0 6 K4 ge _______ j , OPINION Wednesday, September 30, 1981 4 The Michigan Doily Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan U. S. conservatives aced with a ph ilosop hical dich otomy Vol. XCH, No. 18 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, M1 48109 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board i Environmenta T WOULDN'T require too much 4 imagination or too much paranoia t' think that the Reagan ad- inistration has hatched a dastardly s hemae to purposely undermine the nation's environment. It is the evil two-punch plan to transform that part of; the environment which remains pristine, unpopulated and undeveloped into a filthy maze of smokestacks,, refineries, run-off sewers, and rusting atutomobiles. The first phase of the plot is the ap- pontment of James Watt to head the Interior Department. Thus, the arm of' government that is entrusted with the nAion's public lands is infiltrated 0at the very top. The second part of the plan unfolded M~nday, when it was revealed that the administration wants to cut the budget and personnel of the Environmental Protection Agency almost in half over the next two years. Thus, the very agency in Washington that is supposed to keep its eye on industry and gover- nment to make sure that neither destroy the environment is under- mined and rendered completely unable to roperly execute its mission. verything begins to fit together. Thp horrifying plot becomes clear. But such a scenario is only imaginary... probably. paranoia... The reality of the situation-which is no less horrifying-is that Reagan, despite his well-publicized love for chopping wood and riding horses at his California ranch, apparently has very little appreciation for the' need to balance the conflicting demands of en- vironmental preservation and reasonable industrial development. Reagan, who perhaps is still living in a bygone age when America was a land. of seemingly inexhaustable resources, has driven the concern for the en- vironmental side-effects of industrial expansion into a ditch.' But, if we act soon, we can still prevent the Watts and the Reagans from destroying the environment completely. If the Interior Department and the EPA will not or cannot defend the en- vironment anymore, Congress-end the American public must take it upon themselves to step in. Congress, under pressure from its constituents, must demand Watt's ouster and his replacement with a more qualified person wh'o understands the value of undeveloped land. Congress and the public must also make clear to the ad- ministration's budget-cutters that cut- backs in the EPA, designed with the obvious intention to make it impotent, will not be tolerated. Out of the fierce inter-agency struggle over Pentagon dollars, evidence of something much more threatening to the Reagan ad- ministration than simple bureaucratic in- fighting is fast emerging. It now is clear that the shattered liberal consensus which ruled the United States for 75 years has not been replaced by a new con- sensus, but rather by an elemental conflict raging almost entirely within the conser- vative ranks of the president's own party. AMERICAN POLITICS in the '80s has become a raw struggle between one strain of conservatism which argues for order and another which argues for a broad loosening of restraints. "The division goes fantastically deep," said Lawrence Chickering, director of the San Francisco-based Institute for Contemporary Studies, an important conservative think tank with close ranks to the Reagan ad- ministration. "It separates people from the moment they ask the most basic question in political philosophy: What is the starting point of the whole value system-the individual or the group? "The 'modernists' in the administration, many of whom are economists,-believe in the primacy of the individual, in freedom. The 'traditionalists,' who are largely politicians or people trained in the social sciences, are more concerned with the group. The tension between these factions is everywhere," Chickering added. THE CONTEST between order and liberty, of course, is as old as organized politics. It found its purest expression in the running debate, spread over some 30 'years, which matched Benjamin Disraeli, the master of British imperialism, against William Glad- sone, who spoke for peace and unrestrained free enterprise. But by the turn of the century, the brutality of imperialism and the growth of powerful capital monopolies had undermined popular faith in imposed order and unrestrained free enterprise alike, giving rise to the synthesis of liberalism-which subjected both individuals and the larger social group to limited restraints, while guaranteeing limited freedoms. Today, echoes of that old elemental struggle once again resound'on the American side of the Atlantic. The modern heirs to Disraeli' range from; Secretary of State Alxander Haig and the Pentagon planners to law-and-order enthusiasts like Attorney General William French Smith and presiden- tial adviser Edwin Meese. By Frank Viviano THEY ARE JOINED by a new neo- conservative authoritarian strain made up of such diverse elements as the Moral Majority ideologues, who want authority based on fun- damentalist Christianity, and former liberal intellectuals who have swung from welfare state paternalism to authoritarianism. The rise of neo-conservatism in general has to do with a sense of waning American poten- cy-"losing out" to the Russians abroad and to crime and degeneracy at home. In Africa and Latin America, on the television net- works, and in the urban ghettoes, therefore, it seeks to reimpose a secure and fixed concep- tion of culture, society and economy-forcibly if necessary. From David Stockman and other spokesmen for the president's deregulation, tax, and budget-slashing program, on the other hand, the free enterprise ethic of William Gladstone is receiv ng a more serious hearing than it has had at any time sinceGladstone himself. AND, LIKE Gladstone, the new prophets of loosened restraint have found themselves in: serious combat with the prophets of imposed control. "Along with Stockman, (presidential aide) Lyn Nofziger best represents the libertarian side, and he is usually at odds with Meese and (presidential chief of staff) Jim Baker, who are essentially neo-nationalists," one source close to the administration privately con- ceded. Nofziger's announced departure from the administration, now scheduled for January 21, 1982, maywell have something to do with the direction that struggle has taken. "SIMILAR THINGS happened when Reagan was governor of California," a remembered a former gubernatorial staff member. "There was a constant battle bet- ween libertarian and law-and-order conser- vatives in the office. It forced people to leave." Down the line, the present clash in Washington could be particularly sharp over education policy, which Chickering believes will be a "source of real tension. Some ad- ministration officials see schooling as part of the marketplace-they discuss it in economic terms whole others see it primarily as the forum for civic. education designed to main- tain social order." But it is clear that the chief arena of conflict at the moment remains the defense budget, placing Stockman and his Wall Street allies ir historic company. FOR MORE than a century, a tradition of self-interested pacifism has run through the annals of U.S. business, incorporating such figures as Henry Ford, Cyrus Eaton and Ar- mand Hammer. This tradition is based on the very heartland of the nation which produced David Stockman, that Midwestern America of medium-sized cities, fervent Chamber of Commerce business idealism and fiscal rec- titude. Why, after so many years, has this elemen- tal struggle once again erupted? The liberal consensus collapsed, among other things, because its top-down economic 'and social engineering never really solved the basic problems of incentive in mass society. Whatever its initial intentions, the welfare state reduced social participation and eroded personal enterprise. The synthesis slowly unraveled. Hence the renaissance of both strains of conservatism, which address the incentive problem directly, although with vastly dif- ferent tools: liberty and profit for the free- enterprisers, security and the iron fist for the traditionalists-the carrot for the heirs of Gladstone, the stick for the new Disraelites. Unaddressed, however, is the very issue which gave birth to 20th century consensus liberalism in the first place. American society is more pluralistic than ever and at the same time more dependent upon an outside world that now has q capacity to go its own way-a way which eluded it in the age of Disraeli. These facts of life mitigate against the prac- tical expedience of the stick. Dependency also argues against the'ex- clusive power of the free enterprise carrot as a means of regulating society and the economy. It is plainly obvious that too many people breathe the same air and drink the same water to allow the energy industry, for example, to pursue its unhampered self- interest. What these facts point up is just that shared weakness which destroyed pure, imperial Toryism and pure free enterprise liberalism at the dawnof this century. Neither position embraces a very complex view of the social contract, of the continuing necessity to recon- cile the contending demands of order and liberty with the realities of mass society. Viviano is an editor for Pacific News Service. 6 b.An seaki HE PRESIDENT addressed the 'international Association of P ce Chiefs on Monday, and he took the opportunity to make the most detailed statement of his social philosophy since since he assumed the presidency.' 'The Jungle is always there, waiting, ready to take us over.. Only deep moral values and strong in- stitutions can hold back that Jungle and restrain the darker impulses of human nature," he said. It is a disturbing social philosophy. It is a social philosophy that sees the role of government vis-a-vis criminals as strictly limited, as being mainly concerned with the task of throwing criminals in jail and making it very, very difficult for them to get out. There are people who just shouldn't be out on the street-ever-the president says. While the president is duly outraged at the 'failures of the American criminal justice system, his solutions-and indeed some of his assumptions-are off base. The president blames much of the ng o aranoia failure of American criminal justice on liberals, whom he claimed had erroneously tried to reform the in- corrigibles. Further, the president argues, the liberals who have insisted on granting criminals protection under the ex- clusionary rule have been allowing criminals who should be locked up to roam freely. As a solution for this liberal ,malaise, the president has proposed relaxing the exclusionary rule to allow illegally obtained evidence to be in- troduced in trials. The exclusionary rule has been one of the cornerstones of American civil liberties, and its relaxation would only serve to actually weaken the criminal justice system and allow police ex- cessive powers Further, government does have a role-and a responsibility-in dealing with criminals. There is indeed in the criminal element certain persons who will never be rehabilitated, but for government to simply give up trying to help is inhumane and cruel. Weasel Y011-L KrO Jc',' J E tr 7i K-w 4 3 /4' /17FAN AP 04oW9 Fs . A fj ( fc.P 2-7 ( L F KM t- NOW, YOU 4w WA"4T To "O KCWuHc t 1o ACT Yc'Uj- 17f AT THEY H#MAE X14965ANDt eea5 CFT IRct.tyquyoY? By Robert Lence c wrDWET> oug YoGt.R eV yR~ TA-'MD OFT F }R- yos nwtGE£ 0 LETTERS TO THE DAILY: i I I WHEN HE PROMISED US A SAFETY NET, I DIDN'T KNC WE WERE GONNA USE IT LIKE THIS' M ate.-, ow 'Old' To the Daily: I am writing regardin ticle entitled "Road w slow N. Campus bus which appeared in the Daily. One noteworthy fact it ticle is the reference preservation of the "h stone wall on Fuller. Kudos for those trying away the earthmov progress from despoiling is not where it rightly oug . I personally am sadde the imminent demolitio 'old' Wall Street bridge of this new road scheme because the existing bri where it oughta be. Lik oldsters, this old bridge h and waited for three sc ten years, faithfully servi who chose to cross the foot, horse,' carriage, bus. Wall Street 4 What's more, this is a fine g an ar- example of bridge architecture ork may and structural design, the likes of route," which are seldom seen. When this Sept. 24 bridge was built in 1910, the design of the reinforced concrete n the ar- arch had only then been codified. to the As such this bridge is represen- historic" tative of the most advanced engineering and design of the g to turn time, not to be equalled since, in ers of my view. g all that Were it but known, and reflec- ;hta be! ted upon, I think that many, ned that many people would agree that a n of the perfectly useful structure such as is a part this should simply be allowed to , mainly remain as a useful element in our dge isn't daily life. It should remain as a e many tribute to the skill and foresight as stood of those who have served before ore and us. ng those Take a look for yourself from river on the river bank along Maiden auto, or Lane. Note graceful symmetry of the double arch. That arch ring is bridge no two feet thick and reinforced with iron. And compare it to what the beeline boys are going to build in its place. But as we all know, that's progress. And besides, the rebuilding of the stone wall is an easy sop to the preservationists, none of whom probably ever thought to look at a bridge as anything but a big plank to cross the creek. Commonly practical men such as myself are condemned as Reagan shoi To the Daily: Hopefully, those who listened to or read about Mr. Reagan's speech last Thursday will pay more attention to what he did not say then what he did say. What he did not say was that even though he was asking teworthy being insensible, uncaring, material-minded and so forth. Maybe it's true. But not always. I think there are some things worth saving from our past, but not always the same things, or for the same reasons, as those who loudly proclaim the- need to preserve our heritage. But I am definitely opposed to the needless wasting of a useful part of our capital. Take a look for yourself and decide. -Franklin Piehl P.E. September 24, 1981 uld sacrifice Nancy Reagan spent close to $1 million redoing the White House and, though most of the funds came from private contributions, taxpayers will foot much of the bill because the contributions are tax deductible. Finally, what Mr. Reagan did 'I .9 f t:. RAM S TA NS 'TA A FT. ovnlninorl I