100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

March 21, 1968 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1968-03-21

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.


Seventy-Seven Years of Editorial Freedom
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIvERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

McCarthy Against the Kennedy Machine

Where Opinions Are Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MICH.
Truth Will Prevail

NEws PHONE: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

THURSDAY, MARCH 21, 1968

NIGHT EDITOR: HENRY GRIX

The British Tax Hike:
Moving Toward Stability

T*HE WAGE ceiling and tax increases
proposed Tuesday by the British gov-
ernment are harsh measures, but ones
which are probably necessary if the
country's economy is to be saved from
total collapse.
Britain's balance of payments prob-
lems, which has grown increasingly acute
in recent years, has not been solved by
the halfhearted economy measures in-
troduced last year or the devaluation of
the .pound from $2.80 to $2.40 last No-
vember.
Without the deflationary impetus
which the wage ceiling and tax increase
represent, the foundations of the British
economy would have been further eroded
and Britain's hope to enter the European
Economic Community./dealt yet another
setback.
THE LABOR government's latest budget
combines the highest taxes in the
nation's peacetime history with a request
for legislation allowing the government
to put a ceiling on wages, prices and
dividends.
If this legislation is adopted, wage and
dividend increases will be limited to 3.5
per cent a year and the government
would have the power to roll back any
individual prices found to be too high.
The tax increases, designed to hit
Brit9hs in all walks- of life, total $2.2
billion and will account for 8.5 per cent
of the British tax revenues this year.
The tax hike, which takes the indirect
form of sales taxes rather than the more
direct approach of an increase in income
taxes, is designed to cut consumer
spending without adversely affecting en-
trepreneurial initiative. Nonetheless, it
is estimated that the severe tax pro-
grams will cause a one per cent drop in
the real standard of living this year, as
opposed to a predicted one per cent rise
without the new budget.
rHESE MEASURES will naturally arouse
some opposition, possibly to the extent
of ousting Labor from power. Organized
labor has made it clear that it is un-
alterably opposed to wage controls in
any form whatsoever. How the specific
proposals for such controls are received
in Parliament today will show whether
or not the Labor Party can convince the
strong union element within its ranks
that the program is indeed necessary.
In addition, the party's left wing may
also bolt--partly on grounds that the
indirect method of taxation will hit low-
er class living standards much harder
than those of the more affluent.

Should the Wilson government fail, the
Conservatives can be expected to capi-
talize on Britain's economic troubles of
the past three years - troubles which
Edward Heath yesterday blamed on the
"disastrous incompetence" of Labor.
Should there be an election in which
the Tories triumph, however, it seems
likely that they would adopt very similar
measures upon coming into power.
But the new budget just might have
the opposite effect on strengthening
Labor's political position, as evidenced by
the enthusiasm with which Chancellor
of the Exchequer Roy Jenkins' speech
announcing the budget was accepted
Tuesday.
Because, as even the heavily-burdened
British taxpayer is beginning to realize,
this kind of action is what their economy
most needs today.
DESPITE BRITAIN'S key position in
international finance, the country
has not had a really favorable balance of
trade since around 1900. It has taken
two-thirds of a century for the British
to realize that, in light of their position
as raw materials importers, their export
industries must be emphasized if they
are to meet the competition of the United
States, Germany, 'France, Japan, the
Soviet Union, Scandinavia, and their own
Commonwealth for manufactured goods.
Some steps were taken in this direction
last year when a tax measure designed
to lure workers from servic to export in-
pdustries was introduced by Jenkins and
subsequently adopted by Parliament.
The Labor government now realizes
the benefits that Common Market mem-
bership, with its attendant tariff elimi-
nations, would bring to Britain. They
also realize that one of the chief bars of
British entry into the European Economic
Community are her balance of payments
difficulties and the related problem of
the instability of the pound.
ASIDE FROM the need for stability of
the pound - and the dollar - as the
two currencies upon which so many
others rest, meeting the conditions for
Common Market entry is reason enough
for Britain to take the severe steps which
are so desperately needed to restore the
vitality of British trade and the health of
her monetary system.
The new budget is a necessary step
toward the recovery of the British eco-
nomy and eventual Common Market-
membership.
-JENNY STILLER

EDITOR'S NOTE: The following is
written by former Daily staffer
George Abbott White, now a gradu-
ate student at Brandeis University.
CAMBRIDGE, Mass.-It has been
a busy week out here, even by
Cambridge standards. Senator
Eugene McCarthy had Adminis-
tration polsters revising polls hour-
ly in the north, Secretary of State
Dean Rusk decided to talk to Sen-
ator Fulbright in public (Secretary
of Defense Clifford Case unfor-
tunately, declined) down south,
and in Cambridge, everybody's
darkhorse candidate for Secretary
of State-McGeorge Bundy-de-
livered his three Godkin Lectures
at Harvard.
The dust settles as the campaign
moves west, and the meaning of
the action becomes clearer: Eugene
McCarthy deserves the title "Can-
didate for the Presidency." He has
emerged as a truly national candi-
date with a purpose, and, with a
following that appears sound.
McCarthy capitalized on an at-
mosphere created as much by Lyn-
don Johnson's blunders (both in-
tended and accidental) in Asia,
and New Hampshire, as by the in-
tellectual push left by Black Power
advocates and SDS community or-
ganizers. He avoided the daigers
of mere personality and concen-
trated on issues--solidly. He car-
ried an incredibly sophisticated
campaign into the granite-like
hawkishness of New England-to
villages and towns as well as in-
dustrial centers-and in a manner
that made his "non-personality"
charismatic by interjecting a
much-needed factor into American
political life: integrity.
McCARTHY very nearly excludes
integrity,-from the way he simp-
ly and fully answers reporter's
questions, to the almost painfully
sincere and low-keyed speeches on
everything from recognition of the
N.L.F. to an all volunteer Army
or solutions to urban chaos. Many
here think this factor has been in
large part responsible for his cap-
turing the group the New Left de-
spairs of and Democratic liberals
thought hopelessly apathetic: the
great American Middle.
McCarthy got not only margin-
ally-left students to shave beards
and tie ties, got not only those
totally ignorant, politically; Mc-
Carthy got the sons and daughters
of the Middle to put aside their
books and beers for leaflets. His.
And more importantly, he got their
parents to vote for him. In aston-
ishing addition, he persuaded 5,000
New Hampshire Republicans to
cross over the line and write him

in, bringing him near for past,
depending upon how or who
counts) President Johnson.
Several months ago, Senator
Robert Kennedy's entrance into
this race would have been read as
Divine deliverance. Now, it seems
not only to have split strategy, but
also possibility, i.e., can Johnson
be defeated for re-nomination?
The air is electric with talk of
Deals, counter-deals, sell-out am-
bushes, et al. Soldiers run from
one camp to another, then back
again. A bittter fight split the
Harvard Crimson Editorial Board
and the paper, which had previous-
ly vigorously supported McCarthy,
voted Friday 13-11 to switch to
Robert Kennedy, '48.
KENNEDY'S entrance was anti-
cipated, and it could have been
read, even last week, between the
lines of McGeorge Bundy's lec-
tures, with their frequent refer-
ences to "President Kennedy" and
the newly-vindicated virtues of
electoral politics.
Beneath the surface, beneath
talk of "opportunism" and "ar-
rogance," are the more subtle and
more important questions of genu-
ine emphasis and genuine change:
Is Kennedy a man to be trusted
to end the war in Vietnam or is
he just another Harvard boy who
wants to be President? Worse, has
a deal been struck with President
Johnson, or worse yet, electing
Kennedy, are we to find ourselves
re-electing a grouping that for-
mulated and implemented the pol-
icy that makes, has made, Vietnam
and other countries like it, reality?
There are those who think the
latter two questions unthinkable.
The Crimson, for instance, gave
reasons for its switch to Kennedy
in the usual Harvard version of
realpolitik: "Kennedy's candidacy
has obvious advantages. The for-
mer attorney general is an expe-
rienced national campaigner . . .
Kennedy has a greater knowledge
of the Byzantine ways of state ...
Kennedy can command the funds
for the massive media cam-
paign. . ." with the usual qualifi-
cations: "He realizes the costs of
Vietnam and has admitted the
shortsightedness of the policy his
brother pursued . .
Yet those familiar with the
"Byzantine ways of state," those
never fully committed to McCar-
thy, or committed out of frustra-
tion, have reservations that com-
mand most careful scrutiny; re-
servations that might make greater
support of McCarthy a necessity.
Their arguments run that rather
than markedly escalate the war

to dispose of the rising McCarthy
tide, the President has decided to
run again as a "Peace Candidate"
against a man perceived as more
hawkish than he. Nixon is almost
ideal for this sort of ploy, but
Johnson can hardly expect to be
believed this time around. He must
make a characteristically drama-
tic gesture. The perfect, if some-
what painful solution, is to select
Robert Kennedy as his running
mate.
Kennedy's announcement to "re-
consider" came within hours after
the New Hampshire results. (Those
responsible for the McCarthy cof-
fers were most outraged about this.
Couldn't he have waited at least
a day?) McCarthy and the peace
issue immediately lost their priority
in press covers. Rusk and Com-
pany were nearly forgotten. Sud-

endorsement of McCarthyism, the
advocacy of greatly increased de-
fense spending, the adoption of a
counter-insurgency strategy, the
Kennedy clan's modus operandi is
clear. And the fact that both I. F,
Stone and Arthur Schlesinger are
agreed that John F. Kennedy's
anger over Cuba was not so much
the exposure of a reactionary theo-
ry of social change, but "misinfor-
mation" by the generals, or that
the showdown with Kruschev was,
finally, a matter of "touchiness"
and "honor," should put flesh on
whatever bones of pure idealism
are still associated with Robert
Kennedy's image.
IN SPITE of whatever gestures
of reconciliation are made, or are
said to have been made-whether
the questionable loan of Kennedy-
writer Richard Goodwin in New
Hampshire, or statements of "sup-
port" by Robert Kennedy-the
Kennedy family role in Massachu-
setts seems to indicate that any
previous reconciliation was sharp-
ly undercut. An article by Leslie
Carpenter of the Boston Herald
Traveler Washington Bureau de-
serves general notice.
Carpenter contends that Mc-
Carthy knew Senator Edward M.
Kennedy didn't want him to enter
the Massachusetts primary because
it would divide the state Demo-
cratic Party and embarass Ted
Kennedy personally. McCarthy de-
clared he would, but immediately
after he learned the results of a
vote of the Massachusetts State
Committee on a resolution sup-
porting President Johnson (includ-
ing a strong statement in favor of
the Administration's Vietnam pol-
icy).
Carpenter believes that Kennedy,
didn't think McCarthy would run
in his state if the committee vote
went against him by a large mar-
gin. There is evidence of Kennedy
trying to rig it that way. At least,
says Carpenter, friends of Ken-
nedy were on the phone trying to
get all 80 members of the State
Committee to the meeting. And the
outcome, considering the size of
the tally (only four voted against
the resolution) and Kennedy's in-
fluence within the state party
leadership, suggests the word was
also passed to vote for the resolu-
tion.
There is little doubt in Cam-
bridge that the Kennedy's are
greatly preferable to Lyndon John-
son. Yet it is not merely loyalty
to a courageous McCarthy that
makes people want to stick with
him, The thinking is that McCar-
thy is far less likely to sell out

to Johnson on the crucial issues
of war and peace than Kennedy.
And moreover, neither Robert Mc-
Namara and Walt Rostow, nor
people like him, would have a place
in his administration. People here
are becoming more and more
aware too, of McCarthy's substan-
tial record in Congress.
* * *
I RECEIVED a call tonight
(Sunday) that Senator McCarthy
was flying in from Washington to
speak at a small rally at Woburn,
about ten minutes north of Boston.
Snow here has finally gone away,
but it has been raining cold and
steadily for days. There were a few
questions I wanted to ask, and be-
sides, in the downpour, the crowd
would be small.
McCarthy was his quiet and firm
self: "I applaud the vigor and
courage of my supporters . . . No
matter how this thing goes, years
from now, when your children ask:
'Where were you in 1968? What
was your stand?' you can answer,
'We stood up. We fought the good
fight. We served our country in
truth.'" The school seemed to
shake as 2500 people started
screaming. And that was that,
McCarthy looked my way. "Mr.
Senator," I said, "it seems to me
that the major point of differen-
tiation between you and Senator
Kennedy is that the character of
people around you is substantially
different in emphasis and experi-
ence than his. Could you comment
on that?"
"Well . . . two days ago, I was
told that Senator Kennedy had a
good more experience; to recom-
mend him; that, for instance, he
had sat on the National Security
Council for several years .. . I am
not so certain that is a recom-
mendation."
The moment he finished, a tall
man thrust his mouth .over my
head, two more on either side of
McCarthy, and there was the ex-
pected chorus of "Thank you Mr.
Senator." Outside, the crowds ,had
gone It was still pouring. A man
who identified himself as, one of
the Massachusetts Steering Com-
mittee for McCarthy,. came along-
side. He had noticed my Daily card.
"Say, you people in Ann Arbor
don't like Bobby very much, do
you?"
I watched the huge l*cCarthy
bus lumber into the night; Maine,
I had been told. "I've heard that
some buses just left Ann Arbor for
Wisconsin . . . all I know is that
they all have 'McCarthy' painted
on them . . ." Bobby's not much
different in some ways than our
man." Oh. I thought, but he is.

4
*

Eugene McCarthy
denly there was the introduction
of "personality" into a campaign
that the McCarthy supporters had
sought to keep issue-oriented. Sud-
denly there were the same old gen-
eralities and the loose identifica-
tion with "peace."
Finally, so the argument goes,
Kennedy probably believes that he
can consolidate control over the
party as Vice President (since
Johnson has allowed the organ-
ization to disintegrate). Johnson,
on the other hand, presumably
feels he could manipulate situa-
tions to such an extent that Ken-
nedy, as his Vice President, would
eventually become a general ob-
ject of ridicule and contempt.
There are, of course, few illu-
sions by anyone about the Kenne-
dys. From stock market manipula-
tion and rather strange remarks
about the Nazis in the 1930's to the

*
4
U

Letters: Rationale for ROTC

To the Editor:
THREE recent feature articles
have appeared in The Daily
dealing with ROTC programs at
the University. In these articles
two very important questions were
raised: "Is ROTC a legitimate
part of an academic program"
and, "Are the present instructors
qualified to teach at this univer-
sity?" I believe that both these
questions can be answered af-
firmatively.
To say that ROTC or military
science is not a legitimate aca-
demic study because it is a pro-
fessional training program is to
object to engineering, medicine,
and professional programs also.
Often the underlying reason for
the objection to ROTC is a per-
sonal value judgment.
Some people feel this training
and information should not be
available at the University even if
of, our own free will, I and others
desire it. This point of view is
censorship in its purest form. Only
in an atmosphere where all
knowledge is available can free-
dom really be said to exist. If I
believe that this type of training
is necessary to the welfare of the
country why can it not be taught
at a University?
BUTuARE the present instruc-
tors qualified to teach this sub-

ject? The Daily article insinuated
that, because most of the ROTC
personnel hold only bachelor de-
grees they are not as qualified to
teach as the teaching fellow with
a masters degree.
This sort of objection is the
result of ignoring the different
forms an advanced degree can
take. In their field the instructors
of ROTC all have advanced de-
grees. They are all of a captains
rank or higher. All have seen ac-
tive duty in Vietnam who have
taught me. All these men are pro-
fessionals with a great degree of
experience.
In light of these realizations I
think we can dismiss these par-
ticular objections to ROTC at
Michigan.
-Roger L. McCarthy '70
Elvira Madigan
To the Editor:
DANIEL OKRENT thinks that
"Elvira Madigan" is a better
movie than "A -Man and a Wo-
man." Its tough to compare
movies as far as which deserves
more - taste is taste. I would,
however, like to explore some mis-
representations which I think Ok-
rent makes in his characterization
of the two movies.
T will disregard the comment
about Lord Byron except to com-

ment that he seems to think that
Byron was a lousy poet, as though
Byron were a synonym for super-
ficialwriting. Why didn't he men-
tion Keats, Shelly, Robert Frost
or any other poet he's heard of
and doesn't like. (You probably
like Ferlinghetti and Ginsberg a
whole lot more, don't you, baby?)
OK. Be sophisticated.
"Lelouch did not establish any
kind of depth; his character were
merely in love, they did not en-
gage in the necessarily concomit-
ant agony of love." Let us then
compare the two kinds of love. I
have no idea what "merely in
love" is, but let's look at "A Man
and a Woman" anyway. I distinct-
ly recall a scene in which Woman
is lying below Man ("merely in
love" I suppose) and at this mo-
ment of total involvement we sud-
denly hear Woman's heartbeat
tense as she returns to herself and
thinks of her first husband (now
dead). This flashback scene of
rolling in the snow or riding on
horses (I forget which it was) was
really real. I mean there she is
in bed and she starts thinking
about her dead husband. This
seems to me like agony - deep
personal anguish. In "Elvira" the
agony is all external. The cruel
world says "you're too young,"
or "he's no good," or "wait till

Resistance Drafts Coffin

,THE REV. WILLIAM Sloane Coffin is
proof that resistance against the war
in Vietnam is no longer just a series of
individual acts of protest, but a move-
ment witn a nationai voice.
He is proof that the movement has
become coordinated, and that its goals
are crystallizing to a point where the
movement as a whole can be directed
consciously. He represents the "disen-
chanted youth," "the frustrated liberal,"
and even George Wallace's "pseudo-lib-
eral." The growing number of people
skeptical of the nation's policies will
listen to him hear the other side's point
of view. And with his eloquent speaking
style, his wisdom, his wit and his insight,
those who were once unsure will find
themselves discarding their blind faith
in the "establishment" to realize that
the "American dream may become a
nightmare."
No Comment
LANSING M- - A Republican legislator
has blasted the University of Mich-
igan as "a citadel of radicalism" where
students risk both treasonous philoso-
phies and pregnancy.
"Could it be possible that legislative
action is long overdue?" asked Rep.
Thomas Sharpe, R-Howell, in a newsletter
to his constituents.
Alleging demands by "radical students"
for "the right to entertain coeds behind
closed doors in their bedrooms" and their
support of leftist political ideas, Sharpe

Rev. Coffin, though he will deny it, is
a leader of the movement.
Rev. Coffin is neither a politician nor
a diplomat. Some of his views of
America's role in world affairs are
sketchy and open to much debate. His
sacrifice of "purity for relevance" is not
always congruous with his identification
as a chaplain. He even seems somewhat
naive in thinking that youth can turn
on and off at will "their great moral
view of the world." He fails to under-
stand that young people will rarely dis-
card their morals simply to attain their.
ends.
But Rev. Coffin does understand our
nation's tragic involvement in Vietnam.
He displays an unusual amount of com-
passion for his country and his fellow
man, and carries a heavy burden of re-E
sponsibility to help - correct the ills be-
setting the country. His thesis of original
sin displays an optimism about the future
both unusual and refreshing.
COMBINING HIS compassion with his
energy and unrelenting faith and con-
viction in that which he believes, he is
the impetus for the movement to con-
tinue. He has given the movement a cen-
ter, a meaning. He has become a focal
point for dissent.
Having worked and lived among youth
all his life, he understands them and can
communicate with them. For this, he will
undoubtedly be branded a perpetual
adolescent by some of his own generation.
But quietly, he accepts this all as al-?
most predestined and certainly as though

you're older children." That sounds
like a 1959 rock and roll problem.
Problems like not having food are
agonizing and real - but they
are also, external and outside of
the love. In a sense it is a path-
etic problem of not being able to
face reality. The situation in "A
Man and a Woman" is different
in being more directly related to
to love between the two people.
The whole problem with Elvira
and Sixten is their avoidance and
denial of the external world. They
are destroyed because they refuse
to deal with problems. Coming out
of societies as rigid and constric-
ted as armies and circuses, they
have a very distorted sense of
reality. They escape their old roles
and become "lovers." Sixten feels
some doubt about abandoning his
wife, he knows that he and Elvira
are running out of food - yet he
makes only the barest attempts
to think about these problems or
deal with them.
THEY DENY reality more and
more, until finally, in a scene for
me strangely sad, they are des-
perately reaching out for butter-
flies, a physical embodiment of
the unreality they are dying for.
In this context the butterfly is
beautifully used. It is fragile, elu-
sive, ultimately unattainable. So
he kills her and then himself and
now there will never be another
problem - no more loving, no
more butterflies, no more world.
Contrast this deluded way of
looking at the world with the po-
sitive affirmation of "A Man and
a Woman." Instead of giving up
they come together in the end
in an act of love and hope, exactly
the opposite of Elvira and Sixten's
decision.
Cinematic beauty was certainly
in evidence in both. The parallel-
ism is there in every good movie,
however - if you're looking for
it. (Did you notice how 'Bonnie
and Clyde share a pear -in the
car - they're first starting to feel
how it is to be in love and to en-
joy each other as people - right
before they're killed?)
ELVIRA MADIGAN is a beau-
tifully produced tragedy. But don't
believe that happy endings don't
deserve more. Choose life and
live, baby. That, I submit, is where
it's at.
-Mark Schoem, '71
IDA Education
To the Editor:
T n 1 i 'YTTr. TT St .. . . L..

them. It would have been a legi-
timate display of student power,
according to Lehner, et. al., if
both referenda would have passed.
However, as they ' failed, they
are crying like pampered children
who have been frustrated in the
fulfillment of their desires. Ac-
cordingly, they proclaim that the
students need more "education,"
and of course, that the referenda
failed because of the machinations
of evil engineering students.
As an "uneducated" person, I
happen to see things differently.
I have been exposed to six months
of "teach-ins," "sit-ins," trumpet-
ings from the editorial pages of
The Daily, and the biased reports
which have appeared upon its
other pages concerning this sub-
ject.
THIS HAS all occured without
the benefit of any campaign
which sought to "educate" the
student body as to the wisdom of
opposing ideas. However, I have
now become "uneducable," as I
refuse to concern myself further
with the drivel produced by Mr.
Lehner and his other colleagues
upon The Daily staff. Further-
more, I chortle with glee when I
think that this could possibly be
the case with many others.
Although not an engineering
student, I voted against both pro-
posals, and would do so again.
Secondly, although I am ashamed
to admit it, I voted for Mr.
Koeneke, who is one of the parties
who seeks to "educate" me.
-James L. Russell, Grad
Apartheid
To the Editor:
THE PROPOSALS made by Ur-
ban Lehner and Walter Sha-
piro in their editorial (Daily,
March 5, 1968) are interestingly
similar to the policy followed by
the South African government.
The following Quotes could have
come directly from a government-
sponsored information leaflet on
"Self-determination" of "Separate
Development" or "Apartheid":
"More than anything else, black
people demand to control the con-
ditions of their lives, their politics,
their school systems, their supplies
of goods and services. . . blacks
can take a maior significant step
toward self-determination
(etc.)."
Compare the following, taken
from a booklet compiled by the
Department of Information, Pre-
toria, South Africa: "Black Afri-
can people have so far all refused

-0

- --A - im job

m-M

I

i
s
3

..---

'4-;
£4-/
/ ,

,
s

° .. c ttt
i
" .
-< s +.
(
.
\
l

.s
.cty
r 1
fit
1
--- _ 1.

*

V

I

f

I

Back to Top

© 2017 Regents of the University of Michigan