4
Opinion
Page 8 Tuesday, July 21, 1981 The Michigan Daily
The Michigan Daily
Vol. XCI, No. 44-S
Ninety Years of Editorial Freedom
Edited and managed by students
at the University of Michigan
Silver lining
and the CIA
E VERY CLOUD HAS a silver lining, the
optimists will say.
Just when Director William Casey and his
associates had achieved frightening momen-
tum in enhancing the agency's powers, a two-
fold scandal has come along which may cur-
tail this momentum. Dark cloud, silver lining.
Before the brouhaha, proposals were being
formulated to increase the CIA's role in
domestic clandestine activities. In addition,
Congress had received a request to grant the
CIA an exemption from the Freedom of In-
formation Act. Both of these measures, if im-
plemented, would be highly undesirable-not
for our adversaries abroad, however, but for
American citizens right here in the states.
The former proposal would revive prospects
that American "dissidents" would be targets
of CIA abuses, which was the case a decade
ago in the days of Operation Chaos. The latter
proposal would make the CIA dangerously
immune from accountability. All citizens
need-and have a right to-nonclassified in-
formation regarding the agency's activities,
information that would not jeopardize U.S.
national security.
Already, Casey has terminated a long-
standing CIA policy of formally briefing
reporters about nonclassified subjects. In bet-
ter days, reporters covering South America,
for example, could obtain valuable infor-
mation from the intelligence agency. No
longer.
While this pernicious trend has not been
halted in its tracks, the resignation-under-fire
of Max Hugel, director of CIA covert
operations, and the allegations of past
wrongdoing against Casey himself, have im-
pinged the developments. Admiral Bobby In-
man, the CIA's deputy director, warned over
the weekend that the present controversy
might delay action on the two aforementioned
proposals, and an unidentified senator admit-
ted that the Hugel-Casey problems had "ad-
versely affected" confidence in the agency's
operations.
Mark Lynch, a lawyer with the American
Civil Liberties Union, expressed the point suc-
cinctly: "Casey's selection of a shady charac-
ter to run the clandestine service-and the
allegations about his own financial
dealings-overshadow the CIA's contention
that things like the Freedom of Information
Act, or books by former agents that contain no
classified information, are causing allies to
refuse to cooperate with the CIA."
Feiffer
/ J ,- /-
4
4-N PA G % ;L
I
r s
LETTERS TO THE DAILY:
L itPOS ol bertarian viewpoints
4
4
To the Daily:
It would take more time than it
is worth to refute all of Fred
Schill's mistaken beliefs about
history and his confusions about
ethical and economic reasoning.
So I'll simply state the sum of the
available refutations without
argument: Schill is simply wrong
about almost everything he said.
However, as a Libertarian, I
must recommend to Schill that
someday he scratch a bit below
the surface of Libertarianism. He
will find that 1) the differences
between conservatives and
Libertarians , even on matters of
business, are tremendous; 2) no
Libertarian will agree that
"What's good for GM is good for
the country"; 3) pollution is a
problem of a lack of legal protec-
tion of private property, not a
defining characteristic of the free
market, and neither "conser-
vative" trade-offs nor "liberal"
regulatory licensing of pollution
rights will solve the problem.
But more important is this non-
sense about "abuse of the free
market."
First, where has abuse of the
market ever come to equaling the
abuse of power-the power of
government, based on and
backed up only by the muzzle of a
gun. And why on earth should we
trust legislators any more than
businessmen? At least I can
refuse an offer from a business;
does the IRS give me any choice
but pay or suffer? Schill seems to
have received his concept of
government from his high school
civics class, and apparently
believes governments are com-
posed of unselfish altruistic
public spiritedservants with no
incentives other than some un-
defined public interest. This is
hardly a concept based on
reality; it is nonsense.
Second, if abuse of the free
market-I guess this means the
production of shoddy products,
"excessive" profits, "indecent"'
wages, "rape" of the environ-
ment-is the justification for
regulaton, confiscatory taxation,
and price fixing, why not extend
the principle?
For example, Schill's own ar-
ticles on gun control and on
economics have been shoddy
products, and they deceptively
advertisd for specific policies by
using false and misleading
claims. Every day, newspapers
around the country pass off much
editorial ignorance, especially on
economic matters, to paying
customers. Pornographers
promote sexual violence and
promiscuity. And-O, evil of
evils!-many magazines and
newspapers both pay minimum
wages and turn a profit. Isn't this
all flagrant abuse of the free
press?
Is Schill willing to submit to
licensing, censorship, and
regulation of the press-in the
public interest, naturally? The
Courts have prepared the way,
and the Moral Majority stands
waiting for this opportunity.
Hut no. Schill, rightly, wouldn't
endorse regulation of the press.
Yet why not? Isn't spiritual
protection from evil, wrong (anti
liberal) opinions, morally
debilitating smut more important
than materialistic affairs of
products and profits?
The rights to trade freely, the
right to property, the right to
liberty-these are not only as im-
portant as the right to freedom of
the press: They are the foun-
dation of the freedom of the
press. But, having legislated
away these former rights, the
day will come when reformers in
the U.S. will say that the press
too, has a "social responsibility"
that can be adequately served
only under the benevolent, wat-
chful eye of Daddy State.
Schill's reformatory zeal to fix
or vitiate the free market is ill-
formed and misplaced. The
destruction of capitalism is the
destruction of liberty; anti-
market "reforms" are not
removals of tumors. Rather, they
are themselves part of the
progress of an insidious cancer
that will rot all of society-the
market and the press included.
-David M. Stewart
July 18
0
4
I
Unsigned editorials appearing on the left side of
this page represent a majority opinion of the Daily's
Editorial Board. Letters and columns represent the
opinions of the individual author(s) and do not
necessarily reflect the attitudes or beliefs of the Daily.