New Guard April 1964 by Young America's Foundation

...Jl

To the Convention by Y f G Train "Freedom Special" SCHEDULE

"Freedom Special" FARES from from from from from from

Washington Pittsburgh Akron, Ohio Chicago Kansas City, Mo. Albuquerque, N.M.

$195 $185 $180 $165 $140 $105

ALL MEALS ARE INCLUDED IN THE QUOTED FARES. $70 deposit reserves a seat. Roomette, First Class, Bedroom and Pullman fares available upon request.

Washington Iv. 12:30 AM Sat. Iv. 8:00 AM Sat. Pittsburgh Iv. 10:15 AM Sat. Akron, Ohio Iv. 5:00 PM Sat. Chicago Kansas City, Mo. Iv. 1:00 AM Sun. Albuquerque, N.M. Iv. 4:45 PM Sun. San Francisco arr. 1:15 PM Mon. All schedules and fares are based on those in current use and are subject to change.

* Gigantic rallies ik Folksingers and celebrities Excitementâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;and a genuine contribution to the bandwagon * Low cost way to get to the Convention * Vital work for a Goldwater victory HOP ON THE GOLDWATER BANDWAGON ALL THE WAY OUT TO SAN FRANCISCO! FOR A CHOICE, NOT AN ECHONOMINATE BARRY GOLDWATER FOR PRESIDENT

For a choice - Not an Echo NOMINATE B A R R Y G O L D W A T E R FOR PRESIDENT Issued by YOUTH FOR GOLDWATER, James Harff, National Director

THIS MONTH

T H E NEW GUARD The Magazine of Young Americans for Freedom, Inc. Editor: Carol D. Bauman Managing Editor: Donald J. Lambro Associate Editors: William Schulz, Allan Ryskind, Ben Stoker Contributing Editors: T. A. Quinn, Jameson G. Campaigne, Jr. Kenneth E. Thompson, Ken Tomlinson, Gary Russell, Fred J. Eckert, Alfred S. Regnery, Terry Catchpole CONTENTS

April, 1964

•

Vol. I V , No. 4

ARTICLES, DEPARTMENTS Editorials The Issues We Face Barry Goldwater, Jr. Plea for a Conservative Foreign Policy T . A . Quinn The Rise And Fall of NSA Tom Huston Foreign Policy: Insider's Report Allan Ryskind Choose Your Weapons Carol Bauman Rhetoric: No Substitute for Substance Terry Catchpole YAF Roundup YAF Around The Nation

4 6 7 8 12 14 15 16 19

INSIDE THIS ISSUE . . . s -

1 5

SBT" Barry Goldwater, Jr. examines eloquently and carefully the great issues which will confront American voters in the coming Presidential campaign. . . . m r T . A . Quinn, a student of law at Georgetown University, as well as a frequent writer for T H E N E W GUARD, reexamines this Nation's many foreign policies, the ideological framework on which they are founded and their successes or failures. And he calls for a distinct, clearcut conservative foreign policy for all Americans. . . . National Vice Chairman and well-known Hoosier conservative Tom Huston traces in exacting and painful detail the anti-NSA-activity which has flourished in this country during the past three years. . . . BBT" Allan Ryskind, no stranger to these pages, a well-known writer for Human Events^ polishes off his style on the current bestseller. Diplomat Among Warriors. . . . SBT* Mrs. Carol Bauman, just finishing Frank Meyer's latest book attempting to answer the unanswerable question, shares it with us.

The New Guard is published monthly by Young Americans for Freedom, inc., in Washington, D. C. Copyright 1964 in the U.S.A. by Young Americans for Freedom, Inc. All correspondence, manuscripts, circulation orders and changes of address should be sent to: The New Guard, 5(4 C Street, Washinaton, D. C. 20002, Phone: 546-3355. Rates: $4 a year. The editors welcome unsolicited manuscripts but request the enclosure of a self-addressed return envelope. Opinions expressed in signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or of Young Americans for Freedom, inc. APRIL 1964

• The College Service Committee of the Young Republican National Federation in a major policy statement on the U.S. National Student Association has charged that membership in NSA is "detrimental to the best interests of American students, urged that active students on campus speak out against NSA, and asked that colleges not affiliated with NSA remain outside the organization until such time as it ceases to promote its minority-held positions as the beliefs and policies of American students. • Walter Reuther has finally gone and let the cat out of the bag. And we've been saving it as a surprise. But old blabber-mouth Walt couldn't button his lip, so at the recent U A W convention he revealed: "It's rumored in Wall Street that the General Motors Corporation is saving up to buy the United States Government." Gosh, now the surprise is ruined. • In probably the most blatant use of taxpayers money in the history of this Republic, the Administration is now distributing costly, four-color posters throughout the country with a message and bigger-than-life picture of L B J asking Americans to support the Vietnamese war effort. The Administration says it is nothing more than a campaign to help break through "bureaucratic, industrial and shipping bottlenecks to hurry the delivery of equipment for the war against Communist guerrillas in South Vietnam." Most certainly it is a campaign—at the taxpayers expense! And, we might add, that four-color posters, no matter how costly, are not going to win the war in that embattled little nation on the South China Sea. • How To Get Ahead Department: William J . Crockett, Deputy Undersecretary of State, who avidly pursued the Otepka case, causing Otepka's dismissal, was nominated by President Johnson to the position of Career Minister—a big boost up from his classification of Foreign Service 1. Moral for Ambitious State Dept. employees? Get rid of that anti-communist sitting next to you in the office; you're sure to get a promotion. • Miracle of Miracles Department: " I think Castro is more than a nuisance. He is a threat to this hemisphere."—Secretary of State Dean Rusk at a news conference on Friday, March 27th. • President AbduUa Sallal of Yemen recently ended a 15-day visit to the Soviet Union during which he signed a friendship treaty and got promises of more aid. • Assistant Counsel to the Warren Commission, Norman Redlich, a professor at New York University Law School, is listed on a July, 1963 letterhead of the Emergency Civil Liberties Committee as a member of the executive committee. The E C L C was cited in a 1959 Report by the House Committee on Un-American Activities as a Communist front organization. i

A Matter of Semantics if the Administration's efforts to increase the sale of agricultural commodities to the Communist bloc nations were not absurd, the Department of Commerce recently approved an export license for U.S. sulfur to be sold to Czechoslovakia. Sulfur is used as a primary material in the manufacture of 43 explosives, solid and liquid missile fuel propellants, and as a basic material in the production of metals. The products of crude sulfur are employed for the manufacture of fertilizers, paint pigments, dyes, petroleum refining, and in the preparation of other chemicals used in war materials production. This sulfur export license is a perfect illustration of the absurdity of the Administration's attempt to draw a line between so-called strategic and nonstrategic—warlike or peaceful—goods. Constantly, there are far-reaching questions and considerations such as these in the area of export control. Can there be any doubt that there is a continuing need for Congress and the public to have uprto-date information on exports, or proposed exports, to the Red bloc and for the continual evaluation of our trade policies.

April Showers Brings Out the Left A. brand new paper organization has sprouted, nurtured by the Administration's war on poverty program. The committee, which is heavily composed of pacifists, socialists, and assorted economic theorists of the left, has proposed that an adequate income be guaranteed for every American, whether he works or not. The group is known as the Ad Hoc Committee on the Triple Revolution (civil rights, nuclear weapons, and automation). The committee is an outgrowth of a meeting at the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions which itself is headed by Robert M . Hutchins, former University of Chicago president. The committee has further recommended more Federal aid to education, more public works projects including low cost public housing, and Federally financed mass transit systems. Also suggested was the rehabilitation of old military bases for community projects. Secretary of Defense McNamara later proposed a similar rehabilitation plan. Among the many controversial members are these well known individuals: Dr. Linus Pauling, Nobel Prize winning chemist, who has backed many peace movements which have been used as tools of communist propaganda. He recently denied charges by the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee that he had shown a "consistent pro-Soviet bias." Brig. Gen. Hugh B. Hester (Ret.), supporter of many pro-communist causes and writer for the leftist New World Review, who describes Castro as a "humanist" rather than a communist. Bayard Rustin, organizer of last year's civil rights march on Washington, who was a member of the Young Communist League as a youth. William Worthy, Negro newsman who has made trips to both Red China and Castro's Cuba in defiance of the State Department's passport ban. He was also a member of the Young Communist League. Ralph Helstein, president of the Packing House Workers 4

Union, who was denied a spot on the AFL-CIO Executive Council because of his leftist leanings. W. H . (Ping) Ferry, vice president of the Fund for the Republic, who recently called FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover a "spy-swatter."

Footsies With Leftists CjFiving his annual report to the United Auto Workers in convention in Atlantic City recently, Walter "let's socialize America" Reuther called upon the GOP to repudiate the radical right. This call sounds strange coming from Mr. Reuther, whose ultra-leftism prompted Rep. John Ashbrook of Ohio to call Walter a spokesman of the "most radical wing of the radical left." His advice to the GOP is indeed misdirected, having during his long and talkative career played footsie with, as Mr. Ashbrook put it so well recently, "leftists which range in philosophy from one worlders to Communists." Add to this the resolution passed in convention on the Red-infested International Union of Mine, Mill, and Smelter Workers which said in part: "The civil liberties of that union must be protected without regard to any affinity to the Communist movement—past, present, or future." and you see what Mr. Reuther is driving at, and, concurrently, where his leadership is driving the UAW.

Some Kotes on Poverty A. few notes on poverty may be in order at this time, since the subject is, undoubtedly, on the lips and minds of almost every Liberal sworn to feed and clothe and protect and coddle every human being exhibiting a need of some kind. A very interesting picture has been painted about poverty in this nation; but, as Mr. Walter Lippmann has shown us in one of his many prodigious works, that the pictures in our heads are not always in keeping with reality, with truth. So, indeed, the hallucinations of the Administration, the Establishment, and its Directors, i.e., Galbraith, Rovere, Lippmann, and the editorial staff of The New Republic, are not in keeping with economic reality in America. Yet if we can but keep the debate on poverty focused upon the issue of Need, and the burden of proof of such need on the shoulders of the Left, and we conclusively show that their "problem" is not nation-wide, not endemic, and not, most certainly, begging for Federal intervention, then we foresee a very real hope of warding off another attack by the welfare state. Per capita disposable income in the United States after taxes was $2,125 in 1963. It averages out that for every man, woman, and child in the Nation—$2,125. There are, believe it or not, countries in the Middle East where the per capita income is $30 a year. In China it is $63. In India it is $60. The United States produces 33 percent of the goods of the world—with only about 6 percent of the total population of the world. Our highways are congested with automobiles. Luxury is the rule. Signs of prosperity dominate the scene. The Administration has wildly stated that 35 million people in the United States are poverty-stricken. It pretends to believe that by giving away its requested $963 million, the problem can be solved, the poor will become middle class, and everything will work out ginger-peachy. THE

NEW G U A R D

Not so say the figures, which, after all, have to be consulted every now and then. . . . The President's "War On Poverty Program" figures out to an average of $27.51 for each poverty-stricken person. Not enough for a week's groceries for a family of three, did someone say? Even if the budget were raised to the gigantic figure of $9,630,000,000 (just under 10 billion, or 10 times the amount requested), that would mean an average of only $275.10 a year for each poverty-stricken person. Again, such a ridiculous program does not even come close to solving the problem we are given (which, in and of itself, has been exaggerated completely out of proportion to reality). IN

O U R M A Y

ISSUE:

* The Oregon Primary: Its Meaning - k The Truth About Henry Cabot Lodge if: The Hallucinations of Senator Fulbright

DOUGLAS MacARTHUR, RJ.P. T o those who knew him he was so much more than just a heroic figure wading ashore at Leyte during World War I I . He was MacArthur; the General, the tough apple who could take it as well as dish it out; he knew men, knew how to use them, knew how to treat them, knew what they valued most, and held this special knowledge with a kingly posture, a regal stance, a heroic gesture that only he could employ, only he could retain, only he could wield in his 6wn private and significant way. It was all there—everything a military hero is supposed to have, yet found in so few men today that heroism fades from our lips, our minds, our books, and our children know it no more. We recall his words as clearly as we recall the embattled periods in man's history when men fought at Dunkirk • and Hastings, for the liberties we hold dear, for freedoms we cherish, for the individualism we see being torn from our grasp. "War's very object is victory," he instructed the Congress on April 19, 1951, "not prolonged indecision. In war there is no substitute for victory." Those words pierce the very suicidal policy which now grips this nation's strategy in the Cold War. He was asked by a correspondent one morning in France during the war, who had noticed where a bullet had clipped the left sleeve of his sweater, "since when did brigadier generals get to be expendable?" He grinned and said: "Well, there are times when even general officers have to be expendable. Come on inside and we'll rustle some coffee." Men like MacArthur are clearly not expendable—not while every flank of freedom is exposed to attack, not while the forces dedicated to destroying freedom are waging a successful offensive against its defenders throughout the world. And the lessons he gave to us most certainly cannot be expendable. Though he has gone, his foresight and bravery and courage remain, perhaps, to encourage a new leader to come forth and take up the gauntlet and hurl back the challenge of freedom to those who would destroy us. "In war there is no substitute for victory." APRIL 1964

The Fulbright Incantations T h e yearly incantations of Senator Fulbright have always amused us, for they have been unique in their naivete, singular in their ignorance of the real nature of the communist challenge, totally immune to the major onslaught communism makes each day in every continent throughout the world on the last vestiges of freedom. But this time he is to be taken more seriously. This is not .to say that his verbiage is any less silly, or any less suicidal, just more dangerous than usual. For it comes at a time when the West has made more conciliations and acquiescences before the East in the short duration of the past four years than in any other period in the history of the Cold War. Mr. Fulbright is asking us to take that last final plunge; asking us, indeed, what England's Labor Party boss, Harold Wilson, asked recently: that we cooperate completely with the Communists. "It seems reasonable, therefore, to suggest that the character of the cold war has, for the present at least, been profoundly altered: by the drawing back of the Soviet Union from extremely aggressive policies; by implicit repudiation by both sides of a policy of 'total victory, . . .' The Senator must be departing from the realm of reality, for it is impossible to understand how the major offensives by the Soviet Union in Cuba, Panama, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Zanzibar, Ghana, Berlin, Hungary, as well as throughout the entire communist bloc, can be construed as a sign that the Soviet Union has departed from its aggressive policies. The events of the past three years certainly do not show this to be true; the unnamed Russian Intelligence defector appearing on a recent Washington television program and testifying that the Soviet Union is making a greater effort today to infiltrate the West and wage the Cold War than at any other time in her history, does not show this to be true; classified information held by our CIA clearly does not show this to be true; and, last, the announced goal of the communist world is the irrefutable truth that Mr. Fulbright is suffering from hallucinatory manic-depressions. 'We are predisposed to regard any conflict as a clash between good and evil rather than as simply a clash between conflicting interests." But, no matter how conciliatory or permissive our foreign policy becomes, there are forces at work in this world which are good, and there are forces at work which are clearly evil. The Communist Viet Cong are evil. Communists working to inflame riots in Panama are evil. Castro Communists based in Venezuela are evil. The Russian tanks which mowed down young Hungarians were guided by an evil ideology. The act which pulls the trigger of a rifle which places a bullet in the back of the head of an East German youth crossing the Berlin wall is evil. Castro Communists shooting young Cuban youths while rowing their way to freedom are evil. And the list is indefatigable. The chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee of the United States Senate has demonstrated, in the purest sense, the mind of the contemporary American Liberal in the field of foreign policy and the road they wish this nation to travel. For Senator Fulbright there can be no black or white—it is all grey. For him the conflict is not one of ideology, or slavery versus freedom, or even, to be somewhat abstract, democracy versus dictatorship; it is a minor conflict in ideas. And for Senator Fulbright their ideas are alright as long as they keep them in their own way. But the very intrinsic nature of the battle between East and the West involves their ideas taking over ours. Is that too basic for the'Senator to understand? We wonder whether he has the slightest conception of what the true meaning of the conflict between East and West is all about. Still further, whether he truly understands, and is concerned, about the thousands who daily flee the vicious jaws of Communism. 5

Ihe Issues We Face by Barry Goldwater, Jr. T h e dogmas of the Washington planners seem to have created mental straight jackets for many people who should know better. These antiquated, oldfashioned ideas have already been weighed on the scales of history and been found wanting. Let's examine some of them. Foreign Economic Aid is an excellent case in point. The alleged purpose of Foreign Economic Aid was to save the world from communism. Yet, I doubt if there is a single person in the entire world who is not a communist because someone paid him not to be. Perhaps even more significant is the fact that those countries receiving the least amount of American aid have made the most dramatic progress. tomobiles came in and horses went The more obvious it becomes that out? Just think of all those blackForeign Economic Aid is not achievsmiths who could vote, not to mening its objective the more tenacious tion their dependents. Why, rather is its defense by the State Departthan let the village smithy suffer from ment. It reminds me of the old days automation, we would have set up a in the history of medicine when blood special government bureau to buy up letting was considered a cure for just all of those horseshoes that no one about everything. The drain upon the needed any more. Today, we would financial resources of the country have vast government warehouses full created by Foreign Economic Aid is of horseshoes and with the rate of just about as beneficial as those population increase, we would now leeches which were used to draw have several times as many blackblood out of sick patients hundreds smiths pounding out horseshoes by of years ago. hand as there were in 1900. Anyone The mere fact that medical standwho dared to suggest that this might ards in the United States are the be wasteful to our economy would highest in the world has not detered be called inhuman and against the the bureaucratic empire builders in people. It would take a politician of their demand for Medicare. Here great courage to suggest that this r i again a fancy name has been used diculous program should be abolto cover up an outright bid for soished. It is well for us to remember cialized medicine. You may call it that any government which becomes Medicare if you wish, but in the big enough to give us everything we words of Shakespeare, "A rose by want, is also big enough to take away any other name smells just as sweet". everything we have. And I might add that socialism unWashington, D.C. has become a der any name still has an anti-Freecity where all basic values seem to dom odor. have been turned wrong side out. Every day brings us news of some Only recently we witnessed a shocknew program created to bribe the voting example of a loyal State Departing public with their own money. The ment Security Officer being fired from new programs are never new, they his job. His only crime was telling are merely new names for antiquated the truth to a Senate investigating ideas. Like a dope peddler trying to committee. We may never know how hook his victim, the proponents of many loyal, government employees big government steadily attempt to have had their careers sidetracked in build up the dosage of Federal handthe past for the crime of placing duty outs. As in the case of our domestic to country above loyalty to a particfarm problem, finally the victim is so ular bureau. The assault on individdependent upon even larger doses of ual liberty, economic strangulation government aid that he is under comby big government, wasteful foreign plete control. Just as the addict who aid, welfare schemes, the farm mess, seeks to escape from dope, these fooland internal subversion—these are ish beneficiaries now face agonizing problems today's young conservatives withdrawal problems. face. Can you imagine the situation we It is very easy for us to become would be in today if the farm sublost in the complex maze of politics. sidy boys had been around when auHowever, when viewed from a per-

spective of basic principle, the picture becomes more clear. There are two great forces of philosophies at work in the body politic today. There are personalities and policies which seek to increase the area of individual liberty and there are those seeking to decrease the sphere of personal freedom. I am sure it will not come as a shock to anyone if I reflect the opinions of my own father who feels that government is already too powerful—that there should be fewer laws regulating our individual lives, not more laws, more bureaus, and more taxes. The simple fact is that socialism and welfare state paternalism both militate against individual freedom. Political freedom and economic freedom are not to be separated. A government which controls 30 percent of your income through taxes has gained control of 30 percent of your ability to decide for yourself—the ability to decide where you are going to go, how you are going to live, what you are going to wear. Weighed on this scale, we see that every Federal handout, every so-called benefit with its inexorable increase in taxes only serves to bring us that much further under the thumb of government. What is our purpose internationally? Isn't our goal to defeat communism? What hope do we offer the oppressed two-thirds of mankind now enslaved under atheistic communism? I have yet to hear a spokesman for the State Department say that it is our objective to win the cold war. It should be readily apparent to even the most casual observer that you can't get somewhere if you don't know where you are going. But then that is just common sense and that is too simple and uncomplicated for the State Department to comprehend— Why not victory? The venomous poisons of Karl Marx have unleashed upon mankind the largest hate group in history—International Communism. This is the hate-filled doctrine which seeks to turn class against class, country against country and man against God. In Korea and Vietnam, thousands of Americans have shed their blood—the victims of Communist hatred. Step by step we have watched the cancerous spread of this malignant doctrine until today it enslaves people only 90 miles from our shores. Finally, in an act of monumental tragedy even our own President has fallen before the bullets of a Communist fanatic. If freedom is to be our purpose internationally, then no less should it Continued on page 10 THE

NEW GUARD

Plea for a Conservative Foreign Policy by T . A. Quinn e know what we want in the domestic field, our problem is that conservatives don't know what they want in the field of foreign affairs." So spoke a noted conservative political analyst some two years ago. His words strike at the heart of a very real dilemma in the conservative movement—the failure to design a specific program to implement what Senator Goldwater has called Cold War Victory. The conservative mind has quite succinctly devasted the logic of alternative foreign policies, and has raised the call for a new policy of Victory. What it has not done is to become concrete in defining how Viclory shall be achieved. northward, and militarily achieve Reactionary, Liberal and —? Victory in Vietnam. Here are the battlefields far removed from nuclear There are at this time two alternawar laboratories—or the glass house tive policies to Victory, one reacon the East River—where the Cold tionary and one liberal. The reacWar is being fought, and where the tionary policy is primarily containconservative mind and muscle is ment—to hold the lines where they needed most. are now, and hopefully prevent any new Soviet advances. A line is drawn Practical Steps Needed in Laos; when the Soviets breach it, it is redrawn in Vietnam; if that By failing to give Victory a proone is breached it will be redrawn gram, the conservative infers acceptin the Philippines. This was the sad ance of the do-nothing reactionary policy of the later Eisenhower years. The liberal policy is more positive, in that it envisages an ultimate goal; that of a world of Peace, a world safe for diversity. This policy places greater emphasis on the role of plowshares of Peace, such as the foreign policy, of which the China United Nations, but both policies are experience is a prime example. Two deeply colored by the morbid fear alternatives are advanced: recognition of nuclear war. For that reason of mainland China, or the present neither believe Victory as a goal nonrecognition policy. Of the two the either possible or advisable. Because liberal policy of recognition is far of their basis in fear both seriously superior as a policy because it has a endanger the freedom of the West; goal, total acquiescence to Commuone through inaction, the other nist rule of China. The presently emthrough wrong action. ployed reactionary policy is in essence The conservative answer is a cona cruel joke and a contradictory pracdemnation of both, but no formutice which claims to recognize Chiang lated third policy. The liberal VietKai Shek as the legitimate ruler of nam plans call for total withdrawal China, while doing absolutely nothof American forces, as recently exing to put this into effect. A conpressed by Senators Morse and servative plan of positive action to, Gruening. The reactionary policy is for example, take advantage of the a continuation of the war in the Sino-Soviet jealousy and the misersouth, with nothing planned beyond able state of mainland China's econthe next battle. Where is the conservomy for the purpose of taking practiative policy for winning the Vietcal steps to win mainland China namese war? In his book, the Edge back for the West, is simply nonof War, Professor James Atkinson existent. outlines the para-military Cold War A positive liberal program for conflict and concludes that the prime waging Peace is bailing out the Soviet Cold War military weapon of Comfarm mess with American wheat. munism is the guerilla soldier. VietBut wher€ is the positive conservative nam vividly proves this, yet the conprogram for waging Victory which servative Victory policy has presented would use their disadvantage to weakno plan for employment of Western en the Soviets and strengthen the guerillas in Vietnam to carry the war West? APRIL 1964

The need for action is dramatically illustrated in the Eastern European area. For nearly four years a small band of Congressional conservatives has fought for the establishment of a House Committee on the Captive Nations. Such a Committee would propagandize throughout the world Russian colonialism practiced in the non-Russian areas of the Soviet Union and in East Europe. The liberal machine quickly saw the threat to co-existence in such actions and have blocked the Committee. Due to an ineffective and insufficient rallying of conservatives behind this issue there has been no counterattack to the liberal smothering of what could be the core of a Victory Eastern European policy. How many Americans know of the intense anti-Russian feeling in the Ukraine, Armenia, and various other non-Russian areas of the Soviet Union? This Soviet Achilles' heel goes unnoticed because conservatives have not readied the machinery to bring it before the country. The liberal foreign policy is doomed because of the same inner defect of trust-your-enemies which doomed Munich and Yalta. The reactionary foreign policy is inadequate to meet a vigorous Soviet challenge because it is inert. A conservative policy could with long term application provide eventual Victory and Peace, but not until adopted by the American people. A nation used to seeing the image of a sorrowful Khrushchev expressing condolences at President Kennedy's assassination will not turn to accept a foreign policy which regards him as the Stalinite Commissar of the Ukraine responsible for the death of several hundred thousand innocent victims of Stalin's fury, unless that policy has formulated plans and outlined goals. The conservative must awaken the sleeping nation to reality—that Khrushchev would redo the Ukraine throughout the world given a moment's chance—the nation will not awaken itself. In the past two years there have been signs that a conservative program has begun to rise. Hopefully, if this is so, the time is not too far advanced when the conservative call will be not only for rejection of the liberal and reactionary policies, but for substitution of a worked out plan for Cold War Victory. f

(pjcUii

The Rise

And Fall

This is the first installment of a history of the anti-NSA activity which has taken place in this country over the past three years. National Vice Chairman Tom Huston, who has personally participated in all of the events described, begins . . .

by Tom Huston

t is generally admitted that you can fool some of the people some of the time, but very few believe that you can fool all of the people all of the time. However, for fourteen years the United States National Student Association nearly succeeded in doing so. From 1946 to 1960, no other organization in the United States had it quite as good as NSA. Unchallenged in its claim to be the "voice" of the American student community, it spoke on nearly every subject with the authority of a Charles DeGaulle and with the regularity of anT Eleanor Roosevelt. Its credentials included letters of approval from Ralph Bunche, Walter Reuther, and Dwight Eisenhower. Bolstered by a laying on of hands by the State Department and the National Education Ascame obvious to the most casual obsociation, its officers scurried between server. Among the highlights of that Capitol Hill and points more distant Congress was the adoption of the into present, passionately, if not acfamous "Student In His Role As curately, the attiude of the enlightRioter" resolution which praised the ened American student toward the Japanese students who rioted against crucial issues of the day. President Eisenhower and forced the Encouraged by the reception accorded its envoys in Brazzaville, Accra, and other international power centers, the NSA leadership propelled itself more vigorously into the No Loyalty oath.^ political lifestream with grants from the Ford Foundation and other Establishment-approved sources of revenue. Whether donning a Watusi headdress or the red mud of Mississippi, the NSA leadership blended into the political life of this and other countries with the ease of a chameleon. The world was its parish and The Liberal Papers its gospel. Where two or three were called together for a riot, demonstration, sit-in, or peace cancellation of his proposed visit to march, there was NSA among them. that nation. The resolution cited the With the zeal and ruthlessness of right of the Japanese students to riot Genghis Kahn, it swept over and because of "social and economic presdominated the American student comsures" in Japan. Th^ Congress also munity, not by conquering but by adopted resolutions which: (1) conrepresenting. All went well until the demned former President Truman summer of 1960 when a few deleand F.B.I. Director J. Edgar Hoover gates to the National Student Confor their statements hinting at Comgress being held at the University of munist involvement in the sit-in Minnesota began to question and to movement; (2) urged that the United doubt. After a few days they conStates adopt a unilateral disarmament cluded that NSA was the greatest program; (3) called for the abolition fraud ever perpetrated upon the of both the loyalty oath and the disAmerican student community. Quietclaimer affidavit of the National Dely, they resolved to set out and prove fense Education Act; and (4) cenit. sured President Clark Kerr of the University of California for his rec'60 Congress Stirs Doubts ommendation that student government refrain from taking stands on At the Minnesota meeting, the exoff-campus issues of a political, retreme leftist orientation of NSA be8

NSA

ligious, economic, or international nature. A debate scheduled between representatives of the Young Democrats and the Young Republicans turned into a free-for-all when the NSA National Executive Committee insisted that a representative of the Young Socialist Alliance be allowed to speak for thirty minutes on behalf of the socialist cause. Attacking both the Republican and Democratic parties as "capitalist," the YSA spokesman called for a socialist revolution in America which brought enthusiastic applause from the audience. Later during one of the Plenary sessions, a young lady took the floor and solemnly told the delegates that she had a very sad pronouncement to make. "Our beloved Vice President is in the hospital," she said; "he has hurt his knee." At this point everyone cheered. Inaugurates Expose On September 28, 1960, Kay Wonderlic Kolbe, Vice President of the Student Body at Northwestern, issued a statement to the Daily Northwestern which soon received nationwide attention. Mrs. Kolbe, who had attended the Minnesota meeting, warned that NSA was not truly representative and its officers were misusing the excessive power granted to them by the NSA Constitution. "The main thing I got out of the National Student Association convention," she told the paper, "was to seriously question, in my mind, whether Northwestern should remain a member of NSA." She observed that there were many things that happened during the convention that made her wonder if Northwestern's membership was worthwhile. "At times," she said, " I was alarmed that N U was part of such an organization." She vowed to devote herself to exposing the unrepresentative nature of NSA. Meanwhile, at Harvard University the President of the Student Council was busily working to alert the Ivy League schools to the danger posed by NSA's unchallenged claim to speak on behalf of the American student community. Shortly following the conclusion of the Minnesota meeting, Howard Phillips had gathered together a small group of disillusioned delegates to form the Committee for For A Responsible NationTHE NEW G U A R D

al Student Organization (CRNSO). According to Phillips, the purpose of his group was "to assure the promotion of a national student group which will truly serve the interests of the American educational community and the nation as a whole." He favored "the existence of a national student organization which will serve as a forum for the expression of the political opinions of all nonCommunist American students who wish to participate in such a forum." He accused NSA of having "abused the rights of individual students, diminished the strength of our country, and weakened our position in the eyes of students from other nations." He announced an intention^ to carry the fight for reform to the floor of the next NSA Congress which would be held at the University of Wisconsin in Madison.

qualifications." The debate was severely limited and the available microphones seemed to be constantly surrounded by those delegates favorable to the resolution under consideration. Almost the only opportunity for the expression of minority opinion was through the circulation of mimeographed materials prepared by the dozen conservative delegates in attendance. NSA Favors 'A Politicar Corps The Establishment policy line supported a stress on the humanitarian rather than the political nature of the Peace Corps. This was severely attacked by former Y A F National Chairman Bob Schuchman as "unrealistic." Young Republican College

Peace Corps Pep RaHy As it turned out, the fight broke out long before the Madison meeting. During the latter part of March, NSA sponsored a conference on the Peace Corps which allegedly was to be devoted to "a serious perusal of all important aspects of the proposed Peace Corps," but which instead turned into a pep rally for the Peace Corps and The New Frontier. Among the delegates to that meeting were Howie Phillips, Robert Schuchman, then National Y A F Chairman, and William Steiger, National Chairman of the College Young Republicans. National Y A F Chairman Bob Bauman attended as an observer and heckler. Speakers at the conference included Congressman Henry S. Reuss (D.—Wis.), Harry Pollack, International Representative of the AFLCIO, Victor Reuther of the United Auto Workers, R. Sargent Shriver, Senator Hubert H . Humphrey (D. —Minn.), Dr. Harold Taylor, Past President of Sarah Lawrence College, and to add a bipartisan note to the affair, the Liberal Republican Senator from Kentucky, John Sherman Cooper. In typical NSA fashion, the conference delegates covered vast areas in a short time. Although only three hours were devoted to general debate, the delegates acted on thirteen lengthy resolutions covering nearly every aspect of policy and administration. One delegate questioned the procedure implemented by the NSA leadership which allowed one workshop to function without a single copy of the rules, another without having reached a decision on adopting the rules, and yet another with approving the rules with "certain APRIL 1964

Chairman Bill Steiger charged that it was "inconceivable that the Peace Corps will not be a part of our policy opposed to the Sino-Soviet bloc." It was not, however, inconceivable to the NSA leadership who favored turning the Peace Corps over to the United Nations where it could be "apolitically" administered. John Kolbe of Northwestern University argued that candidates for the Corps should be subjected to a preliminary security check to be conducted by the F.B.I, and prior to their active Peace Corps duty to a more extensive security check and formal government clearance, since "it isn't sensible to send someone overseas who might he opposed to our beliefs." This was flatly rejected by the delegates. One girl from Syracuse University wondered where the Corps would find people who could defend America "with all its racism" against a reasoned critique by a Communist. "Our mission is a humanitarian, not a chauvinistic one," she declared glibly as she resumed her seat with the satisfaction of one who had studied international relations at the feet of Adlai Stevenson. The Washington press corps provided the conservative minority with amazingly fair and complete coverage. For the first time, open and concerted opposition appeared in an

NSA meeting and was reported nationally. The illusion that NSA spoke for every student began to fade. The Peace Corps Conference proved to be a harbinger of what was to come five months later in Madison. For many of the delegates attending the Peace Corps Conference it was an initial foray into the NeverNever Land of NSA. They found it an eye-opening experience. One of them told her college newspaper that the conference was "ineffective," "in no way representative," and "not at all democratically run." The results of the meeting clearly indicated that conservatives could never exercise any influence within the ranks of the Association so long as the authoritarian structure remained unchallenged. The formation of CRNSO guaranteed conservatives that an all-out effort would be made to offer an alternative to the Ritualistic Liberalism which permeated NSA, but success would be impossible unless conservatives were given a fair hearing. The Congress rules were so rigged that all opposition could be stifled. Only those ideas which were compatible with the general philosophy of the leadership could compete in the NSA marketplace. Procedural Reform On April 21, 1961, Kay Wonderlic Kolbe announced the formation of an organization dedicated to the fight for procedural reform within NSA. The new non-partisan group, designed to accommodate people of every political persuasion who felt a need for creating a democratic environment with NSA, called itself SCANR —Students Committed To Accurate National Representation. Mrs. Kolbe indicated that her group was interested only in halting "the misrepresentation which has thrived unchecked for so long." She accused NSA of practicing "massive deception" in the preamble to its constitution by claiming to speak for "the students of the United States of America." She pointed out that not only were most students unaware that NSA claimed to represent them in every resolution, but even those students who were familiar with the association were being represented inaccurately. Observing that of the 141 resolutions in the NSA Codification of Policy, 86 (or almost two-thirds) has been passed by the 35 member National Executive Committee, Kay charged that this "oligarchical method" exemplified "the way a small group of self-perpetuating national officers" use the name, school, and 9

number of individual students to lend strength to their own whims. She indicated that NSA leaders should stop taking the role of officials in a governing body, and spend their time trying to make NSA function as "the reflective organization which it purports to be." Liberals Regroup Although the activities of these reform groups were officially ignored by NSA leadership, the Leftist Establishment did not waste any time rallying the troops for battle. In early June a secret memorandum on the forthcoming NSA Congress was sent to a select group of 70 students by Al Haber of the Students for a Democratic Society. In his memorandum, Haber explained the need for a two-pronged Liberal effort at the Congress to forestall any attempted Conservative reforms. He called for the creation of a Liberal Study Group which would provide an opportunity for "literature distribution and representation from the whole complex of liberal, democratic organizations so that the congress could be effective in recruiting and generally promoting our own activity." He saw the study group as a means of "countering the propaganda activities of Y A F and the conservative caucus." In addition to the study group, Haber favored the establishment of a "Liberal Caucus" which would handle "the politiking concerned with officer elections, organization of floor debate, assignment of people to committee proceedings, and intelligence eflforts on the activities of YAF." As Haber envisioned it, the caucus would be handled by a fairly small group who would largely select themselves, would meet often, be mobile, keep personally in touch with the progress of the Congress and make sure that people were appointed to handle specific tasks. " I believe," he wrote, "it proved a mistake at the last Congress to have these caucus discussions generally open." He felt confident that the conservatives, who would be looking for "evidence of political maneuvering," could easily be fooled if the study group were to be separated from the caucus. "It is clear, of course," he observed wryly, "that the liberal study group will not be independent of such concerns," i.e., the Liberal caucus. "We must insure," he argued, "that there is responsible, fully open and democratic expression and debate of the liberal position. This clearly is not possible if the educational forum must also handle the semi-secret political functions. The study groups 40

should have regular, open and publicized meetings, should avoid the impression of having a line, should encourage debate and controversy on issues and generally should play a visible role throughout the Congress. Only in this way can we cut the ground out from the charges that are sure to come from YAF." One-sided 'Working Papers' Haber was convinced that the most effective means of spreading the Leftist line was through "working papers" which would be prepared by SDS and mailed to delegates a few weeks prior to the Congress. Among the items which he thought should be covered were: 1. Communism—". . . how they (communists) can be dealt with democratically and why it is important to use democratic means." 2. NSA—". . . its relation to the democratic left . . . its role as a radical lobby and action force on the campus and nationally for educational reform." 3. Non-Violence—". . . its significance as a social dynamic." 4. The Student Movement—". . . what do we mean by radicalism." 5. Y A F and the Organizations of the Right—". . . their associations with groups like the John Birch Society and with racist, militarist, imperialist butchers."

The papers were to suggest "root issues and lines of effective and radical solution" and were to reflect "an unwatered liberal, democratic left position." Each was to contribute to the ideological war to be waged by SDS against the invading conservative infidels. The leftist concern over potential opposition from conservatives at the Congress was not revealed only by the circulation of secret memoranda. The Village Voice reported that Liberal-minded college students in the Village area had taken charge of "plans for a vigorous counter-offensive against a threat of a right-wing coup d'etat of one of' the most cherished strongholds of student opinion." According to the Voice, a com-

mon front was being formed to ward off a threatened takeover by conservative forces of the National Student Association, with various liberal student organizations and individuals, including the Campus A D A and the SDS, putting aside their doctrinal differences to defend the besieged student organization. It sounded almost as if rifles were being distributed to the citizenry to fend off an invasion of Madison by alien armies. As it turned out the conservatives were about as welcome in Madison as a mission of Methodist missionaries in the Vatican City. They arrived for the most part individually or in small groups and not by busloads as, unfortunately, one Y A F leader had predicted. They registered at the University of Wisconsin Union Building, set up operational headquarters down the street at the Madison Inn, and went about their business of winning friends and influencing NSA. It was a rough job. June issue: The 14th National Student Congress Goldwater, Jr. The Issues We Face Continued from page 6 be our goal within our own country. One of the reasons that creeping socialism has moved forward is the fact that every battle up to now has been fought in the free area of the economy. I f every political debate is centered around whether or not we should socialize some section of the economy which is now under free enterprise, then we must eventually lose our freedom. Even if the welfare staters lose 9 votes out of 10, little by little as those 10 votes are taken, we will succeed in creating socialism. I submit to you that it is high time we re-evaluated some of the over-expanded government programs already in effect. Instead of simply arguing about whether we should nationalize medicine or the power industry, perhaps it would be more profitable to argue about unnationalizing part of the vast existing governmental complex. It takes guts to attack a sacred cow. It takes honesty to refuse to bribe voters with their own money. However, I fail to see any reason why our tax dollars should be used to finance power businesses run in competition with taxpaying private enterprise. I believe that 1964 is a year which will call for daring and imagination. The outw,orn solutions of the oldfashioned blood letters cannot be allowed to sap the vitality of our country, our freedoms, or our economy. THE

NEW GUARD

A SPECIAL OFFER

A T T E N D T H E C A P T I V E NATIONS' R A L L Y I NWASHINGTON, D.C.

from

THE NEW GUARD y o u MAY purchase any paper' back book which has been reviewed in T H E NEW GUARD for almost 50 percent less than its retail price. All of the books offered are listed in the coupon below with bookstore prices and the lower rates to which you are entitled as a reader of T H E NEW

GUARD.

Because the cost of billing you (bookkeeping and clerical work) would prohibit offering you these low costs, your check must accompany the order. YoQ may order direct from us, as shown below. Mail to T H E NEW G U A R D Book Department 514 C Street, N.E. Washington, D. C. 20002 Please send me a copy of each book I have checked off below: •

Tower: A Program For Conservatives (retail price .60) PRICE .35 • Goldwater: Conscience Of A Conservative (retail price .60) PRICE .35 • Goldwater: Why Not Victory (retail price .60) PRICE .35 • Heinsohn: Anthology Of Conservative Writing (retail price $2.45) PRICE $1.50 • Campaigne: American Might b- Soviet Myth (retail price $2.00) PRICE $1.25 • Chamberlain: Americas Second Crusade (retail price $2.00) PRICE $1.25 • Hook: Common Sense irThe Fifth Amendment (retail price $1.75) PRICE $1.00 • Ray: South Wind Red (retail price $2.00) PRICE $1.25 TOTAL: My check for this amount is enclosed. Name

(PLEASE PRINT)

Street

The

George W a s h i n g t o n University Lisner A u d i t o r i u m

SATURDAY

M A Y 23rd sponsored

The

8:00 P M

National Captive Nations'

Committee

in cooperation with YOUNG AMERICANS FOR FREEDOM

The National Captive Nations' Committee in cooperation with Young Americans for Freedom is sponsoring a Captive Nations' Rally in Washington, D.C. at the George Washington University Lisner Auditorium on Saturday, May 23rd, 8:00 P.M. The keynote speaker at the rally will be Walter H . Judd, former Cong, from Minn, who will be joined by Cong. Edward Derwinski of Michigan and Cong. Daniel Flood of Pennsylvania. The Rally will call attention to House Resolution 14 and 15 which is being sponsored by Representatives from both major parties in Congress. Major opposition is from the U.S. State Department who feels that Representatives of the people do not have the right to decide foreign policy matters. The Resolution says in part: "WHEREAS, on the issue of colonialism the internal tyranny of imperialistic Communist powers have not been adequately exposed by U.S. representatives in the U.N. and in other international bodies; and

"WHEREAS, following the passage of the Captive Nations' Week resolution in 1959 by the Congress of the United States and again during the annual observance of Captive Nations' Week, Communist dictators have consistently displayed to the world their profound fear of growing world knowledge of and interest in all of the captive nations; "NOW, THEREFORE BE I T RESOLVED: That T H E CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES ESTABLISH A COMMITTEE WHICH SHALL BE KNOWN AS T H E SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON T H E CAPTIVE NATIONS for the purpose of conducting inquiry into and a study of all the captive nations with particular reference to the moral and legal status of Red totalitarian control over them, in order that facts concerning conditions existing in these captive nations can be obtained for the purpose of establishing means by which the United States can assist the people of the Captive Nations through peaceful processes to regain their national and individual FREEDOMS."

THE NEW GUARD

CHANGE OF ADDRESS FORM I F Y O U A R E GOING TO MOVE, please use this form to notify T H E N E W GUARD at least one full month in advance. We must have both old and new address to change your address plate. I F POSSIBLE, please include your N E W G U A R D address whenever you write about your subscription; it carries, below your name, the code line that is all but indispensable for speedy attention to your request.

NEW ADDRESS (Please Print) NAME ADDRESS CITY

ZONE

STATE

OLD ADDRESS (Please Print) NAME ADDRESS CITY

ZONE

STATE

I wish to subscribe to THE NEW GUARD for one year at the regular rate of $4.00 per year. Please enter my • new • renewal subscription.

City Zone AF^RIL 1964

State

MAIL TO: T H E NEW GUARD, 514 C Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.

B O O K S ^Foreign Policy: Insider's Report by Allan Ryskind I t is somewhat astonishing to think that Robert D. Murphy began his government career in 1915 as a clerk in the Post Office Department. Few people, it can be safely generalized, have risen from this lowly status to play such a decisive role in shaping recent history. Diplomat Among Warriors, the memoirs of Mr. Murphy, is an absorbing account of this ex-clerk's participation in m^jor foreign policy decisions since 1940, the year President Roosevelt asked Mr. Murphy, by then a career foreign service officer, to assess the chances of bringing French-controlled Africa into the war against the Nazis. From 1940 until his retirement as Undersecretary of State in 1959, Murphy was engaged in a score of crucial diplomatic assignments. In this period, he lined up French support for the allied invasion of Africa, helped set the state for the admits (page 438): " I think I had assault on Italy, and was intimately as much to do with initiating Khruinvolved in executing allied post-war shchev's trip to the United States as policy toward Germany. The first anybody, and I prepared the recompostwar American Ambassador to mendations to the White House urgJapan, he also aided in negotiating ing it." That recommendation, which the Korean armistice agreement and later acted as Ike's troubleshooter in the 1956 Suez affair and in the subsequent landing of U.S. Marines in Lebanon. And these are only the highlights of a long and distinguished career.

111

Diplomat Among Warriors, by Robert

D. Murphy. Doubleday, $5.95.

Mr. Murphy, it seems, has written a book designed to anger everyone: the rightists, among us, will decry his leftist tendencies; leftists will shudder at his hard-line diplomacy; and middle-of-the-roaders are sure to brand him as an extremist. An upstanding member of the Birch Society, for example, could not possibly tolerate Mr. Murphy. An Irish Roman Catholic—from Milwaukee, Wisconsin, yet—Murphy accuses the late Sen. Joseph R. McCarthy of having conducted an "inquisition" against the State Department. He does not believe the United States could have done much during the Hungarian revolution. There is praise for a trio of conservative betes noirs: Dean Ac|^eson, Charles "Chip" Bohlen, and George Kennan. Lo and behold, he even offers some kind words for Communist Tito. Worse yet, he boldly 12

Murphy confesses sadly went awry, stirred up some of the most passionate and vigorous debate in American history and resulted in an outpouring of wrath against President Eisenhower, though Ike "agreed very reluctantly" to the idea, says the former diplomat. But to mark Murphy as another wooley-headed foreign service officer would do him a grave injustice. Beginning with his first major diplomatic role in 1940 to persuade elements of the government of conquered France—the Vichy regime— to the allied cause in World War I I , Murphy has displayed a remarkable realism and toughness which other diplomats would do well to emulate. Liberal journalists like Walter Lippmann sharply criticized the American policy of working with a French regime which was forced to cooperate

with Hitler. But the Vichy-appointed administrators, particularly those in French Africa, were far from sympathetic to the Hider cause. Murphy's role of cultivating these anti-Hitler elements in the Vichy regime paid off handsomely. It paved the way for French cooperation with the allies when the alHes invaded French controlled North Africa. Murphy's memoirs, however, are particularly pertinent to current events as he assays American policy vis-a-vis Soviet Russia during both the war and post-war years, right up through most of the Kennedy Administration. Despite some admitted myopia on his own part toward Soviet intentions, he was a strong critic of the "adherents of the Grand Design of U.S.-Soviet cooperation." The accommodation apparatus, he feels, has allowed the Communists to hurl the West backward in retreat. Murphy recalls, with some horror, our willingness to give in to Russia, particularly in Germany. At one time, he writes. Secretary of State James Byrnes proposed to Stalin that America was willing to keep Germany demilitarized for 40 years! Stalin was too greedy to accept. Murphy surmises, and would only have agreed if America had also been willing to dismande Germany's industries on a permanent basis—which we almost did with the Morgenthau plan. In a discussion of the Berlin blockade in 1948, Murphy sounds a good bit like Barry Goldwater. Reminiscent of Goldwater's "send the troops into Cuba," Murphy insisted at the time that we should have sent a "small combat force" through the Soviet ground blockade shutting off Berlin's access routes. The American airlift. Murphy comments, was not a victory, for it "failed to ensure" our "legitimate claims for surfacelevel access to that city." Murphy thinks he should have resigned in protest over our policy, remarking " . . . I still deeply regret that I was THE

NEW GUARD

"We as young conservatives believe: That foremost amon^ the transcendent values is the individuals use of his God-given free will, whence derives his right to he free from the restrictions of arbitrary force; that liberty is indivisible, and that political freedom cannot long exist without economic freedom; that the purposes of government are to protect these freedoms through the preservation of internal order, the provision of national defense, and the administration of justice; that when government ventures beyond these rightftd functions, it accumulates power which tends to diminish order and liberty.'* "THE SHARON STATEMENT" of the Young Americans for Freedom (drafted at the group's 1960 meeting at Sharon, Conn.).

Self-bonding Nameplat^s of miracle Mylar* with pernnanent $ub-$urfatfe metalized printing •DuPont's Reg. TM

om-pm

Self-bonding anodized and etched Aluminun> Foil Nameplates .

Self-sticking All-Vinyl or Mylar Nameplates — surface-printed . , . permanently protected

W. H. Brady Co. offers employment opportunities to competent young men and women with a strong basic liberal arts education and with specific training in accounting, advertising, business, chemistry, economics, engineering (chemical, electrical, electronic, industrial and mechanical)', graphic arts, manufacturing, mathematics, personnel, purchasing, sales'

1964

associated with an action which caused Soviet leaders to downgrade United States determination and capability, and led, I believe, to the subsequent Communist provocation in Korea." Nor is Murphy less critical of our decision not to press forward to victory in Korea. As Ambassador to Japan and a negotiator during the Korean armistice. Murphy had a special vantage point to assess the situation. He sided with General Mark Clark and the late Douglas MacArthur that "we were being bluffed out of a well-earned victory. . . . The United States had the military capacity to drive the Chinese 'volunteers' back into Manchuria. . . . We had greatly superior forces which could have been used to destroy the sanctuaries across the Yalu from which the Chinese were operating with impunity." And we had "nuclear" weapons, he emphasizes. There are other areas of policy to which Murphy has brought his keen insight. Regarding disarmament, he feels that "Constant urging by us to induce the Russians to talk disarmament, may please the neutrals, but the Soviet government regards such overeagerness as a sign of weakness." On Cuba: "Some of us worry about what has been called our docile submission to a dangerous violation of the Monroe Doctrine. . . . Most Americans are dismayed at the willingness of the United States government to barter with and pay ransom to a hostile, sawdust dictator." Some of his most scathing criticisms are left for that Sacred-Cow, the United Nations. He blames GOP —presidential candidate Henry Cabot Lodge for the gradual transformation of the American delegation at the United Nations into almost a "second foreign office," which has fashioned policy even softer than the State Department. Murphy scorns the U.N.'s capacity for achieving much and feels there are situations where the United States is "too eager to merge its identity and destiny with the United Nations." Our associates at the U N , as well as our opponents, he insists, should know America is capable of going her own way; that we will not take a position forced on us by weak and willful nations. Murphy then deflates the U.N. firsters with this thrust: "Personally, I never regarded the U.N. as a divine machine from which happy solutions to our problems would miraculously flow. Nor have I feared the consequences even if the U.N. should collapse utterly." Goldwater could do worse for a Secretary of State. 13

(DwsJiqsmxji

(jon&smjuA

Choose Your Weapons! by Carol Bauman Debate within the American conservative movement has given us almost as many definitions of conservatism as there are conservative scholars. Rather than attempting to define "conservatism," however, Frank Meyer's objective in his newest book is to define differing emphases among conservative ideologues. Experiences of three years with NEW GUARD readers tend to bear out Mr. Meyer's belief that two poles of viewpoints within conservative thinking do exist. But, Meyer insists, a consensus of views also exists. It is the aim of this collection of essays to sort out how much the consensus can be distinguished amid the pet theories of such protagonists as, say, Russell Kirk, and Wilhelm Ropke, or between Willmoore Kendall and F. A. Hayek. If there remain a few stalwarts who believe that it is enough to call oneself a conservative, (i.e., opposed to the collectivist dogma,) much less to attempt to define the species of conservatism, to which one belongs, those brave souls should not read this book. A blissful ignorance of the ideological struggle going on within the conservative camp is preferable to expending precious time and energy taking sides—when so much of a practical nature needs to be done just to insure that the scholars among us will have the freedom and the leisure to indulge in such polemics. W/iaf /s Conservof/sm? Edited by Frank S. Meyer, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, $4.95. However, for the fearless, Meyer's collection of essays will prove "timely, important, and provocative" as promised on the book's cover. It is likely that the germ of the idea for What Is Conservatism? was nourished by the series of essays published by National Review in 1963. Meyer, at that time, took issue with Brent Bozell for his emphasis on the necessity of order and authority as prerequisites for a virtuous society. Meyer, it seems, feels strongly that individual freedom is the most important prerequisite for personal virtue. The smouldering coals of the feud 14

were further fanned by Frank Meyer's stimulating book, In Defense of Freedom: A Conservative Credo, in which he expanded on his idea of freedom as the primary goal of government. Not long after, authority and tradition were defended by that preeminent scholar, Willmoore Kendall. In The Conservative Affirmation, Kendall analyzed what it means to be an American conservative, with the emphasis on order, law, and especially, the U.S. Constitution. Can One be Sure? Now, with the appearance of still another book on the conservative split, the dialogue has but increased in scope and the definitions of conservatism have expanded, until we poor laymen are forced to wonder how we could have ever been so certain of our beliefs. The most enlightening chapter and the finest definition of what the discussion is all about comes from Frank Meyer himself. Meyer affirms the existence of two distinct strains of thought in contemporary conservatism—but at the same time insists that they can in reality be fused to form a "single, broad, conservative political theory." He draws the distinction as essentially "between those who abstract from the corpus of Western belief its stress upon freedom and upon the innate importance of the individual person (what we may call the "libertarian" position) and those who, drawing upon the very same source, stress value and virtue and order" (what we may call the "traditionalist" position). What causes our current problem, Meyer asserts, is not that one of these emphases is entirely wrong, but that when both sides pull against one another rather than maintaining a delicate balance between the two—distortion sets in. Such distortion is usually caused, we find, by one side accusing the other of holding an extreme position. Thus we have the "libertarians" who fear that the authoritarian or "traditionalist" view, if followed to its conclusion, would result in the imposition of a certain set of ideas upon men, coercing them to accept the tenets and practical ap-

plication of the traditionalist's view of life. Nothing, of course, could be more anathema to the American conservative. On the other hand, the traditionalists "view with alarm" the tendency of some libertarians to carry freedom to excesses—resulting, they feel, in anarchy and lawlessness. Such a state is repugnant to most libertarians who hold that maximum freedom is only possible when individuals live according to a higher order, exercising their precious liberties without impinging on the rights of other free citizens. Tradition Saves Time Leading off the dialectic between the two poles is an essay by Russell Kirk, entitled "Prescription, Authority and Ordered Freedom," whose very title is enough to cause shudders of fear from libertarians. Kirk's contribution proves to be most valuable, however, and freedom purists would FOR THE CAMPAIGN AHEAD

THE

GOLDWATER

SWEATSHIRT

Styled with raglan sleeves and the every-popular crew neck. Gold letters on black. Reflect the enthusiasm of the current conservative movement with your Goldwater Sweatshirt. Comes in S, M, L, XL. Also available . . . a beautiful full-size Automobile License Plate bearing the name "GOLDWATER." Comes in black with gold letters. $1.50 each. Send check or money order to: Modern Creations P. 0. Box 251 - Topeka, Kansas Name Street City PLEASE CHECK: PLATE • SWEATSHIRT •

IF SWEATSHIRT Quantity Size

THE

NEW G U A R D

do well to try to understand what he is saying. Reverence for the lessons of the past and adherence to the tried and true, Kirk writes, does not necessarily preclude the conservative from experimenting with new ideas, or accepting new methods. It simply saves time, if nothing else, Kirk points out, for us to accept and depend heavily upon the authority of accumulated wisdom. No man, even one with the most acute reasoning powers can work out complicated scientific theorems and doctrines without reference to the work done before him. Yet in the process of giving the authority of the past its "legitimate presumption," Kirk insists, we are alJhsL

ClmsiMam.

ways sloughing off the useless and outmoded, and adding to the stream of tradition. "Authority, prescription and tradition undergo in every generation a certain filtering process, by which the really archaic is discarded; yet we ought to be sure that we actually are filtering, and not merely letting our heritage run down the drain." Willmoore Kendall, in brilliant rhetoric, gives us a lesson in little known historical facts about the Bill of Rights and particularly the First Amendment. Kendall's main point is much the same as in his chapter on the "Open Society" in The Conservative Affirmation. He believes, as many

of us do, that the Constitution was never intended to allow the government to enforce absolute freedom at the expense of public safety and national security. Here is exactly where, as most conservatives know too well, the tension between freedom and authority is most strained. The courts, in particular the Supreme Court, have been notoriously rough on legislation dealing with internal security, and on censorship laws designed to prevent the spread of pornography. In Kendall's view, the found Founding Fathers never intended that the Constitution be used in such a manner. M . Stanton Evans, like Kendall, views the Constitution as constructed

(bJismrL

Rhetoric: No Substitute for Substance by Terry Catchpole i he fulfillment of the American Dream: Mark Harris, who started his working days as a shipping clerk in a New York glove factory, grows up to be a famous writer and to be commissioned by Life magazine to do an article on the 1962 California gubernatorial race between Richard Nixon, who got his start as a delivery boy at his father's grocery store, and Pat Brown, who once sold newspapers on the streets of San Francisco. So, Mark The Glove Boy starts off to do a story about Richard The Delivery Boy and Pat the News Boy, under the auspices of Life, owned, incidentally, by another Alger-type whom Harris fails to point out: Henry The Missionary's Son. Harris begins his assignment by attempting to put aside his prejudices, against Nixon and for Brown, so that he may write an objective account and then draw conclusions. This book, in brief, is Harris' personal story of how he went about this task. Mark Days

The Glove Boy, or The Last of Richard Nixon, by Mark

Harris, Macmiilan, $3.95.

He traces the origin of his prejudices; then describes his extreme prejudice (he really loathes Nixon) as "the politics of hysteria"; deduces that such hysteria arises from "a lack of historical perspective"; decides to write his Life piece from the historian's point of view. Q.E.D. Upon submitting his article to Life, Harris found that they did not like the historical angle; the Luce APRIL 1964

machine then forced him to alter it to a personal present tense. When the article appeared, Harris' friends chided him because it was too fair and objective. Harris himself admits that the article was barely adequate. This failing necessitated Mark The Glove Boy or. The Last Days of Richard Nixon. Here he dispenses with any pretense of objectivity and lashes out at Nixon at every opportunity. He does not criticize the ex-Vice President for his ideas (except on education) or politics, but for such things as the way the walls of the Nixon home are painted, the titles in the library, or the type of people who worked at Nixon headquarters. Harris sees "symbols flying off things" all around him. He collects the symbols and forms the man to whom they pertain. His is a purely deductive, behavioristic method, which would ignore the essential subdeties, heredity, heritage and basic soul of any person, not just Dick Nixon. And as most American behaviorists will now concede, introspection did not fail at Wurzburg. If Nixon is so awful, and Harris does point out a few valid deficiencies in campaign style, why is Pat Brown so much better? Is Harris really for Brown, or against Nixon? Although the author makes passing reference to his approval of Brown's "collectivist" welfare schemes, and to his jovial, congenial attitude, the positive attitude is vague and uncertain, nothing valid. The book, in the end, is litde better than the Life article.

Harris does have a unique, expressive literary style which was wellemployed in his best novel. The Southpaw, but here it often only serves to confuse both writer and reader, to lead them away from the central, personal issue. As an account of Harris' personal experience, the book holds some enjoyment; as a political commentary, whether you are pro- or anti-Nixon, it holds litUe value.

BARRY!

"stamp " I I

Spread the word with new G O L D W A T E R â&#x20AC;˘ T R A D I N G S T A M P S ' ("Trade-in Johnson for B a r r y Goldwater!"). T h e newest campaign idea since the bumper-sticker! J o i n the thousands who are placing this attractive gold stamp on all of their mail to help put B a r r y in the White House! Perfect for Goldwater group fund-raising (we'll send a wholesale price-list along with your order). Put B a r r y on all of your mail. . . . Send a book to a friend! 100 BEAUTIFUL STAMPS FOR ONLY ONE DOLLAR! Order today from: S A S Productions, Box 242E, Saratoga, C a l i fornia. Send only $1 for each book (of 100 stamps) ordered and we will pay postage and deliver without delay.

by James Madison to be the most ingenious method men have yet devised to maintain a balance between order and freedom. He does make a strong point against authoritarians, however, when he raps them for their aristocratic view of power: "The authoritarian, like the libertarian, believes that value and enforcement go hand in hand; unlike the libertarian, however, he accepts both. He merely wants to be the person doing the enforcing." An "Old Whig" F. A. Hayek, whose works on free enterprise economics are invaluable to the American conservative, refuses to consider himself a member of the movement. Insisting that he is instead an "Old Whig" of the British variety, Hayek identifies strongly with 19th century Liberals, and therefore likes to call himself a Liberal, but admits it is becoming increasingly difficult for him to do so in the face of current usage of the term. Father Stanley Parry does a masterful job of illustrating that conservatives have a dual task of both adhering to and reconstructing tradition, since what tradition we have in the world today is largely of a collectivist and statist nature. Father Parry also emphasizes the religious aspect of political theory—insisting that ours is a Christian civilization and that without that central fact, men can never succeed very long in structuring an ordered society. Garry Wills constructs an idea called "The Order of Convenience": "It is the meeting of political institutions with the mystery and activity of man, a standing-together (constitution) of political discipline and the individual discipline of exercised freedom." John Chamberlain and Stefan Possony relate conservative thinking to today's issues such as free enterprise, and in Possony's case, the need for a realistic conservative attitude toward national defense. William F. Buckley, Jr.'s, contribution fills out the series. In reply to constant queries of What Is Conservatism? from both friendly and hostile audiences, Buckley says he often quotes the unforgettable definition of the late Professor Richard Weaver: " . . . A paradigm of essences towards which the phenomenology of the world is in continuing approximation." In summing up, Meyer repeats that the consensus of views expressed by 16

the authors is far more dominant than the divergences. This reviewer would have to agree. When the chips are down, our adversaries the liberals don't care whether we're libertarians or traditionalists. They only care about power, and power is what they

have. The job of all conservatives is to reconstruct the kind of ordered thinking and individual response to the challenge which can reverse the trend toward collectivism and reestablish freedom as the best antidote for what's wrong with America.

Way Down South In The Land Of Barry

YAF In 01' Miss. Senator Barry Goldwater won a decisive and surprisingly easy victory in a YAF-sponsored mock election held at Mississippi State University within the past few weeks. Senator

Goldwater's victory came on the strength of 46% of the total votes cast in this deep-rooted Democratic state. Senator Goldwater was trailed by President Johnson, who received 15% of the vote. The Mississippi States Rights Party received only a

VICTORY IN '64

GOLDWATER Kmbossed

Steet

12" X 4 " - S L O n E D

I^icense