Wh Afrian aily
Edited and mandged by students at the
University of Michigan
Editorials printed in The Michigan Doily express the individual
opinions of the author. This must be noted in all reprints.
WEDNESDAY, MAY 10, 1972 News Phone: 764-0552
"Now, here's my Vietnam plan ...
T)RESIDENT NIXON'S decision to mine and blockade the
ports of North Vietnam was a calculated and
desperate move to stave off impending South Vietnamese
collapse and avoid the consequences of years of stupidity
and tragic malice.
The blockade comes as no real surprise. It is one
more in a series of escalations to salvage "democracy."
defend our allies, fulfill our "commitments," free our
POW's. and protect "our boys."
There is, in fact, little evidence that the blockade
and mining in the North will have any effect at all on the
continuing advance of communist forces in the South.
THE PRIMARY rationale offered by the President Tues-
day night to justify this newest move is the pro-
tection of the remaining 60,000 American troops in the
South. And they cannot leave until they guarantee the
quick release of American prisoners.
Our soldiers, moreover, cannot depart just yet, and
leave the fighting to the ARVN, because that would
mean "turning 17 million South Vietnamese over to Com-
munist tyranny and terror," the President declared.
This bit of logic, which discounts the alleged success
of Vietnamization, is the very pap which has in the past
and may in the future be used to require the bloody and
expensive presence of U.S. military men and force in
"WHAT IS ON the line in Vietnam," the President said
recently, "is not just peace for Vietnam, but peace
in the Mideast, peace in Europe . . . possibly for a long
time in the future."
The President is right. Peace is at stake, though
we've been killing for peace for a "long time" already. The
carnage must not contipue - even, as the chief executive
put it, out of "respect for the office of the President."
We don't respect this one, regardless of his office.
-THE MICHIGAN DAILY
NIGHT EDTOR: ROSE SUE BERSTEIN
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR ARTHUR LERNtR
PHOTO TECHNICIAN: DENNY GAINER
Who can beat Nixon?
By LINDSAY CHANEY
jF THIS year's Democratic primary campaign
will be remembered for anything. it will
be remembered as the year when the party
bosses lost their grip on the rank and file
The party pros - the county chairmen and
state leaders - have always favored candi-
dates whose stances were squarely in the mid-
dle of everything.
The pros did not especially want a man who
was in favor of doing anything. Rather, they
looked for a man who would alienate as few
voters as possible. They viewed the electorate
as composed primarily of status quo centrists
with small left and right fringes on each side.
So it wasn't surprising when the Democratic
leaders rallied around Edmund Muskie, the
avuncular ill-defined blob from Maine.
MUSKIE AND THE party pros said he was
the only man who could attract a broad enough
coalition of voters to defeat Richard Nixon.
Few claimed he would do anything to help the
country - his main asset was his alleged ability
to "bring us all together."
But if Muskie appealed to a broad cross-sec-
tion of the voting public, it didn't show in the
primaries. His hoped-for landslide in New Hamp-
shire which could have knocked George Mc-
Govern out of the race did not materialize.
Muskie followed his uninspiring New Hamp-
shire showing with a fourth-plice finish in Flor-
ida. In the critical April 4 Wisconsin race, he
also finished fourth. He finally called it quits
after a double-barreled defeat in Massachusetts
POLITICAL ANALYSTS now believe that the
party professionals were mistaken in assuming
approximately of equal strength, with the left
and right united in their distrust of the establish-
This view is borne out by the successes of
George McGovern and George Wallace w a o
might be categorized as the left and right ends
of the Democratic Party. Both men have been
mavericks of sorts - lacking regular party sup-
port. And both men appeal to the anti-establish-
ment sentiments in the electorate.
The quesion now facing political progsosticat-
ors is: What kind of man can win the nomina-
tion? And more specifically, what kind of man
can beat Richard Nixon in November?
WITIl MUSKIE out of the race, the "center"
has been filled by Hubert Humphrey, the effer-
vescent warrior from Minnesota. A few political
regulars are predicting that the November race
will come down to Nixon-Humphrey again. How-
ever, others are not so sure.
Humphrey's liabilities seem to outweigh any
assets he might have. His positions on various
issues seem to vacillate, depending on his
audience. Furthermore, you can't beat a tried
and tested old shoe with just an old shoe.
There is no way George Wallace will be
nominated, although his convention delegates
are likely to play a key role in picking the
THE MAN who has the best chance to beat
Nixon in the fall is George McGovern. Mc-
Govern is a fresh face on the national political
scene. His programs for income redistribution
and full employment are sweeping enough to at-
tract left-wing radicals and pragmatic enough
to attract blue-collar workers.
Furthermore, his appearance of scrupulous
honesty appeals to persons who are tired of the
lies and deceptions of the Nixon administration.
that the electorate is composed predominantly---
of centrists, with left and right fringes. The pre- Lindsay Chancy, '73, is an Editorial Page Editor
sent view is that the left, center, and rtght are of The Daily.
The 'trashing' tactic
By BOB BLACK
ON THE LAST day of class
last term, some of the
marchers against the new air
war revived a political tactic
which had fallen into undeserv-
ed neglect - trashing. Ini
breakingewindows and inflict-
ing other superficial damage on
North Hall, the University-sub-
sidized ROTC building, they did
some $3,000 - 5,000 damage.
Many who were present op-
posed the trashing, and outside
media opinion was wholly un-
favorable. Under the circum-
stances there was little oppor-
tunity for the campus commun-
ity to debate the question. But
there is a case to be made for
trashing. as a conscious, consid-
ered political tactic. Here and
now, though not for all times
in all places, trashing is appro-
The special term "trashing"
refers to a special kind of direct
action. It should not be con-
fused with mindless personal
vandalism, on one hand, or with
quasi-revolutionary violence on
the other. By trashing I mean
the conscious destruction of
public or corporate property to
dramatize and to protest major
moral offenses by its owners. It
definitely excludes v i o 1 e n c e
against persons. It is not civil
disobedience, and trashing as
such is not suitably tied to an
immediate policy objective.
By definition, trashing is a
political act directed against
large and impersonal organiza-
tions. And appropriately so, be-
cause only an institution - a
government or corporation or
university - is equally capable
of committing a crime against
humanity and resisting imme-
diate control by people outside
TRASHING MAKES sense
only when two standards apply:
the institution cannot be
deflected from its policy in the
short run (because it is large,
bureaucratic and interconnected
with others like it); and
-it can be influenced in the
long run (by elections or laws or
If the first standard does not
apply, trashing is unnecessary:
if the second does sot, trashing
But if we are somewhere in
between - and that is where
the anti-war movement has al-
ways been -- there is a moral
JAN BENEDETTI ..
ROSE SUE BERSTEIN
DENNY GAINER ..,
HARRY HIRSCH ..
SERR Y KASTLE.
SHEILA MARTIN ....
PAUL TRAVIS ....
ROBERT wARGO ....
M -RCTA ZOSLAW ..
A.Associate Sports Editor
. .... ..... Co-Editor
. .. .Night Editor
.... Photography Editor
Assistant Night Editor
. .. ..Night Editsr
- 0c..... Sports Editor
.... '. Co-Editor
Assistant Night Editoe
... .... Photographer
General Business Assistant
Assistant Nght Editor
General sBusiies Assistant
I~ Assistaistr N ii L dRos
responsibility to act in whatever
fashion is likely to effect an ul-
timate change in foreign policy.
In resuming the bombing, the
government surely anticipated
and discounted any expression
of student opposition up to and
including marches - they know
what to expect by now.
The movement has never ob-
tained particular policy revers-
als by matching them with one-
on one tradeoffs ("Remove half
PEOPLE OPPOSE the war to-
day, by and large not because of
its monstrous immorality but
because of its domestic conse-
quences - in terms of inflation,
the draft, and vast unrest, vio-
lence, hostility and polarization
fostered by tactics like trashing.
Because the laws are not com-
msensurate with the outrage
with which Americans view
trashing - the deliberate, im-
pudent and usually unpunished
massive violation of the rights
of property - it outrages ordi-
nary people. Now that the costs
of the war are being concen-
trated on the Vietnamese peo-
ple, it is all the more urgent to
raise the one social cost which
cannot be Vietnamized.
In short, we should trash not
in spite, but because, it polarizes
Americans, encourages repres-
sion and arouses feeling against
us. Polarization at a time when
the range of opinion- is forced
to the left means that more and
more people are joining the
group that seriously opposes the
war and will not tolerate any
politician who disagrees.. That
we are- "alienating" people who
oppose these tactics is true -
and a good thing too, because
alienation is contagious.
IT IS no accident that'anti-
war and anti-youth sentiment
have risen together, nor that
Wallace and McGovern some-
times tap the same class-based
protest. Better to hate the young
in futility than to slaughter
Asians with indifference.
Thus trashing, which injures
no person and costs us a few
eents each, can be a small price
to pay in altering attitudes and
ultimately saving lives. It should
not be dismissed out of hand.
Boh Black7,7, is a twcnsber
of the LSA Stdent Gorern-