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


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.

September 19, 1970 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1970-09-19

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

le trlygan Batty'
Eighty years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan

balancii teacups

No skin off your back?. Wanna bet ...

moda I

nnadiiie col


420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich.

News Phone: 764-0552

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



U.S. foot-dragging in Paris

TE UNITED STATES has long charged
that its adversaries at the Paris peace
talks are making no serious attempt to
end the Vietnam War. But the reaction
of the U.S. negotiators to Thursday's
peace proposal by the Provisional Revolu-
tionary Government in South Vietnam
seems to expose the United States as the
real detriment to progress at the talks.
The recent proposal offers a broad
range of-safeguards for the purported ob-
jectives of the U.S. in Southeast Asia, but
still the negotiators say they find noth-
ing promising for negotiation in their
first reading of the proposal.
The chief issue at stake in the proposal
is the setting of a date for the with-
drawal of American troops. If this can be
agreed to, then the Viet Cong have agreed
to Immediately begin talks on the ques-
tions of insuring safety for the withdraw-
ing troops and also to begin discussions
on the release of American prisoners of
war. The U.S. no doubt, will continue to
argue that its troops are needed in South
Vietnam, but the interesting point about
the proposal is that it seems to undercut
with guarantees of safety all the argu-
nients used by the Nixon administration
to justify the presence of American
troops in S.E. Asia.
In the, p a s t few y e a r s, four basic
premises have been set for this purpose:
-to provide for "self-determination"
for the South Vietnamese people;
-to prevent a "bloodbath" which would
allegedly follow a quick takeover by North
Vietnam without a continuing presence;
-to . protect the sovereignty of such
nations as Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, etc.;
-to insure the safety of the last
troops remaining in the case of a with-
With regard to self-determination, the
proposal is simple and direct.
First, and perhaps most importantly,
the proposal suggests that the provisional
revolutionary government will negotiate
solely and directly with the existing South
Vietnamese government.
It does demand that President Nguyen
Van Thieu, Vice President Nguyen Cao
Ky, and Premier Van Thien Khiem not
be involved in the dealings, but the pres-
ence of these men would certainly not be
essential to the maintenance of both the
interests and essential character of the
present government. For as a result of
the nature of the elections which created
that government - anti-war, and com-
munist candidates were not allowed to
participate-such a homogeneous govern-
ment was formed that any three men in
it certainly ought to be dispensable with-
out tremendous effect. If it is indeed the
interests of the. South 'Vietnamese and
not the interests of Thieu and Ky that
the U.S. has in mind at the talks, this
point ought to be negotiable.
THE PROPOSAL also calls for the estab-
lishment of a provisional government
of broad coalition for the organization of
really free and democratic general elec-
tions and also ,for insuring the right to
self-determination of the South Vietna-
mese people during the transitory period
between the restoration of peace and the
holding of general elections. The pro-
visional government would also be set up
by the various existing parties, includ-
ing, of course, the current Saigon govern-
ment. This is certainly also self determi-
nation for the South Vietnamese.
By self-determination, of course, the
United States also implies several aspects

of the government must be acceptable to
the United States. But the U.S. can hardly
disagree with the objectives of the Viet
Cong in this respect, for the statement
calls for "an administration which stands
for peace, independence, neutrality, which
improves the people's living conditions,
which insures democratic liberties such
as freedom of speech, freedom of the
press, -freedom of assembly, freedom of
belief, and which releases those who have
been jailed for political reasons and dis-
solves concentration scamps so that the
inmates therein may return and live in
their native places."
Thus, the U.S. surely cannot continue
to use the self-determination argument
as a justification for fighting the Viet
Cong for the proposal 'elearly demon-
strates that the PRG is genuinely inter-
ested in self-determination.
THE BLOODBATH argument is made
equally invalid by the proposal. The
proposal states that:
"The provisional coalition govern-
ment will carry out a policy of na-
tional concord, insure the democratic
freedoms of the people, prohibit all
acts of terror, reprisal, and discrimi-
nation against those who have col-
laborated with either side, stabilize
and improve the living conditions of
the people and organize general elec-
tions in order to form a coalition
Thirdly, the proposal issues specific
assurances that the proponents of the
"domino theory" need not fear the pro-
liferation of warlike activity by the Viet-
cong. The peace plan specifically states,
"The provisional government will pursue
a foreign policy of peace and neutrality,
practice a policy of good neighborliness
with the kingdoms of Laos and Cam-
bodia, and r e s p e c t the sovereign-
ty, independence, neutrality and territor-
ial integrity of these two countries."
FINALLY, THE most ' important sub-
stance of the proposal is that the
safety of American troops will be guar-
anteed. Since the whole aim of the pro-
posal is to offer the safety of the troops,
then Nixon can hardly argue that with-
drawal must be slow.
But even more revealing than the pro-
posal itself on this aspect was the U.S.
reaction. For U.S. officials said in the
N.Y. Times yesterday both that they did
not believe that the Viet Cong would
shoot at withdrawing troops and t h a t
they felt the military could defend itself
in any case.
In view of the fact that the Cambodian
invasion and most recent administration
arguments for slow withdrawal have been
based on the need for protection of the
withdrawing troops, it casts serious
doubts on the credibility of the admin-
, Becausethe Viet Cong had never spe-
cifically guaranteed the safety of these
troops, Nixon could tell the public that
protracted occupation of South Viet-
nam was necessary and appear credible
with much of the public. But now that it
is clear that Saigon could be safe if it
negotiated, and that U.S. troops are in
no danger, it is time for the American
people to force the administration to get
serious about withdrawal and peace at
the Paris talks.

READ the New York Times
fashion page the other day. It
was accidental. I was on my way
to the editorial section but hap-
pened to glance at an array of
pictures on page 54-the ."food
fashions f a m i l y furnishings"
spread-and must confess to a
lapse of will power that failed to
stop me from reading on.
I didn't like what I saw. I didn't
believe what I saw. But I want to
share it with you because this
shouldn't be limited only to New
Yorkers or to those who might
pick up The Times.
One of the headlines read "Furs
for Grande Dames and 'Wild
Kids.'" and the article provided a
look at what is in store for those
who want cold weather rags in the
Just-Under $1,000 to $25,000
The coats are the creation of
one mind-furrier Jacques Kap-
lan-who reportedly "'promised
everything for everyone' " this
year. Jacques, The Times further
explains, is known for his "ir-
reverence with pelts," and the pic-
tures and article amply justify this
The furrier also has a penchant
for mink, we're told, evidenced by
his tie-dying, shearing and sten-
cilling of it in creation earlier this
year. And now he has used it to
provide, among other things, a
mixed media masterpiece-a olue
denim coat lined with red, mink
to be worn with a blue denim skirt,
or I suppose on the streets of Ann
Arbor, with one's classiest pair of
bell bottoms.
"The kids can go as wild as they
like," The Times adds, for Jacques
has also designed:

A cape made of purple uphol-
stery velvet trimmed in black
curly lamb.
-A blue-dyed nutria (the pluck-
ed fur or pelt of a coypa, a South
American aquatic rodent) with tie-
died sleeves and belt, in the style
of a Japanese kimono;
-A group of pieced minks in
bright colors resembling stained
-Sheepskin coats, fur side in-
side, painted with huge buter-
flies or flowers;
-Gorilla coats, (apparently be-
cause they look as hiresute as
gorillas do) made not of gorilla
fur but primarily of goat,
-A Silent Majority wrap made
of ribbons embroidered with flags
which are sandwiched between two
sleeves of dyed red rabbit fur nd
red rabbit trim on the bottom; and
-A rabbit coat with peace sym-
bols stencilled on the front, back,
sides, and sleeves, presumably for
the Vocal Minority.
ALTHOUGH IT is difficult to
predict what next year's political
and social phenomena will be, one
is confident that Kaplan will
probably be as atuned to the times
then as he tries to be now. And
I would bet that we can look for-
ward to such lovely creations as:
-The Bomb Proof Mink Stole
made of concrete overlayed with
seroulian mink to match the ce-
ment. The stole, though admit-
tedly heavy, would be sturdy and
strong-just perfect to wear to
work in the Pentagon or any other
federal building likely to be bomb-
ed. (There might be the problem
of hanging these up, of course, so

perhaps they could simply be
-The Hijacker's Dilemma is quite
expensive because the "coat" would
really be a parachute made out
of Russian sable and Hong Kong
silk. The straps, parachute case
and a flowing cape to disguise the
mechanism would be the sable
parts with the actual parachute
made of the Hong Kong silk.
(There would be a $365 extra,
charge for multicolored silk.) The
coat works quite simply. When the
culprit announces that the plane
is going to be hijacked, those
wearing the Kaplan creation can
head fo' the nearest emergency
exit, pull the slide and catapult
into the air. Then they can pull
the diamond studded 'cord at-
tached to the silk, chute which
jettisons the sable cape, opens the
sable case and releases the silk
chute to insure a nice landing.
After they land, the parachutees
can pawn the silk and remaining
sable to book passage home.
-Similar in principle to this
year's "Gorilla," the "Ghetto" is
hand made from the skins of rats
given to furriers by the unfor-
tunate inhabitants of substandard
housing. This coat, would be ideal
for day or nightime use because
the wearer would so resemble a
rat, that the rodent hnight not
even bite him as it invaded the
house to look for food.
-And finally, of course, there
is the Jacques Kaplan coat made
by the descendants of the Russian
sables, minks, gorillas and coypus
Kaplan destroyed to earn his
trade. Because of the rarity of the
beast, however, only one copy of
this coat would be available.




m cCracken:

Ignoring. the question

'HE TITLE of the speech was
"Economic Priorities for the
Seventies." Such a title w o u 1 d
suggest to most people that the
talk would in some way be relat-
ed to an analysis of areas in which
the government hopes to allocate
substantial portions of its budget.
Paul McCracken, chairman of the
President's Council of Economic
Advisors, however, merely -b a r-
raged the audience with statistics
which showed that the projected
federal expenditures for 1975
were almost as much as the pro-
jected revenues, and this was only
et unting projects which. the gov-
ernment is presently committed
to. In other words, no new pro-
jects were contemplated in Mc-
Cracken's view of the economic
situation in five years.
As he deliverea his masterpiece
of fluent ambiguity to an over-
flow crowd in Rackham Aud.
yesterday, McCracken remained
unruffled by occasional disrup-
tions from hecklers. Unfortunate-
ly, the speech indicated that this
unruffled attitude will apply to
all voices who ask and demand
changes in national spending
Throughout his speech, Mc-
Cracken took the attitude that the
economic policy trends of the fed-
eral government would remain
constant, with an increase in hu-
man resource expenditures, and a
gradual decrease in military
spending. Nowhere did he say
anything about new priorities, or
areas which demanded especially
close attention by the federal gov-
ernment. He did mention that
there would be an increasing need
for housing, but the need for
housing and the fact that the gov-
ernment is spending money in
that area is/ already fact. The
possible role of the federal gov-
ernment in areas such as environ-
mental pollution, mass transpor-
tation for cities, and population
control, were not mentioned and
we can only assume - which is
probably not a bad assumption -
that the Nixon administration has

Cracken seems to be saying that
the present administration is not
going to make any drastic inno-
vations or changes in national
spending priorities. He further
goes on to assert that a "market
mechanism" would be a good way
to allocate resources. At a time
when most people realize that de-
finite changes in spending prior-
ities are needed, it is not at all
comforting to hear statistics which
indicate spending for the next
five years will continue pretty
much as it has been going. As to
a possible shift toward a more
capitalist economy, McCracken
seems to forget the truism that.
while a capitalist society can pro-
duce visible material abundance
for some of its people, there must
always be segments of the society
which are economically exploited.
For people who went to see the
speech, the best part of the event
was no doubt the question and
answer session. Questions had to
be written down on cards and
passed up to the platform, so there
was actually no direct dialog be-
tween McCracken and the specta-
tors. However, the spontaneous
shouting between various factions
of the audience made the whole
afternoon worthwhile, the audi-
ence being divided about two to
one in favor of McCracken.
The best audience shouting
match erupted shortly after Mc-
Cracken was asked why he con-
sidered increased spending for
HEW inflationary while he did not
consider increased spending for
defense as inflationary. McCrack-
en answered that defense spending 0
was going down and HEW spend-
ing had been up. Many people ap-
parently did not think the ques-
tion had been answered suffici-
ently, and shouted "answer the
Shouting between the pro-Mc-
Cracken forces and the anti-Mc-
Cracken contingent continued for
a minute, then the unruffled Mc-
Cracken went on to the next

Three minutes of silence

no innovative plans in these areas.
McCRACKEN emphasized that
it is a total governmental mechan-
ism which determines spending
priorities, and not he, the Presi-
dent, or Congress alone. Although
that is certainly the situation, as
a member of the Council of
Economic Advisors, it is M c -
Cracken's job to suggest spending
priorities, and supposedly t h e

President will listen, otherwise
he wouldn't be paying for eco-
nomic advice.
As he summed up his speech,
McCracken gave a clue as to the
economic policies which the Nix-
on administration will follow in
the years, ahead. "The task we
confront is, through improved de-
cision-making in the public sec-
tor and reliance on the market
mechanisms, to see that we

achieve a sensitive tailoring of
our economic resource to the
complex, changing, and freely ex-
pressed preferences of all our
people," he said.
"Instead of settling for what
the majority wants, in the public
sector, the marketplace gives
everyone what he wants," he ex-
Insofar as any meaning could
be extracted from the speech, Mc-


Haven't you

heard ? The

War is


going to end

AS SOME of you may probably be aware, there
is still a war going on in Vietnam.
A girl giving out handbills on the Diag had
the poor taste to bring it up again. Join nation-
wide anti-war actions. Remember-only you can
prevent genocide. That's really funny. I mean,
you're good people, and I agree with you and
all, but don't you know? I mean, you're not
stupid-haven't you heard?
The War is never going to end. I thought
everyone knew that by now. The War always
has been and always will be. People used to
say, 'When the War ends . . .' Today, nobody
even says 'If the War ends . . .' It would be like
saying, 'If the sky falls . ...'
But that's not the worst part, the most frus-
tratino- nrt of the thing. Not only will the war

A RECORD ALBUM is being planned--
"Voices of Vietnam," it will be called. It will
feature those sounds that have really made The
War come alive for all of us. Lyndon Johnson
-"We're not going to send American boys to do
the job Asian boys ought to do." Richard Nixon
-"I have a plan to end the war in Vietnam."
But above all, the album will feature radio
anouncers. Seven minutes of body counts. And,
of course-that wonderful line that greeted us
so many times in a thousand voices over toast
and coffee in the morning-"Ninety-seven South
Vietnamese civilians were killed yesterday in
what a U.S. Army spokesman described as a
'tragic mishap.'"
Remember - back in '65 and '66, when we
could discuss the war in Vietnam. (Then it was
called the war in Vietnam - if you said The

wars (one that ends eventually) was slipping
away. We got up enough energy for the mora-
torium and the march to Washington, and more
people agreed with us than ever, but so? The
old illusions had receded. Stopping the war was
like stopping the tide.
AND OF COURSE, this year was Cambodia,
but so what? We know now, there's j u s t no
point. The War is The War. We will be fighting
it - and ending it - for the rest of our nat-
ural lives. And beyond. Forever. Forever.
It's in poor taste to talk about Vietnam - a
permanent sort pf affliction you don't talk about
any more than you'd complain to your friend
about his wooden leg. People are killed in Viet-
nam - people are killed in auto crashes. They'll
both go on forever, have always been there,
nothing we can do about it. 50.000 Americans

Try, people of this generation - try imagin-,
ing your world without The War. It's not easy.
There seems to be a time in one'o life, the
time When one first, becomes concerned with
the political world, which etches itself perman-
ently on the mind - and though world situa-
tions change, one continues to view things from
the perspective of that period. So for our par-
-ents, it was the Depression and the Second
World War. Roosevelt is their leader and Hitler
is their enemy.
FOR US, it is The War. It has, directly
or indirectly, shaped the political outlook of
our generation, while altering much of the tone
of American life. It has, needless to say, chang-
ed Vietnam quite a bit. Only the war itself re-
mains constant. Caesar said the only 'thing


- - - -''

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan