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.