y- eighth when 2.05 inches fell in thirt y hours , drowning memories of a solid earth. The authentic poor departed, not only because of the theft and rape and filth which left them mor e wr etched than they had ever been before, but be- cause anyone could read in the rain the judgment of the Lord against the blasphemously named Res urrection City. Somebody dedicated a couplet to James Baldwin : Vengeance, saith the Lord, is mine; Your fire is out , the flood this time! 82 I THE STRATEGIC CONCEPT of the "Poor People's Campaign" was to seize power at the center of American government. It was ridiculously premature, but it was not without precedent. Castro from the Sierra Maestra, Mao Ts e-tung from Yenan, had laun ched campaigns against their capitals from remote rural regions. Why not move agai nst Washington from Mississippi? When Martin Luther Kin g was dreaming of such a "long march" he had one advantage over his fellow revolutionaries Mao and Fidel- he had far mor e support in the capital which was the object of the strategy. There was never a time prior to ultimate physical takeover when Castro could have looked to Havana or Mao Tse-tung to Peking for the ki nd of support and encouragement which Martin Lut her King got , or seemed to get , from Washington, D.C., right down to the day he died. And after that he had the gr eat at his funeral, where the symbolic mule train was first used to make a show. The American Establ ish- ment was, or at least appeared to be, eager to help in overthrowing itself. You almost have to feel sor ry for Martin Luther King that he took the protesta- tions of the power structure at face value, when they hail ed him as it were as the Prince of Peace-until the very last, when the revelation came that h ~ had been led to the mountain top and shown the kingdoms of the earth, onl y to be hurled from the heights with his hopes to the "freedom now" of the grav e. The Vice Pr esident of the United States and his principal rival for the 1968 Democratic Presidenti al nomina- tion appeared to be almost rivals for the succession to the crown which sits so (pardon the word) poorl y on the head of Ralph Abernathy. Hubert Humphrey and Eugene McCarthy were both prominent in the gathering of the poor before the Lincol n Memori al on June AMERICAN OPINION nineteenth, "Solidarity Day." To he sure, a politician' s motives in such an instance are inevitably ambiguous. Hubert Hum- phrey was booed by some of those present, while McCarthy got only cheers. It has been suggested, but not docu- ment ed, that Hubert himself sur repti- tiously provided the anticlaque which booed him - in order to validate his more than faintly absurd pose on the Right of the wrong Senat or McCarthy. Li ke Lyndon, Hubert has on other occasions attended meetings where he joined in the refrai n, "We Shall Over- come." It is the most fascinating thing in the world to speculate on what can be going on in the mind of a Pr esident or Vice Pr esident who publicl y chants a Communist slogan dir ected agains t the majority of the people of his own country - and against the "Establish- ment" of which he is, theoretically at any rate, the head or next in line. W ho m are Lyndon and Hubert going to over- come? The people who elected them? It certainly is the American people and the American government that Castro- ites have i n mind when th ey say Ve n- ceremos-we shall overcome . The whol e thing is as confusing as the Cultural Revolution in China, where the fanati - cal Red Guard rages destructively through the society of which their su pe r nal lea de r Mao Tse-t ung i s supposedly the absolute dictator. Who is overcomi ng whom ? II IT IS CLEAR that some kind of struggle for power is going on, and that Solidar i- ty Day, Resurrection City, and the Poor People's Campaign are part of it. It is also clear that poor people have little to do with the Poor People's Campaign. Ralph Abernathy is not poor, Hubert H umphrey is not poor, Eugene McCar thy is not poor, and Mart in Luther King certai nly was not poor. The dilemma of such a campaign is that the publ ic int uitively knows that SEPTEMBER, 1968 the leaders cannot be genuinely poor. If they have the ability to lead, they have the ability to have delivered them- selves from poverty, and will have done so. This is not to say that they may not be far from having all the money they want. Who does? But they cannot present themselves as leaders and at the same time be suffering from poverty. Nor can they, gr ant ed that they are not poor themselves, be hired by the poor, for the poor have no money to hire them. They must be - there is only one thing they can be if they are leaders of the poor - they must be moved by religious zeal. They must love their neighbors as themselves. Now Martin Luther King, phony as so many of us believe him to have been, nevertheless had convinced many others that he was indeed fired by religious zeal, was a man of God, an apostle of love, peace, and brotherhood. (Repeat, I don' t buy that, but lots of people did.) But, who believes any such thing about Ralph Abernathy? Or, for that matter, about Hubert Humphrey or Eugene McCarthy? As for the denizens of Resurrection City who survived the rains and slop of the first ten days, they qui te evide ntly had all the spiritual exaltation and human compassion of Mack the Kni fe. Facts on File, no Rightwing publica- tion, reports that Resurrection City father James Bevel (though paterni ty in this matter, even multiple paternity, is hard to establish) "a nnounced May 22 that about 200 Negro yout hs, mostly members of Chicago and Detroit street gangs, had been sent home. 'They went around and beat up on our white peo- ple,' Bevel said." Facts on File conti nues: Leaders of non-Negro groups participating in the Poor People's Campaign May 25 bittedy denounced the treatment they had received from N egro leaders and members of the 83 march. Spokesmen f or the American Indians, the Mexicall -Americalls and the Appalachiall whites said Ne gro leaders had ignored them for the most part and militant Negroes had abused them . ( Vol. XXVII, Page 233.) Since one of the victims wh ose feel- ings were wou nded by the haugh ty blacks was Reies Lopez Tij erina. the Castroite guerri lla leader who calls himself the T iger of New Mexico. we mav conclude that the contumelv was palpable. . Mor e flagiti ous occur rences abound- ed. As David Gumaer report s: "Three would-be members of the Poor Peo- ple's Campai gn were lat er arreste d in Washington for the brutal murder of two Marines. . . . Numerous other acts of violence were report ed, such as the beating of newspape r report ers and cameramen and the mugging of curi ous sightseers." Fulton Lewis III , in "The Top of the News" for June tenth, told how he had made a tour of Resurrection Ci ty in May and returned in early June. Lewis commented : "The changes in the Poor People's camp have been remarkable. It has been tra nsformed in onlv a few weeks from a fairlv livable cornrnunitv of temporary housing into a filthy, v i l ~ , at r oci0 us-.s mel Ii ng , and da ngerous slum." The authentic poor, Lewis found, were gone; the ga ngste rs re- mained. "There are the Marshals, the Peace Brothers, the Rangers, the Rat Patrol, the Milwaukee Commandos. and the Memphis Invaders - to menti on just a few." Armed with machetes (Cuban moti f again) , hammer (So- viet? ), or "whatever weapon they can find," they inflicted a "multilateral reign of terror." In a later broadcast Lewis repor ted his int er view with Mut ual Ne twor k's James Hall, a daily observer of Resur- rection City. How di d it happen, Lewis asked, that so many of the "poor peo- 84 pie" had "cars, very good-looking cars"? Hall had noticed that, too. Seems that there were just some "young people" who wan ted to "suppo rt this move- ment," and "they are drivi ng these big cars and they are wearing expensive clothes." Well, now, you wouldn' t want to discriminate against somebody just be- cause he was lousy rich, would you? Especially if he was lousy enough and willing to wall ow wi th his expensive clothes in the mud. "So these peopl e," Lewis asked, "don' t even regard them- selves as being poor?" "T hey will ," replied Hall, "-what do I want to say -'identify' themsel ves with the poor people's movement, but it is obvious that many of them are far from being poor peopl e." The filthy rich wer e wel- come to Resurrection City provided they were, literally, filth y. III THERE WERE OTHER rich who "identi- fied" themselves with the "poor," but only in a Pi ckwi ckian sense. They stayed, if they were black like Aber- nath y, at the Pitts Motel, or if they wer e wh ite like Hubert and Gene at places considerably nicer tha n even that. It doesn't reall y matt er wh ether yOll arc rich or poor, black or white. All that really matt ers is if you are truly dedica- ted to the overt hrow of existing Ameri- can institutions. Including bath s. Well, perh aps I oversimplify there. Some Leftwingers, such as Senator McCarthy himself, look physically clean and decent. It is onl y the spirit of the nation which they seem to seek to destroy. Also it should be noted that whil e the poor will gen erall y accept the rich, the rich will not always accept the poor, even wh en both appear dedica- ted to erasure of any distinction between t he two. Many rich men prefer to cur thei r own throats in their own way. Some will even insist on sterilizi ng the razo r. AMERICAN OPINION Frankly, the Established Left, which had for so long found Martin Lu ther King at once diverting and convenient, never had a stomach for Ralph Aber- nathy. And King himself had grown presumptuous. Took himself quite seriously. He was certainly not the man to manage a coup, nonviolent or ot her- wise, in Washington. Best thi ng was to phase out what King represented. Overprolonged unction is a frightful bore, really. So the man was shot - quite fatally. The Poor People's Cam- paign was part of his estate, a legacy whi ch had to be liquidated. The Liberal Establishment's attitude toward the Poor Peopl e's Campaign in 1968 was like Owen Lattimore' s recommendat ion for U.S. policy in the Far East circa 1950- to let Kor ea fall, but not look as though we had pushed it. Not that the Establishment had any intention of abandoning the racial gam- bit. Far from it. But King had served his purpose, and Abernat hy had no purpose apa rt from King. Abernathy, for Establis hment taste, is really too much of a Negro. I know it is un- fashionable to admit that race differ- ences exist, much less to discuss them . Nevertheless it is obvious enough to all who have given the matter any serious thought that Negroes are deficient in malice. They are capable of savage out- bursts, yes, but they will har dly settle upon a course of studied malevolence and pursue it to the end. Whether Othello, the Moor of Venice, was a Negro or not is debatable: he could have been. But Iago coul d never have been a Negro, and an authent ic Negro can hardly approximate an lago. The devil may be black, but not Congo- lese, not Sudanese, not Bantu. Possibly East Indian, possibly Hami tic, possibly Semitic. (Oh, I mean Ara b, not Jewish! ) To the great Moise Tshombe, who is about as pure Negro as a man can get, the Establishment prefers a Stokely Carmichael, who is mostly East Indian; SEPTEMBER, 196 8 an Adam Clayton Powell , who possibly has no Negro blood at all, and appears to be of Arabian descent ; and especially a Bayard Rustin, some kind of hybr id from the sotadic zone. These mixes, in which malevolent white genes are in- corporated, per mit the Establishment to have its devilsfood and eat it too. Chief executor of the Establishment's Lattimoresque policy toward the Poor People's Campai gn was a convicted sex pervert n amed Bayard Rustin. Permanently executive di rector of the A. Philip Randolph Institut e, Rustin was appointed by the Southern Christian Leadershi p Conference on May twen- tieth to organize the June Nineteenth Solidarit y march-or "National Day of Support," as it was called once or twice. This appointment, announced by Abernathy on May twent y-first, was widely hailed as giving the Poor Peo- ple new prestige, since Rustin had been credited (or debited, and whether rightly or wrongly I cannot say) wit h the public-relations success of the August 28, 1963 March on Washington, when Marti n Luther King had his most famous dream. Two hu ndred and fiftv thousand demonstrators were, it was estimated, gat hered in 1963 before the Linco ln Memorial for that one. It was a well-controlled charade which spelled Revolut ion from the Top. As of that time and place it was t he Establish- ment's dish of tea, and Bayard Rustin was their boy, just as Mar tin Luther King was their pri ma donna, though I'm not sure I've got my genders right in either case. At any rate, when Rustin was made manager of the Solidarity Day march in 1968, the "Liberal" Pr ess in unison sang his praises. "For he's a jolly good fellow . . . which nobody can deny." So firmly attached to the Establishment is Rustin that when on June third he announced certai n "i mmediate de- mands" which Negro Hosea Wi lliams said the next day were "una uthori zed" 85 and "a bunch of foolishness," the doom of t he Poor People's Campaign was sealed. On June sevent h Rustin resigned, and Aberna thy appointed in his place one Sterli ng Tucker, of whom no one had ever heard. Abernathy for King, Tucker for Rustin. The scrub team was now on t he field, and the fans be- gan leaving the stadium. On June 19, 1968 possibly one-fift h the number of the 1963 demonstration assembled in the general vicinity of the Lincoln Memorial. Still, forty to fifty thousand is a good crowd (it would half f ill the Yale Bowl) if they are en t h us i ast i c. These were languid, munching picnic lunches, dabbling and dribbling in the Reflect ing Pool, wan- dering, in their nearest approach to something like purpose, away from the speakers' voices. By the time Abernathy began his sixty-five minutes of fustian, his audience in the flesh had dwindled to between five and ten thousand, according to the N ew York Times, and I'm sorry I can't give you a better authority. How many of the five-to-tea listened is anybody's guess. Ralph said he was speaking "wit h a divine man- date from God" and "wit h a mandate from the people." God kno ws what else he said. Hardl y anyone listened. Closest to an oratorical success, according to the National Observer of June twenty-fourth, came Martin Lu- ther King's widow, Coretta, who said, qu ite unforgettabl y: "Free at last, free at last, thank God Almighty, I'm free at last." What do you suppose she meant by that? Though the Observer's report er, Wes- ley Pruden Jr., wrote a few days before Abernathy and associates were arrested for trespass and the crime-ridden shant y- town was demolished by the same federal government which had fostered it, he concluded perceptively: "Resur- rection Ci ty has been a flop, perhaps the worst since t he civil-rights move- ment began." 86 And that is just fine with most of us. Our joy should be tempered, how- ever, by realization that a country where we feel relief as if from real suspence over whether a Ralph Abernathy can succeed in seizing power in the capital is a country in a precarious plight. The Poor People's Campaign as such did not threaten Washington ; Was hington was threatened by the sickness within itself which permi tted a malevolent absurdity like the Poor People's Cam- paign to take shape in the first place. IV IF THE Poor People's Campaign failed in Wa shington because of ( 1) in- competent leadership, and (2) a deci- sion by the Establishment to let it fail, it failed earlier at its princ ipal point of origin, which was Marks, Mississippi, because of ( 1) a decision by the Mississippi establishment to contain the revolut ion, and (2) competent local, county, and state leadership. The Missis- sippi establishment, I need hardly say, is not the same as the Establishment, but regr etfull y I must add that the Establishment also operates in Missis- sippi, and when it puts its mind to it, as it did at Oxford in 1962, can over- whelm the Mississippi establishment - which would not be the case if all other states were equally concerned to pre- serve their own powers. (Li ke the Te nth Amendment, I prefer "powers" to "ri ghts.") Frankly, one must give Mississippi credit , both at Oxford in 1962 and at Marks in 1968, for rational and vigorous action. There was disaster in the first instance, and exemplary success in the second, because in the first Washington supported its assault on Ole Miss with enough militar y power to have made the Bay of Pigs a triumph. (Cr eighton Abrams, by the way, was in charge of military operat ions at Oxford, as he is now in Vietna m, but his orders were different; he was told to win at Oxford.) AMERICAN OPINION In 1968, however, Washington left Ralph Abernathy pretty much on his own, and neither he nor his S.c.L.c. henchmen were up to the mark in Marks. The Mississippians of Quitman County, of both races, conducted them- selves with firmness and dignity. The fires of anarchy were set in Quitman County in late April an.I early May 1968, as they had been set before in Watts, Newark, Detroit, Chicago, and so many other points in the United States. But the blaze would not propa- gate itself, the flame flickered and went out. Shifting metaphors, the melodrama scheduled for a long run in Resurrec- tion City opened in Marks and was really a worse flop there than in Wash- ington. The Nation's Capital, reeling from the riots and fires of April, was at least palpitant with anticipatory dread and sickened by the mess and stench of Resurrection City. From the point of view of the revolution, all that was to the good. Nor, on the side of decency, were there any compensations in Wash- ington. There were in Marks, which emer ged from the attack upon it physically intact and bright with honor. Three revolutionary caravans emana- ted from this reticent county seat in North Mi ssissippi, asti gmatically described in Newsweek (May 13, 1968) as "a shabby, one-stoplight poverty pocket discovered by King two years ago and , accordingly, chosen by his heir s as a first staging area for the march." Waiving the argument that the place was "discovered" by DeSoto four hundred-odd years ago, Marks is scarcely a "poverty pocket," but a very att ractive if slightly somnolent little town in the particularly prosperous area of Missis- sippi which we call the Delta. The reason it has only one stoplight is not that the city fathers cannot affor d an- other one, hut that in the tranquili ty of the area no mor e are needed - if, indeed, that one is. (Incidentally, ther e is probably an inverse ratio between the SEPTEMBER, 1968 number of stoplights in a town and that content surpassing wealth found by the sage in meditation, but Newsweek doesn't dig.) Allegations that Marks is a "poverty pocket" rest chiefly on (1) carefully selected TV camera shots by C.B.S. showing a marginal area where Negroes had bought lots for fifty dollars and built their own places to live (the double implication that these were typical and the work of exploitirrg landlords was doubly false), and (2) the statistic that median income for Negroes in Marks was "little more than $500 annually" (quote from Facts on File) , which is not only highly doubtful but leaves un- said that it is easier to live on five hun- dred a year in Marks than on five thou- sand as a commuter in Connecticut (I suppose the latter is really impossible, but the former is not) . By the way, let me interject this personal note, which I hope my Missis- sippi friends will not read. I have lived in the State since 1962, and find the people admirable, but one thing does bother me a bit. Mississippians tend to run, on the average, a little heavy. I mean physically. Fact is, they eat too much, and the diet is so healthful that they assimilate it well. This goes for both races. These are big Americans. It is typical of Leftwing propaganda Iwhichcalls war "peace," etc. (you know, the principle of reversal) that it should describe Mississippi as a land of hunger and starvation. These people do eat. The ones with money eat expen- sively and the ones without money eat cheaply. Nobody starves! (If you don 't like blackeyed peas and cornbread you are culturally deprived, and probably a Yankee into the bargain, but cornbread and blackeyed peas are good for you, as well as delicious, and the patty sau- sages are the best in the country.) But wealth in and around Marks is not limited to white Delta planters wh o publish arty magazines on the side, nor 87 to that form of wealth which depends in some degree on a mixture of phi losophical temperanc e and economic relativ ity. There are Negro plante rs as well as white. Claude Martin and James Davis, to name two, are worth on the order of a quarter of a million dollars each. These, you understand, are landowners, not ballplayers or enter- tainers-not that there's anything wrong with entertainers and ballplayers. There does seem to be something wrong these days, however, with the noblest of all professions, and Davis and Martin have been quoted as saying that what Marks does not need any mo re of is Negro pr eachers. That is bound to mean Ralph Abernathy, but not him exclusivelv, as seen below. . Marks Negroes do not have as much money as they woul d like-and neither, I believe, do whites in Westchester County, New York. But Marks Negroes hav e television sets and automobiles. They look at the same programs and buy the same brands of gasoline that are looked at and bought in N ew York or California. The fact is, thev virt uallv all have television sets and If you ask how they do it on five hun- dred dollars a year I will say I don ' t know, but I'm more sure of the TV sets and the cars than I am of that propa- ganda statistic. V T OWARD THE END of June, I ran up to Ma rks and had the privi lege of talking to a number of the law-enforcement officers there. I said above that in Wash- ington nothing good came out of the Poor People' s Campaign , but in Marks there were severa l incident al benefits. one of the most important being, by common consent locallv, an enhance- f h "" "f'h I r ment 0 t e Image 0 t e aw-enrorce- ment off icer. This is a benefit whi ch ma ny American communi ties would like to get also; I'm sure no one has to tell them that the way to get it is not 88 to solicit revolutionary actio n such as the S.c.L.c. inflicted upon Marks, but to meet it with resolution and compo- sure if and when it does come. I talked to Quitman Countv Sheriff L. V. Har rison, Chief Deputy Sheriff Marion Choat, Cit y Clerk Edwin Wag- ner, Police Officer D. W. Jones, and Police Officer L. C. Pride (who is a Negro) . T hese men, together with Chief of Pol ice J. W. Jenki ns and Mayor Haword Langford, set an example for America of calm, efficient, and resolut e law-enforcement. To do so they had to have, and did have, cooperation-first from their fel- low citizens in Marks, second from the Gov ernor of Mississippi and the Missis- sippi Highway Patrol. They did not need, and did not get, any help from the federal government. The ubiq uitous pr ess and T V men wer e something! And, at the peak of the crisis there were as many as a hundred Highway Patrolmen on duty at once in the area . All these people needed physical and moral support from the citizens of Marks. T hey got it. Ladies of the town prepared food and fed the Highway Patrol at the American Legion hu t. A Pr ess Room was set up in the Chamber of Comme rce office, where from eight a.m, to eleven p.m. cold drinks and restr oom faciliti es were avail abl e - and, most important, telephones for filing stories. This was generally appreciated, though the N ewsweek man with remarkable solicitude for his own virtue said he would try "not to be prostituted" by such ki ndness, and he seems to have departed as chaste as he came. Whi te people of the town, like Des - demona, were at first reluctant to be- lieve that anyone would try to do what the Southern Christian Leadership Con- ference did in fact try to do - i.e., destroy their town. In spite or because of this skepticism, they agreed in ad- vance to "lay low" if trouble came, and AMERICAN OPI NION to let local and state officers take care of outside agitators. One duty they had, in accordance with the principles of the common law. That was to protect their own property. They were told : Get your guns. If the rioter comes to your house to do harm, kill hi m. Otherwise, lay low. This was done as a matt er of pre- caution. Nobody was ki lled. No property was destroyed except a couple of broken windows. A Memphis Negro gang, "The Invaders," roughed up. some of the local Negroes, and the Highway Patrol dispersed a crowd that seemed to be approaching criticality. Considering the potential, force was at a minimum. Private possession of guns preserved the peace. Every family and every business estab lishment in Marks has at least one gun. When the marchers asserted their right to parade en masse down the center of the main street, their leader was told by the officer on duty: Pro- ceed at your own risk . I' m not going with you bet ween that double line of blank store windows and risk the cross- fire when some of your boys start break- ing glass. The marchers took anot her route. There was no shooti ng. The citi- zens of Marks had confidence in their offi cers, and the officers had confidence in the citizens. The greatest difference between this little North Mississippi town and Wash- ington, a month earlier (when the post-Ki ng assassinatio n riots occurred) was that in Marks the law was en- forced without racial discrimi nation. In Was hington, of course, under the Cyrus Vance-Ramsey Clar k policy, there was .the most flagrant discrimination in favor of black looters and arsoni sts. No loot- ing, no arson in Marks - though the ratio of aggressive "nonviolent" revolu- tionaries to ordinary citizens was tempo- rarily much higher than in any big city. Everyo ne in Marks, black and white alike, knew that if he broke the law he would be arrested. SEPTEMBER, 1968 As it ha ppened, the few arrests that had to he made were allocated in accord- ance with the most refi ned principle of justice, "To each his own." The Marks city police department has, under Chief Jenk ins, a racially balanced force - one whi te and one black. It was Officer D. W. Jones, wh ite, who arrested the white man who illegall y (though harml essly) fired a gun ; it was Officer L. C. Pride, a proud Negro, who called Negro agitator Willie Bolden a liar to his face on national television - be- cause Bolden had slanderously lied about Pr ide. . T he period of tension in Marks lasted three weeks. It began about April twenty-first, when Wi llie Bolden, ad- vance man for Aberna thy, hi t town. Psychologicall y, he hit it prett y hard. Holding mass meetings at Negro chur ches, this So u th e r n Ch r i s t i a n Leader's gospel was "go burn, burn, burn !" It was very stimulating. Marks Negroes, however, failed to see the immediate advantage, and noth ing was burned. Nobody arrested Bolden for this inf lammatory oratory. When he assumed a Pied Piper role he got more action. On May first, a day beloved of Communists everywhere, Bolden went into the Negro school and led out two-hu nd red chi ldren, contrary to school regu lations. Obviously he was guilty of trespass, contributing to the delinquency of minors, disturbing the peace, I don' t know what all. Willie thus got himself arrested at high noon on May Day. It looked for a time as if Willie Bolden might get that riot off the ground aft er all. Bail was set at $500. Willie had in hi s pocket (being poor) only $240 cash. This he gave to one Wi llie Brown, a local Negro who had given bad checks in Marks, and asked him to raise the other $260. It is not known how the account between Bolden and Brown was finally settled, but bond was not made for Bolden. 89 With Willie in jail a crowd formed on the cour thouse lawn, demanding his release. Southern Christian Leader An- drew Marris ett said, Let Willie Bolden go. N o bond. N o fine . Let him go. Sher- iff said, Willie will get a trial. If he's not guilty he won't be convicted and a/on't be fined. He hasn't made any bond. Get your people out of here. Marrisett said (here I follow Newsweek for the word- ing) : "We prefer goi ng to jail unl ess you turn him loose." Accommodatingly Sheriff Harri son and Deputy Choat arrested six leader s and put them in jail with Willie. One local Negro, L. C. Coleman, an ex-convict and some kind of preacher, also a disappoint ed office- seeker, pled with the Sheriff: " "Mr. Har- rison, don't you want me in there too ?" But, Colema n was not jailed. I hear he compl ained to the F.B.I. Now the crowd-"student s," News- week called them-still refused to dis- perse. So the Mississippi Patrol dispersed them. No sweat. That was the climax of the tension in Marks. Next day Aberna thy came into town after some of that mule wagon nonsense in Mem- phis. (It costs money to get mules and wagons to show how poor vou are. Like, a five-year-old car means vou are a bit strapped for cash, but a fifty-year- old car means you are affl uent. T hese days, to ride in a mule wagon yOLl got to be loaded. ) Aberna thy came to Marks Mav second, and somebodv bailed Willi e Bolden out of jail. That was the dav L. C. Pride called him a liar - b e ~ a u s e he was. They started three caravans, or some- thing, out of Marks. Abernathy went on right away to Ed wards, Mississippi, and from there through Alabama. On May eighth a "Freedom T rain" of ten buses took off for Resurrection City. And on May thirteenth another "Mule Train" left Marks also headed east. It I took thre e days to get to Batesville, twenty miles away. Food was delivered by somebody in a Hertz truck. One mul e 90 died before they got to Gr enada, another thirty mil es. The thing was absolutel y crazy. There was no point in it. It cost large sums of money. It did the poor no good. It even did the revolution no good - except to assure the revolu- tionaries that any folly whatever is per- missible in America today, and will get support from the gr eat tax-exempt foundations and the National Council of Churches, as the Poor People's Cam- paign did. Negroes were recruited in Marks for the trek with absurd promises and veiled threats. If they went they would each have a brick house in Washington. If they did not go, federal aid and wel- fare checks would be cut off. One wom- an, Willie Hill, took eleven children and had another in Resur rection City. All thirteen are now back in Marks and, like other returnees there, they don't talk. Well, what would you say? Might say, It sure did rain. People in Marks who stayed home feel prett y good about it now. The two races there are perhaps closer than they were-drawn together by common re- jection of the fantastic fraud that was the Poor People's Campaign, drawn to- gether, too, by common realization that Marks, Mississippi, has maint ained law, order, and a level of economic viability for both races in a way unknown in Detroit. A small fraction of the damage done in Ne wark 1967 or Washington 1968 would have wiped out Marks, Missis- sippi, completely. But the plague of civil riots passed over the little Delta town, with onl y an admonitory flick of the death angel 's wings. My fr iend R. A. Carson summed it up : "The story is that ther e is no story," which puts Marks in the category wi th the happy nation that had no history. But Carson added, "Marks saved Mississippi ." And I would add, The example oj organized and determined citizenry could save the United States. - - AMERICAN OPINION ON MANLINESS So You Want To Raise A Boy? Taylor Caldwell is the most widely- read living author in the world. Her books include The Devil's Advocate; Never Victorious Never Defeated; Tender Victories; Your Sins and Mine; Dear and Glorious Physician; Prologue to Love; Grandmother and the Priests, A Pillar of Iron , No One Hears But Him, and many others. Her latest is Testimony of Two Men. GENTLEMEN! Please pass this ar- ticle by. It is only for your ladies, scores of whom have innocently written me for advice as to how best to raise their little boys to be truly manly, American, patriotic, God-fearing, law-abiding citi- zens of their country. I am touched by their faith in my omniscience - I don't have that faith, myself. Though I have no sons, but only daughters - the prettiest in the world, and the dearest- I have always been surrounded by hordes of male relatives, uncles, grand- fathers , fat her, great-grandfathers, cousins, and I have three grandsons and a great-grandson who is the apple of my eye. In comparison, I have had few female relatives, and so I studi ed the Boys, being the world's greatest ad- mirer of the male persuasion. So - goodbye, gentlemen. See you another time. I AND NOW for you dear ladies: Let us sit down and talk confidentially to- SEPTEMBER, 1968 gether about a very important matter. First of all, like all mothers, I once foolishly insisted that every other wom- an, and every man, too, love my children as much as I did. I thought teachers, bus- drivers, postmen, neighbors, other mothers, and absolute strangers, should just adore my children and feel my own tenderness and concern for them. If a neighbor complained that one of my girls ran over her flower-beds or broke a window or teased a dog or pushed another child, I thought that neigh- bor "didn't love children." If a teacher said that one of my girls was inatten- tive, rude, rebellious, giggly, and didn't know subtraction from addition, and she in the fifth grade, I contemplated demanding that the teacher be fired. You see? I was just like other mothers, and just as absurd. Imagine thinking that the world revolved about my chil- dren! Thank God, I came to my senses in time, thanks to a wise priest. But you'd be surprised to learn that most women, even today, enlightened though they are, and well-educated young ladies, think exactly like that! They beam about our "child-centered culture," and expect you to agree, when you want to laugh indulgently in their faces. You want to tell them that civilized societies aren't "child- centered," but only primitive and ab- original ones - Stone Age folk. You want to inform them that well-bred people keep their children out of sight except for rare occasions, that they seldom "discuss" their children with anyone but teachers, pastors, and doe- I tors, and that they know that other 91 people are bored to death with the chil- dren of others. At one time, before America became crude and uncouth and "Liberal," she was a civilized country, and children had their place and were taught to keep that place. They were taught - and not only in America - that as they were immature and ignorant and noisy and not very interesting as yet, they had litt le or no status; though their parents loved them even if only God knew why. Children, being innately shrewd, understood that and knew it was tru e, so they had their own deligh t- ful world. If they committed innocent pranks they were truly innocent. Chil- dren rarely became criminal s as they do now, and a delinquent was practi- cally unknown. They were thrashed regularly, and they knew they deserved it, and never were "emot ionally dis- turbed" by it. Children are hardy littl e beasts, and a blow or a whi pping means little to them. In fact, they really un- derstand that this is a sign that their parents are concerned about them, and honestly love them and wish them well, and they are content if not pleased by such comeuppance. So, the first thing you do with your children, girls, is to assure them that some day they will be bearable adults, but as of now they are endured by parent s because those parents love them. But they must not expect love from others until they have earned it. Their teachers are dedicated souls, but even they would not stand the con- stant company of children unl ess they were paid for it - and they are not paid enough, considering the agony our children now inflict on them. From infanthood, children must be taught respect for authority, love of God, rev- erence, qui etness in the house, in the school, in the church, obedience, good manners, respect and honor for coun- try. You can begin right in the play- pen, girls, believe me. 92 II "THE HAND that rocks the cradle rules the worl d." It can also ruin the world, and is doing so merrily now, all in the name of Loving the Children and Giving them the Best. Worst of all, grea t hor des of American mothers don't seem truly to love their children. You doubt it? I not e that a very popular women's magazine of this month' s issue report s on how it had asked its readers what was their consuming worr y these days. Were the women - mothers mostly - concerned about their childr en's future in this increas- ingly terrible world ? Were they anx- ious about the spreading irreligion? Were they fearful of c rim e in the streets, war , holocausts, riots, disasters, chaos, confusion ? Were they appre- hensive about their country? Their husbands' health ? The draft? The venality of evil polit icians ? The spread of Communism ? Any other calamity you can name ? No, not at all! The ladies' consumi ng worr y and const ant concern was fear of losing their slender figures! Honest to God, girl s, honest to God. Read it for yourselves. Their second monstrous terror was that they feared they were not "handling t h ~ grocery 'money right." But the first - their girl ish figures! Incr edible? Yes, but true. Re- member, these women were not illiter- ate. Many of them had college degrees. The magazine publishes very good articles and occasionally an excellent piece of fiction. But even the editors, themselves, were aghast at the ladies' replies, and the feverish report of their wornes. Now, we know that real, honest-to- God men hardly exist any more, that homosexualism has vastly increased and become overt in America, and that it has now, in Washington and New York, taken on respectabilit y and elan and has an air of delicate chic. We know now that the student body AMERICAN OPINION of our colleges, and the faculties, too, reek with femi nine "males" and limp- wristed flit s. Drugs and homosexuality are rampant among our male youth. They seem to go together. Weare not concerned just now - though we should be - over the fact that our government is permeated with deviates who are often manipulated by our na- tion's enemies and Communist lovers, and are a terrible hazard to our coun- tr y. We are mostly concerned at this immediate time wi th a general failure of manhood among our boys, and most of us understand that it begins prac- tically in the bassinet. Yet not a single woman, replying to that magazine's queries, expr essed her fear that her son might not grow into a real man - in spite of the fact that such a national failure has brought down the great em- pires and republics of the past and may bring down America to ruin, too, un- less the tendency can be reversed. The ladi es surely know of the rotten- ness and extent of such perversion in America. They surel y can't have escaped being aware, for it is the rare magazine or newspaper wh ich doesn't mention it regularly, and with anxiety. They hear about it - and see it illus- trated - on TV and at the movies, and in books. So it wasn't blissful ignorance that blinded the ladies, they just didn 't think it important. No doubt many of these females were "Liberals," and so were mor e than half-convinced that there is something elegant about femi- nine men, somethi ng aristocratic. After all, isn't so-and-so in Washington a homo, and that eminent playwright, and that novelist, and that professor, and that high official? And aren't they darling "men"? But surely! Even lady "Liberals" don't want their own sons to be flat- ulent shemales. Or, do they? 0, I am sure that even those benighted ladies would wi sh for a masculine son. But how do you explain the tremendous SEPTEMBER, 1968 lack of inte rest in the subject, on the part of the ladi es who answered that magazine' s query? Could it be-again- that many American mothers don 't really care about even their own chil- dr en and are concerned only with sex and their girlish figures? What kind of sons will they raise to manhood? It should concern you, girl s, for your own sons will encounter the sons of those women, in school, in offi ces, on the streets, in colleges, and in employ- ment. Such creatures will thr eaten their country, and thei r very lives; would corrupt their souls and their minds; would bring down the walls of our cities upon their heads; would open the gates of our nation to the deadl y enemy, Communism. It will return us to barbarism - this femininity of the sons of the ladies who thought the most important thing in the worl d was their figures. How can you be certain that your son, or sons, will escape the emasculat- ing pollution ? It is well-known that both sexes possess latent characteristics of the other sex, and that environment and companions of evil intent can bring . out the submerged tendenci es. To be- come a man, a boy must be treated as a man from the very cradle. But first of all his mother must be a woman, whose husband is her dearest treasure above all else, whose children are secondary to her mate in all things. A woman must be womanl y - not just "femi nine." She must have the strong instincts of a woman, and a love for her home. A mother whose first con- cern is "sex," and clothes and personal ind ulgence and hairdos, and her phys- ical appearance, will not produce a manly son. I've known dozens of these "women," and invariably their sons have been lightweights. How could they escape the insistent picture of self-indulgence I and self-love whi ch they saw every day of their lives as childr en, in thei r 93 mothers? How could they not see with what indifference their fathers were treated, and how they were re- gar ded as providers of goodies, and not as beloved? The mother was the Queen, arrogant, svelte, greedy, perfumed, silk- en, demanding all things - and so the little boys began to identi fy with these creatures , these heartless, stupid, sel- fish, grasping, inane and pretty things. Mama was Everythi ng. She impli ed that firmly, herself. And boys want to be Everything, too. So they ident ified with Mama. There is the root of this emasculation, far beyond what the headshrinkers call Smotherlove. It is no accident that homosexual men almost invariably hate their mothers. It is the rare homo who became that way because his mother loved him too much and pampered him too much and protect ed him too much. Homo- sexuals are made at home, from the very earliest years. Hatr ed for women- and for Mama in particular-is the homosexual 's most outstandi ng charac- teristic. One can feel honest compassion for them, and condemn their mothers. They are trivial women-and mur- derers of the best in their men, ernas- culaters really. The trivial woman considers her children's appearance the most impor- tant part of them, and the hell with their souls and thei r characters! She impresses on them that looks are all that a person is- and noth ing else at all. So her children learn that clothing is more valuabl e than books, and the way their hair is arranged mor e neces- sary to their future than any school. She teaches them to be postures, papier- mache mannikins with eterna l, painted, fixed smil es and arms crooked in a gr aceful position. It is more porte nt ious for a girl to know how to swi ng her hair on her shoulders and a boy how to make his teeth gleam than it is to learn of the nature of God and man and one's destiny in the world . She 94 teaches her children to prattle-even the boys-so that for hours on end when they are young adolescents and adults they say absolutely nothing and re- spond like amiable aut omat ons. They have no personality; they are the natu ral prey of the ruthlessly int elligent and corrupt- these affable, enervated, and empty sub-humans. When they have houses of their own they resemble thei r old home; it all looks like window- displays of furniture where no one ever lived. As the trivial woman is all for style she takes on the sur roundi ng colora- tion, and as the sur rounding coloration of America today is "Liberalism" she is a "Liberal." But ask her for one sound opinion based on reason and the facts and history, and her mouth falls ajar, she looks coy and peeky and flirtatious and hastily changes the subject to one within her range such as clothes, fash- ions, and silly gossip. Or sex. She does love to talk about sex, though what it actually means she does not know. Yes, she can chatter a littl e about Freud, too, but who he was and what he wrote she has not the vaguest idea. While it is of course true that not all "Liberals" are homosexuals, all homo- sexuals are "Liberals." They owe it to nit-brained Mamas. Again, treat your son, from the very bassinet, to be manly. He is a human being and has dign ity from his birth; he is not a cutesy toy; he is not "ador- able." He is not "sweet." He is an em- bryo man. Treat him so. Let him see from infanthood that you respect his status and he will acquire pride in him- self. You ladies should read Phi l Wylie's Generation of Vipers , and though you will heartily disagr ee with Phil-as I did-on many topics, and feel anger at his shouted loathing of "Mom" and "Momisrn," he does have a point: The "Mom" type of woman corrupts, de- grades and emasculates her son. How many times have you seen it yourself ? AMERICAN OPINION III AND FORGET the absurd idea that children, even in the bassinet, are "helpless." I've noticed that by the time a child-a boy especially-is a month old he has his mother's number down exactly. He may not be able to talk, sit up or speak, but he is extraordinarily bright and .clear-eyed - far more than he will ever be again. Babies have no illusions, no fantasies, no sentimen- talities. I've seen my great-grandson, at one month, in the arms of his mother, staring up at her and figuring out-quite astutely-how to get some- thing out of her which she did not wish to give him, or do for him. I've held him in my own arms and have had him study me with the sharpest con- centration and attention he will ever know-and I knew very well that he thought my baby-talk was asinine, as it was. So I stopped insulting him with it and spoke seriously to him and he gave me-not the "lovely innocent smile" Dr. Spack speaks of, and which kids never have, anyway-but a smile of confidential understanding. It was almost trustful, even if kids are never really trustful. They learn to "trust" later on, God help them. I've seen my grandsons, just crawl- ing, sit up and ponder on how to devil Mama and get something they want. You could almost hear their realistic little brains clicking as they turned the subject over in their minds . They con- sidered whether a spell of yelling would accomplish things, or not. Then they looked at Mama most thoughtfully, weighing her possible reactions to the demand. And quite often I've seen them come to the conclusion that this time Mama was not in the mood, or the idea is hopeless, and they continued to crawl and go about their business. It is this clarity of understanding and honest animal cunning which should be cultivated and made to work for the boy's manly future. So, no matter SEPTEMBER, 1968 how delightful your baby is, look at him with respect, and never-s-but never-use comfy-cozy-chintsy language to him. Give him your love and gen- tleness and tenderness, of course, and hug and kiss him when you wish- and you'll wish far more often than he willl-s-but again treat him with the dignity he deserves. Let him know at all times that you are on to him, and he'll be delighted and amused in the dark little realistic heart of him, and he'll respect you and honor you. Not even a kitten respects a burnt-offering or a doormat or a slave. Always be one step ahead of Jonnie, and two steps ahead of his plottings. He'll not only regard you with consideration when he is a baby but will be considerate of you when he is older, even during adoles- cence. No man, whether ten days old, ten years old, or twenty, has anything but contempt for the soft touch. When he is a man, then, properly brought up by a proper mother, he will detest the whining and the deliberately helpless, the mendicant and the faker, the malingerer and the feeble "Liberal." He will be brave and proud and truly masculine, scornful of those who live, as Samuel Butler put it, "only to lick the platter clean and leave a pile of offal." He will demand of others that they be men, too, and so will be a force of strength in the world which sadly lacks true men in these days. His voice will be loud and clear before politicians, and he will never be guilty of betraying his country. Best of all, as Solomon says of true mothers, he will "rise up" and call his mother "blessed," and say of her "all her ways were pleasantness and all her paths were peace." What more can a mother desire? There is one hippie-yippie phrase which delights me and which is most expressive: "Tell it like it is." That goes for your boy-children. (Girls are less likely to believe Mama's homey little lies and cutenesses, all dressed up in 95 Sweet Phrases.) Therefore, tell your boy children the absolute tru th on any occasion, no matt er how tragic or dis- tasteful or horrible it is. A man should learn the truth from his cradle. Let us first get it firmly in mind : Children are tough and resilient and hard-nosed. They are not "petals and flowers" as Dr. Spack once insisted to me in a letter . They are saner and colder of heart and more adaptable and tougher than they will ever be after they reach their majority. They have no illusions; the dreams of children are violent dreams, not concerned with gardens and fairies; their aims are strong and sturdy and ruthless, con- cerned with self. Above all, children like to see and hear things "like they are." They catch on to darling euphe- misms at once, and cooing lying voices and tender lying smiles-and they de- spise them. Children are primi tive men-they are of the cave absolutel y. We civilize them later, but civilization does not necessar- ily include lies. (In fact, any civilization based on lies, euphemisms, fantasies, unreal ideologies and refusal to face the truth will inevitabl y die, and good rid- dance to it.) Now, primitive man knew all about life and death. He accepted both without fear and with realism. Men are born-men die. It is of one piece, to primitive man, and your child is long a primitive. As a realist, he de- serves your respect and your truth. My mother was a realist, and I honor her that at least. When I was four years old she told me, "It is time for you to face the fact of death and know all about it. You were born only to die. We all die. Some die as babies, some as children, some as grown-up people, some as old men and women. It is just as natural as living. You may die as a child, or you may die as an old woman. It is in the hands of God and no one knows when or how. " I wasn't in the least disturbed. She 96 took me to visit a friend of hers whose baby had just died. The infant was in his coffin among his flowers, looking asleep and peaceful and waxen. I had liked the baby. I touched his cold hands and rearranged his shroud to my liking. I felt no horror and no dread. It seemed to me, as a very young child, that death was a sort of self-indulgence and that a strong-spirited person could outwit it one way or another! (There may be somethi ng to that, girl s. I have seen people given up by doctors who rose from death-beds to live a long time afterwards and die of heart y old age.) I was then introduced to religion, and learned that insofar as a man's soul is concerned there is no death . It didn 't exactly comfort me; children need no comfort, they are filled to the brim with it from birth. But it did give a calm continuity to life, did convince me that our life here is only an interlude in eternity. When a child is taught that he is eternal he can take life "like it is," and the hell with the immediate troubl e or pain. We may become skeptical later, and who isn't?-but at least the idea remai ns in our minds, immutable, and can gIve us courage. So, introduce your boy-chi ld, es- pecially, to religion even while he is in the bassinet. (Boys are far more timid and fragile than girls, as any mother of both can testify.) You may think your baby is too young for re- ligion, but he is not . My own children at six months understood that I was praying by their bedsides, or crib-sides, before they could even speak. I know, for if I neglected the ceremony they cried and were insistent. Chi ldren are ritualists. Well, they may not have even understood about Whom I was pray- ing too, but they gathered the idea that it was One who prot ected them and remained with them through the night, and so they had no night-t errors . I heard one of my daughters, then only eight- een months old, talking over things AMERICAN OPI NION qu ite seriously with God after I had kissed her good-night. And I had thought that she still was unaware! It was a lovely conversation, between an infant and her Guardian and her Father, and I am sure God listened to it with more tenderness and attention than He ever gi ves to sophisticated adult prayers -for it was pure and unaffected and right to the point. She wanted a teddy- bear, and she described it exactly, then fell asleep assured she would get it. (She did.) When I was young, First Commun- ion was at eight or later, for it was thought that young childr en could not comprehend the Maj esty and Meaning of it, nor the nature of good and evil. But now the Church understands that very young child ren can grasp the mean- ing of God, and that they know all about good and evil in the playpen. I, myself, was not an exceptional child, except that I was bigger and stronger than most others, and more bellicose. But I knew to Whom I was praying whe n I was less than two years old, and I knew the difference between good and evil. I knew there were no "situ- ation ethics" or grey places in morals and behavior. You were either on the side of the angels, or on the side of the devils, and if the latt er you coul d be absolutely certain that you would be painfully thrashed as soon as Mama or Papa caught you. And that brings me to another point : Corporal punishment. Dr. Spock and Company think chi ldren are too in- nocent and too lovely to be slammed, and slammed hard. Nonsense! Again, children are primitive man. Primitive man knew that his parents wanted to prot ect or warn him of danger, and as speech was rare the blow did the work thoroughly. Watch animal mothers: They do not croon over their young ones and try to "persuade" them not to do naughty things or dangerous ones. They slam- and the youngster immedi- SEPTEMBER, 1968 ately learns that some things are ror- bidden. They love and cuddle their infants, but when a lesson in the reali- ties of life is needed Animal Mama lifts her paw and lets go painfully, and does not comfort the culprit when he howls. In fact, he learns that he has to work hard to get back into her favor and the kitchen. Girls, being slightly more civilized at birth than boys, are somet imes- I say sometimes-open more to reason. (But don't bet on it!) So, when a girl is about twelve Mama can often "explain" things to Susie, and if Susie has learned to trust her mother she will listen. But boys are more determined and, when they are young, reason seems like a silly thing to them. But they do und er- stand the swift punishment; they re- spect pain. Don't wait for Papa to come home to slam your boy-child. Slam him the moment he commi ts a crime, and slam hard. He may yell and say some incredible things to you, but he will respect the lessons of that good right hand which deals out immediate justice, as well as cookies and caresses. "You will only teach them physical violence," mourn the Dr. Spocks. Well, we have two whole generations reared on Dr. Spock and Company, and who is more violent on the campuses now, and who is more savagely murderous on the streets? Our juveni le delinquents are the result of the Spock philosophy. The assaulters of teachers and the old and the helpless were given "gentle- ness" a'la Spock in their homes. Imply to a boy that no matter what he does he will be "loved," and that he is the most import ant creature in the world , and he will become, even as a youth and a young man, cruel, arroga nt, sel- fish, demanding and fierce. When he comes up agai nst the real world of life-unsheltered by pamperi ng Mama - he will be outraged, for no one there will cosset him and defer to him and ( Continued on Page 101.) gj listen to his vaporings. And, he will take revenge on it. He will shriek "Police brutality!" when he is given the blows he ought to have had in the play- pen. He will be uncontrollable, savage, resentful, believing that everything should be granted him and nothing demanded of him. He had been treated "democratically" by his parents, and so he will believe, as a youth, that his callow opinions are as good as anyone else's, and that authority is something to be derided. For, isn't he the Real Authority? He had been taught that by Spock and Company. No one advises maltreating a child or beating him insensible or giving him "cruel and unusual punishments." But a firm strap hung handil y near by, and a good firm palm, can be used without permanently crippling a kid-though when one looks at some campuses today the thought does intrude! Teach your boy children to work, and work ard uously, even when tod- dlers. A two-year-old can help set a table-though not with your best china, as yet. He can pull out chairs; he can dust; he can put away his own clothes and toys. He can dig weeds. He can hose lawns, straighten furniture, carry out garbage. He must learn that if he has a place in the family-an honored place-he also has responsibilities. All money he receives must be earned. He should not be given an allowance just "because." His father earns money; therefore, his chi ldren must earn it. By the time a boy enters his teens he should have a summer job, no matter how af- fluent his father. In England, there are no long empty holidays from school as there are in America. There is Christmas vacation, and Easter, only. A young person doesn't need long holidays, full of idleness and mischief . He doesn't need to "recoup." He has all the vitality in the world, and youth is the time for learning. School should continue through the summer, SEPTEMBER, 1968 and school plants used all year long. The week-ends are quite enough "holi- day" for kids . So work hard to keep the schools open and the kids learning, all year long. Perhaps, then, we won't have whole generations of young people entering high school and college unable to read or write decently. If you can't get your schools to stay open-send your boy to summer school, real summer school, and that doesn't mean camp. Perhaps your church could be persuaded to have summer classes in religion, his- tory, English, etc. "Satan finds mischief for idle hands to do." Be honest about your boy's inherent capabilities. If he is only average, or less, in elementary school and high school, consider having him taught a trade instead of sending him off to some liberal arts college, where he will learn "dissent" and rioting. Good ma- chinists' and mechanics and plumbers are worth their weight in gold, and al- ways will be. Don't listen to the educa- tionists. A successful life doesn't depend on a college diploma! Half the eminent men and women in the Who's Who books never went to any college- though later they did receive honorary Ph .D.s. Intelligence is never learned or acquired. It is inherent in a child's genes. No education-never mind what the self-serving educationists say!-can increase a child's capacities for learning and understanding and intellect. These things are in him or they are not. If your children ma nifest a capacity, through marks, for higher learning, then go to it, but pick out a really decent college and not a "democratic" one. There are still religion-oriented colleges in the United States, and private ones. So, be realistic about your children. If ronnie wants to be an automobile me- chanic or plumber-and that is where his aptitude is-don't wail about what the neighbors will think, or what the teachers say. Give him wha t he needs with your honest blessing-his manhood 101 and self-respect and success will depend upon it . IV To SUM UP: To make American boys manl y, don't be cut e with your sons. The Engli sh language is rich and vi- brant and full of millions of shadi ngs and meanings. Don't use a "cute" word when a good An gl o-Saxon wor d wi ll be bett er. Don't be "hornev" with vour boys. Don 't handle them i ~ public!' I've seen Speck-mothers pawing thei r half- grown boys in superma rkets and on the street, patting them, cuddling them, resting their hands on the ir shoulders, embraci ng them. Disgusting ! A real boy hates it. Keep your hands to yours elf, Mama. Treat your boy's manhood wit h respect , even when alone with him. Don't be seductive with him, but teach him to stand when you enter a room and remain standing until you are seated. You can't begin too soon. Respect your children's privacy-in their own rooms, or when they are en- tertaining . (That is, if you have civilized them.) Don't "poke" your Mommy- head into their bedrooms, nor be "peeky" or coy. (See what I mean about language?) Don't "slip" into a boy's bedroom without first gaining permi s- sion. Only snakes "sli p." There is a sort of woman-you have probabl y met her-who softly gro ans about her "Maternal instincts," and presses her hands to her bosom, rolls her teary eyes and admits, con fesses, that she is "all mother" and just can't help loving up he r young SO il before her audience. She begs you, wit h those wet eyes, to "understand," and then to applaud her or at least to give her a sentimental smile in return. Funnv thing, though : She isn' t overcome wi th mat ernal passion when with her daugh- ters, and doesn't manhandle them in publ ic! If anything, that wet eye be- comes dr y and glaucous wh en she sur- veys her gi rls, and her voice matche s, and not even the sweetest littl e girl- child can overwhelm her with delight . Especially not your s. Winston Churchill once said tha t if a girlie woman was distasteful a boyly man was intolerable, and he was right. You want your son to be a man when he enters hi s teens, and not a girl in a boy's body, nor the sort of male who will be a "boy" until the day his weary wife either shoots him or divorces him or leaves him, nor the kind wh o will whi mper that he won't defend his coun- try nor his house nor his family, bu t will only "love" an aggressor. There is one "boy" however whom you ma y cuddle, pamper, cosset, hug and kiss to your heart's content, and be rewarded handsomel y for it, and be appreciated. That "boy" is your hus- band. Lavis h on him all the affection you can; delight in him; praise him even when you'd like to kick him where it would do a lot of good; tell him he is marvelous, beautif ul, magn ifi- cent . Lie in your teeth. Men have left thei r wi ves for man y reasons, but not one I know has left a wife who mothers him. Pretty legs are a di me a doz en, and so are inflat ed bosoms and mini- skirts and perfumed hands and lac- qu ered hair. A man likes them, but if hi s wife is a mother to him as well as a sweetheart he will think she is the loveliest woman on earth, above rubi es. beyond price, no matt er if she weighs two hundr ed pounds and has three chins and mousy hair, and is stupid. But then, a woman like that is not stupid! Only the professiona l "mothers" are, with their feminine sons and disgusted daughters. - - CRACKER BARREL - ----------- I - EAGLE ROCK- I've los t fo rty pounds since last Ch rist mas. Of course, I lost f ive of them eight times. -JACK MOFFITT 102 AMERI CAN OPINION THE ANZACS Our Allies In Australia And New Zealand PRESIDENT Lyndon Johnson' s drarnat- ic announcement of March thirty-first, that he was de-escalating the Vietnam War in an ende avor to get peace talks started with H anoi, is having long-term political repercussions in both Australia and New Zealand. Socialist opposition leaders in both count ries lost no ti me in hailing the new Ame rican policy as a confirmation of their own policy of seek- ing to end the war by first halting the bombi ng. They sensed the possibility of incr eased political suppor t as a result of the changed situation, and even expect a return to political power on both sicles of the T asma n Sea aft er what has been a long period in the political wilderness. Clearly, the Liberal-Country Govern- ment in Canberra, led by Mr. John Go r- ton, and the Nationalist Govern me nt in Well ington, led by Mr. Keith Holy- oake, were openly shaken by the John- son announcement. Dur ing the week prior to Mr. Johnson's abrupt cha nge in policy, Australian Foreign Affair s Min- ister Paul Hasluck had stood brave ly in the Aust ralian Parli ament and assur ed Australians that the war was going well. Prime Mi nister J. G. Gorton ha d in fact just expressed his opposition to any wi thdr awal from Vietnam un der cover of a phony truce agreement. T hen came the Johnson th und erbolt. Increasing numbers of people in the two Anzac* nations are begi nning to real ize that bot h Lo ndon and Washing- ton regar d them as expendable. The British are not only ret reating from Singapore and Malaya, bu t their abrupt evacuation of the major base at Aden, the center of British naval power in the SEPT EMBER, 1968 I ndian Ocean. has left a vacuum into which the Soviet is alr eady intruding. And now the threat of an American withdrawa l from Southeast Asia has driven home the message to Australians and New Zealanders that they are the most isolat ed gro up of European peopl e in the world. How they react to the de- veloping sit uation will be determined hugely hy how they resist the collectivist vir us attack ing them from within. Both Aust ralia and New Zealand have had vigorous Socialist movements since late in the last century. In Pa raguay to- day there are still descendants of the g r ~ u p of Australi ans who attempted with disast rous result s late in the Nine- teent h Century to establish a Socialist Utopia there. I n the Twenti es a Queens- land Stat e Socialist Govern ment at- tempted a maj or Socialist program with enormous financial losses. Then, after electing what appeared to be a compara- tivelv conservative Lab or Government in 1935, New Zealanders found them- selves being moved into the Welfar e State under the dir ection of such ded i- cated Social ists and internationalists as Walter Nash. Of course, the Wel fare State has not had quit e the same dead ly effects in T hi s t er m was coi ned at t he t ime of the Gallip- el i camp aign in th e Firs t World \Var, when Aus- t ra lian and N ew Zealand t roops foug ht toget her in the first ma jor mil it ar y operati on for both countr ies. Anzac is der ived f rom Australian and Ne w Zeal and Army Cn rps . Anzac Da y ccleb ra- rions, on April twent y- f i f t h of each year, arc th e biggest nati onal celebrat ions in both countries. The Gallipoli campaign was mi litarily a blood y di sast er-but it dc monsr r nt cd t hat Australian and New Zealan d t roo ps wer e among t he fine st shock troops in t he worl d. T hey were used later in t his role on t he \X' est ern Fron t in Eur ope. 103 New Zealand that it has had in some other countries, probably because a large number of New Zealanders are still en- gaged in primary production . Some of the best and most int ensive farming in the world is to be found in that country. A significant reflection of the New Zealand character is the fact that there is tremendous support there for Rhode- sia. It is no secret that the New Zealand Government agreed to take an official anti- Rhodesian stand only as a result of economic pressures from the Wi lson Government in London. Much of New Zealand's primary production is geared to the British market. The common external peril now so obvious to Australians and New Zea- land ers has forced them to start tryi ng to coordinate many of their activities. Because of Australia's much grea ter pop- ulation and advanced industrial system, it is clear that New Zealand's future must be dependent to a great extent upon what happens in Aus tralia. It is therefore essential to devote our primary attention in the brief space we have to the development and influence of the Communist Conspiracy in Australia. The Conspiracy in New Zealand oper- ates basically on the same pattern as in Australia, except that the major leader- ship there is Peking-or iented. In Aus tra- lia there is onl y a small Peking gro up. Led by Mr. Vic Wilcox, a prospero us chicken farmer, the New Zealand Com- munist Party is high ly rated in Peking because it is the only Communist Party in the Wes tern world - except Albania - following the variety of lunacy bab- bled by Chai rman Mao. But now there is a break-away Soviet wing of the Party called the Socialist Unity Party (S.U.P.) . By a much more subtle approach than the Wilcox gro up, the S.U.P. is making some progress within the New Zealand Labor Party through the trade unions, where "united front" tactics are being successfully empl oyed. A number of promi nent professors SEPTEMBER, 1968 and lecturers at New Zealand universi- ties are now vigorous ly and openly sup- porting Communist causes. Typical of these academic hooligans is a Profes- sor of Economics at Canterbury Univer- sity, W. Rosenberg - nephew of the famo us Julius Rosenberg. There has, alas, been serious Communist penetra- tion into all sections of New Zealand's educational system. Even the Principal of the famous Lincoln Agricultural Col- lege (Christ Church), Mr. Eric D. Hud- son, is a zealot for Communist causes. The pro-Vietcong demonstrators have also been active in New Zealand, staging one of their most ambitious projects when they "confronted" representatives of the S.E.A.T.O. nat ions and South Vietnam's milit ary allies at their meet - ing in Wellingt on duri ng the last week- end in March and the first week in Apri l. But it must be recorded that Pres- ident Johnson's shocking statement on Vietnam created much more havoc among the S.E.A.T.O. delegates than the "confro ntation" of the squealing anti-Vietnam demon strators! In Aust ralia the Communist move- ment has, since it was founded in 1921 with approximately three hundred mem- bers, ably demonstrated how to mould its members as Len in, Stalin, and other Communist leaders have said they should be moul ded. The Australian Commu nists have fait hf ully followed everv twist and turn of their Moscow masters. Initially, for example, they sup- ported Australia's declaration of war on Hitler's Germany in 1939, only to re- verse themselves and to try to under- mi ne the war effort whe n they learn ed from Moscow that the war was "im- perialistic." But when Hitler turned upon Stalin, his partner in crime, the Australian Communists suddenly dis- covered that the war was a just cause after all. From the begi nni ng the Australian Communists decided that they should concentrate upon penetrating the Aus- 105 tralian Labor Party through the t rade union movement. Australia is the most highl y un ioni zed nation in the world , with a combined trade union member- ship of approxima tely two mill ion- which is sixty percent of all wage and salaried workers in the country. The big- gest and wealthi est of the unions is the Aust ralian Work ers Union, whose mern- I bers are those engaged in industries as- sociated with pr imar y produ ction . This union has a long recor d of opposition to I Communism, as do manv of the craft uni ons. Commun ist influence IS at pres- ent concent rated in those uni ons cover- ing transport, communications, and power. Ina large, sparsely populated country like Austra lia, as the Commu- nists realized, transport and communi- cations are vital. This was graphically demonstrated to Austra lians early thi s year wh en the pro-Red-Chinese Secre- tar y of the Postal Workers' Union, Mr. Geo rge Slayter, stopped all mails, pro- duci ng nat ionwi de confusion. There was also a th reat to close down the tele- phone system and to stop all telegrams in an effort to test the will of the Fed- eral Government. The Government re- sisted rather well. St rikes in the highl y- centra lized, State-owned power organ - izations have also demo nstrated the havoc which the Cons piracy can create with a few men in keyposi tions. However, since the defea t of the La- bor-Socialists in the Federal Parli ament in 1949, Austra lia has been compara- tively free of the major ind ust rial con- vulsions which shook the nation in the early post-war years. Commun ist con- trol of the trade un ion movement was at its peak immediatel y after the war., T his was the period wh en the Commu- nist Secretary of the Federated I ron- workers' Uni on, Mr. Ernest Thornton, could boast : "We have planned str ikes because we have made stri kes our busi- ness." He was, of course, only parrot ing Lenin, who said : "Without the trade unions, revolution is impossi ble." SEPTEMBER, 1968 Fortunately, as a result of the defec- tion in early 1949 of a top Communist official, Cecil Sharpl ey, Australians learned how the Co m m u n i s t shad used fraudulent ballot practices to ob- tain and hold key offices in the trade unions. Following passage of appropri- ate legislati on to prevent these practices, Communist strength in the trade unions was substantially reduced. But, like Communists everywhere, the Aust ralian breed is both persistent and proli fic, and the Aust ralian Council of Trade Unions, the parliame nt of the Au stralian trade un ion mov ement, is constantly under heavy pressure from the Communists, who are assisted by the fact that most of their opponents are themselves Social- ists of one type or another . The Communist virus was so success- fully inj ected into the Austra lian Labor Party from the very birth of the Aus- trali an Communist Party that the dom- inant feature in the subsequent history of the Australian Labor Party has been consta nt controversy about Communist influence. Speaking at the Fourth Con- gress of the Communist International in Moscow, Mr. J. Garden, one of the founders of the Australian Communist Party, told of how at the All-Aus- tra lia T rade Union Conference in June, 1921: ". . . we found that we were able to cha nge the policy of the Labor Party. . .. We cha nged the objective . . . to so- cialization of industry by revolutionary, political and industrial action . . . ." Gar- clen said that Australian Communists were also working to undermine the Labor Party's support for Australia's immigr ation policy, consciously de- signed to ma intain a homogenous Eu- ropean population. Over the years Australia's immigra- tion laws have been a ma jor target for the Communist Fifth Column and its Leftist allies. Although all Australian political Part ies have in recent years claimed to have modif ied their attitude toward s what has been generally known 107 ....------------ Political Advert isement ------------...... FOUND: ARARE GEM Anti - Communist Runs For Congress Gary Allen, a graduate of Stanford University and one of the natIon's top authorities on civil turmoil and the New Left, is author of Communist Revolu- tion in the Streets-a highly praised and definitive new volume on revolutionary tactics and strategies, published by West- ern Islands. Mr . Allen is active in anti- Communist and other humanitarian causes and is President of the Founda- tion for Economic and Social Progress. A film writer and journalist, he is a Contributing Editor to AMERICAN OPINION. Gary Allen lectures widely. GENERALLY, politicians are a low sort, rating on an integrity scale somewhat below used car salesmen and only slightly above social workers, having shifty eyes and sticky fingers with egos the size of Mount Rushmore and brains the size of a wizened pea. Their promises should be taken as containing all of the sincerity of those of a sailor departing on the morning tide. There is, praise be, an occasional exception; a man who says what he means and vice versa. Occasionally, there is a man who wants to solve problems besides his own sagging bank balance. Having found such a man, he should be treasured as a rare jewel, shaped and polished, then put on display for the worl d to marvel. Your chances of finding such a gem are slimmer than gnats' ankles, but , alas, I have found one for you. His name is Mike Odell and he hangs his hat in the North woods where trees grow tall and men grow straight. I can vouch for the fact that his princi- ples are tougher than a two-bit steak and his knowledge of Communism as thorough as a Scotchman searching for a lost nickel. Yet, compared with the humor and blarney of this smil ing Irishman, Prof. Harold Hill was no salesman at all. Mike Odell converted his whole family into hard-core anti- Communists. Mike is running for Congress. He is a tough, tireless campaigner who was t he yo ungest ma n elected to t he Was hington State Legislature in 1962. Mike has no plans for being a career politician. He knows that if you don't play the game (and he won't) your chances of being re-elected are scant. But he wants a national platform from which to tell America the truth. Naturally, not only the Democrats, Washington State's Mike Odell : t he unpolitician but the Rockefeller people want to stop Mike . And you really can't blame them. Mike is a dangerous man - to the Lef t. H you are frust rated by the lack of a good candidate in your area, I know of a Class A man in Was hington State who would be eternally grateful for your support. And, as a matter of fact, so would I. Write : ODELL FOR CON- GRESS COMMITTEE, Dick Ander- son, Chairmanj6214 - 196th Street S.W. jLynnwood, Washington 98036. '------------- Political Advert isement ------------....... as the "White Australi a" policy ( prim- ari ly to escape the charge of being ra- cist"), mounting race friction in other parts of the world has convinced the great majority of Australians that they would be foolish to import a problem they do not now have. The Communists have attempted to exploit without much success the Australian aborigines, a small group of primitive people most of whom live in Australia's nor th, and who are never seen by the majority of Aus tra- lians. In New Zealand the Communists have a much larger native group, the Maoris, to try to exploit. But while the Maoris , a much more advanced people than the Australian aborigines (a nd wit h special representation in the Ne w Zealand Parliament) , seem to like the Welfare State, the Communists have had comparatively littl e success with them. For thi rty years Mr. J. Garden was a living symbol of the Communist Con- spiracy's efforts to subvert the Austra- lian Labor Party for its own purposes. He held many high positions in the A.L.P., incl udi ng that of a Member of the Federal Parliament, while at the same time remaining a card-carrying member of the Communist Part y. His Party Card was discovered when after the war he was arrested for fraud and conspiracy . At the time of his arrest he was holdi ng the vital position of liaison officer between the Chifley Labor Gov- ernment and the trade uni on movement . Writing in Th e Communist in 1925, Mr. Garden, at that time officially the head of the Communist movement in Australia, declared that: "When Labor gets into Federal power, the way will be open for the revolutionaries. .. ." But first, he not ed, "the Labor Part y should be thoroughl y Bolshevised. . . . Not only mus t the party be Bolshevised, but im- media te steps must be taken to orga nize the left wing, not only in the trade unions but in the party itself." How- ever, although the Commu nist virus SEPTEMBER, 1968 was work ing within the Labor Party, the Party's leaders found the pedd ling of collectivist objectives a severe polit- ical handicap and every effort was made to "play it down" at elections. The rev- olutionary discipline of the Labor Party split badly when it came to office dur- ing the Depression of the early Thirties: The Bolshevisation had not been thor- ough enough. But, when the Curtin Labor Govern- ment came to power early in World War II, the stage had been set for Com- rade Garden and his friends to proceed with their revolutionary program. Their power and influence were enormous, even extending into the Commonwea lth Security Organi zation, under Dr. Her- bert Vere Evatt , whose dra matic resig- nat ion as Chief Justice of the Australian High Cour t to stand as a Labor candi - date had played a majo r role in per- suading large numbers of middle-class Australians to help bring Labor to power. Evatt was a close friend of prom- inent Marxists like Professor Harold Lask i of the London School of Eco- nomics and Mr. Justice Felix Frankfur- ter, and he made little effort to hide his Marxist proclivities . Under the Curtin Labor Government of 1941-1945, patriotic anti-Communists were persecuted and a number impris- oned without charges or trial. Eventual- ly they had to be released after a judicial investigation established that a mon- strous injustice had been done. Evatt of- fered no apologies and took steps to pro- tect himself from legal action. He talked about the rul e of law, but attempted to exploit the war crisis to tear up the Aus- tralian Federal Constitution. Fo rtunate- ly the electorate insisted upon its Con- stitutional rights and turned back his moves toward overt Bolshevisation. Eventually the Communists and their Labor Party allies pushed thei r program too fast, and the attempt by the Chifley Government (1945-1949) to nationalize the Australian banking system con- 109 vineed sufficient Australian electors that they should use the Federal elections of 1949 to remove the Labor Part y from office. Across the T asman Sea the New Zealand electors also decided that they had had enough of the Socialists. The new Australian Government of Robert Menzies badly fumbled it'! first attac k on the Commu nist Part y when its legislation for outlawing t h ~ Com- munists was ruled un-Constitutional by the High Cour t. Dr. Evatt, the da rli ng of the Reds, led the successful legal bar- rage to protect the Com rades. He then sparked a campaign which routed the Menzi es Government's 1951 efforts to alter the Federal Constitution by increas- ing its power to deal with the Com- munists. Since the Feder at ion, Aus- tralians have been notoriously reluctant -through a considerable number of ref- erenda- to vote for increased Federal power. The electorate had noted that whi le pr ior to the 1949 elections Liberal and Country Part y spokesmen had been biting in their attacks on Fabian eco- nomic advisors at Can berra ( men like Dr. H . C. Coombs, Chairman of the Australian Reserve Bank), these So- cialist planners continued to hold their positions and the Menzies Government was accepti ng some of the very rest ric- tive policies it had condemned while in Opposition. As a result , many supporters of the Government rejected the proposal to increase Federal power, fearing that it would be used for purposes apart from attempti ng to ban the Commu- nists. The Government, after all, had adequate power to deal with the local Bolsheviks, but unfortunately few Mem- bers of the Government really under- stood the nature of the prob lem. By 1954 the Menzies Government had caused so mu ch electoral resentment by its failure to implement its own policies that the Labor Opposition, led by Dr. Evatt, had every prospect of bei ng re- turned to power at the elections that year. Sud denl y the bombshell announce- SEPT EMBER, 1968 ment by Prime Minister Menzies that a Soviet diplomat named Petrov was seeking political asylum in Australia, and had made sensational disclosures concerning Soviet espionage activities in Aust ralia, completely changed the po- litical atmosphere. There were wid e- spread rumors before the elections that Soviet espionage activi ties had reached most effectively int o the Department of External Affairs during the Labor Ad- ministr at ion when Dr. Evatt had him- self been Mini ster of External Aff airs. But in spite of the atmosphere produced by the Petrov defection, the Menzies Government managed to sur vive wi th only a small maj ority. It is certain, nonetheless, that without the Petrov affair Dr. Evatt wou ld have become Australian Prime Min i ste r. Petrov therefore not only made avail- able extremely valuable intelligence in- formation to the whole non-Communist worl d, he saved Australia from Labor Government led by Dr. H . V. Eva tt, one of the most dangerous men ever to enter Austra lian politics. Evatt reacted wildly to hi s defeat by chargi ng that there was a Roman Catholic "conspiracy" inside the Labor Partv. It was Roman Cathol ic members of the Labor Party who had played a major role in weakening the Communist grip on the trade unions, and who were concerned about Dr. Evatt's pro-Communist foreign policy. Evatt felt that by using the sectarian weapon he woul d drive the most mili- tant anti-Communists out of the Labor Party into political oblivion, while gai n- ing incr eased electoral support in a pre- dominantly Pro testant Australian com- munity. But inst ead he produced a ma- jor split in the Labor Party and the creation of the Democrat ic Labor Party. Under the Australian system of pref- erential voting for the House of Repre- sentatives, the D.L.P. has never elected so mu ch as a single represent ative, but its preference votes have been decisive in keeping the Liberal-Count ry coali- 111 tion Government in office. In the Sen- ate, elected on a system of proportional representation, the D.L.P. now has four Senators who hold the balance of power. The Democratic Labor Party is there- fore a major factor in the current Aus- tralian political situation, a harsh reality which the present Labor Party leader, Mr. Gough Whitlam, appreciates. The Leftist Mr. Whitlam (both he and his private secretary are members of the Fabian Society) is determined to re- store Labor's electoral fortunes. He real- izes that it is essential for him to dim the present pro-Communist image of his Party in order to gain sufficient D.L.P. "second preference" votes at next year's elections. He feels that a little harmless pebble-throwing at the Communists will not prevent the Communist-dom- inated trade unions from providing their usual financial contributions to his election campaign; and, he and his fel- low Fabians hope that the thr eatened retreat in Vietnam will persuade Aus- tralians to shift their support from mili- tary defense to "neutralism" and the purchase of Asian friendships through more "foreign aid." In spite of the fact that the Commu- nist virus has penetrated deeply into many sectors of the Australian commu- nity - particularly the universities, the mass media, and the government's Aus- tralian Broadcasting Commission- until the Johnson statement on the shift in America's Vietnam policy, ther e was no evidence of a major collapse in Austra- lian will and morale. Just prior to the Johnson capitul ation a promine nt Mem- ber of the Government had even tabled a motion urging that Aust ralia should support those Ame ricans calling for a tougher military policy in Vietnam. Since then, a public opinion poll has shown that a substantial majorit y of Australians favor an increased Austra- lian milit ary effort to help fill the vacu- um left by the Brit ish withdrawal from Southeast Asia. Clearly, the Anzacs are starting to come under the greatest test in their his- tory. But the old Anzac spirit remains. It was well reflected by Mrs. 2ara Holt, wife of the late Prime Minister Harold Holt, when she said in April, after re- turning home from the United States, that she and her fellow Australians would-if necessary- at least go down fighting the Communists! Can you imagine Jacqueline Kennedy saying a thi ng like that? CRACKER BARREL----------- EAGLE ROCK-We' ve got a cute new puppy at our house. His mot her was a cham- pion poodl e and his fat her was a leash law violator. EAGLE ROCK-In marriage, a woman gives t he best years of her life. In a happ y marriage, she gives them to t he man who made t hem the best. EAGLE ROCK-Wh en t he onl y gleam in your eye is caused by t he sun hitting your bifocals, you' re about ready to give up. EAGLE ROCK-A good listener is usuall y thinking about somet hing else. EAGLE ROCK-The perfe ct wife knows when her husb and wants to be force d to do someth ing against his will. EAGLE ROCK-If you st ill have your tonsils and appendix af ter t he age of thirty, the chances are you' re a doct or . EAGLE ROCK-A girl can look both virt uous and tremendously excit ing- if she also looks like she has to put up a const ant fight to do it . EAGLE ROCK-Too man y peopl e who have passed t heir dr iving tests t hink th ey can pass anything. EAGLE ROCK-The t rouble wi th some ser mons is th at t he aut hor hasn't sinned enough to be able to preach about it . EAGLE ROCK-The har dest secret f or a guy to keep is the opinion he has of hi mself. EAGLE ROCK-A pr etty I rish girl on a quiz program was asked the other night wh o, out of all t he world, she'd rat her be. Blushi ng f uriously, she answered, ' 'I'd rat her be Lieute nant Milton Cohen in Vietn am-he's in the same tent wi t h my husband." -JACK MOF FITT 112 AMERICAN OPINION Lt. Gen. L. B. (Chesty) PuLLer, U.S.M.C. (Ret.) ~ --- -- .... LEWIS BURWELL (CHESTY) PULLER is a soldier's soldier who became the fightingest Leathern eck of all time. It is not something that happened by accident , but some- thi ng he did because of wh at he is. Character is the word for it. Character and valor and honor - good synonyms for United States Marine. And that iron character is something that Chesty Puller was no doubt born with on 26 Ju ne 1898 in West Point, Vi rginia, for he comes from a family of justly famous Confederat e ancestors. He grew to young manhood steeped in the tradi tions of the South. Afte r a year at Virginia Military Insti tute, he enlisted in the Marines on the day after his twentieth birth day and rose from priva te to lieutenant general. In over thirty-seven years of service Chesty Puller won more combat decorations than any Marine in history. Among those awards was a Purple Heart for seven wounds he received on Guadal- canal, and five Navy Crosses-the nati on's second-high est medal. Chesty served an amazing twent y-seven years on sea and foreign-shore dut y. As a young Mar ine he fough t his way through more than a hundred combats in the Banana Wars of Haiti and Nicaragua, earning from the natives there the grim nickname , EI Tigre; he commanded the famo us Horse Marin es in Peki ng in the early Thirti es, where for diversion and fur- ther toughening he learn ed to play polo, and ga rnered a four-goal handicap; he comma nded a Marin e batt alion in Shangh ai in the days just prior to Worl d War II ; and wit h the declaration of hostiliti es following Pearl Harbor, he battled his way thro ugh Guadalca nal, and then from island to island in the Pacific, concludi ng at Peleliu, wh ere against tremendous odds, he led the assault on the Japanese in one of the most awesome battl es in Marine history. In the Korean Wa r, Chesty Pull er resumed command of the Fi rst Marines, and personally led his regiment ashore in the assault at Inchon, one of history's gr eat est amphi bious st rikes. He mar ched on Seoul , and eventually commanded the rear of the Fi rst Mari ne Division, wh ich had been cut off in the area of the Chosen Reservoir by hundreds of thousands of Ch inese Communists. It was dur ing this action, wh en Chesty was infor med that his force was completely surrounded by the enemy hord es, that he replied: "Those poor bastards. They've got us right where we want 'em. We can shoot in every direction now." This from a general officer wh o never set standards for his men that he wouldn't-and didn't-perform himself. He persona lly led his troops, demanding that his subordinate commanders do likewise. A favorite exclamation about Chesty originated wit h a battle- weary lieut enant in Korea who said: "I'd follow hi m to hell - and it looks like I'm going to have to." Chesty Puller was often muzzled and kept un der wraps, but nonetheless made himself heard. He readi ly expounded valid win-concepts about every phase of Leftist failing in the Korean War (and on the current war in Vietnam), regularly blasting the United Nations Organizat ion, and he made himself kn own as being as hard-core an anti -Communist as he is a Marine. Thus, on 31 October 1955, at a tough , young fifty-seven, thi s splendid and outspoken Marine was forced to retire from active service. AMERICAN OPI NION is proud to salute General Lewis Burwell Puller as the living legendary exemplification of the Marines' mott o, Semper Fidelis- Always Faithful. - BRIG. GEN. WILLIAM C. LEMLY, U.S.M.e. (RET.)
(Milestones in American History) Edward J., Jr. Renehan - The Monroe Doctrine - The Cornerstone of American Foreign Policy - Chelsea House Publications (2007)