Principle Above Party: A Man of Courage ml
VITAL ELECTION-YEAR READING W R I T T E N BY
BARRY GOLDWATER: EDWIN
Mcdowell
The most complete, accurate account of the life and times of the leading presidential candidate.
P O R T R A I T O F AN
THE
HERE ARE SET FORTH: • His beliefs a b o u t w e l f a r e m e a s u r e s . . beliefs f a r different from t h o s e c l a i m e d by hostile c r i t i c s .
DEMOCRATS
• H i s v i e w s o n F e d e r a l aid to e d u c a tion a n d his s t a n d o n T V A .
DILEMMA
• His r e l a t i o n s with t h e Negro, a s his s t a n d r e l a t e s to e d u c a t i o n , private p r o p e r t y , p a s t N A A C P affiliation, Negro e m p l o y e e s in t h e G o l d w a t e r o r g a n i z a t i o n , a n d t h e v i e w s of a n A r i z o n a Negro editor.
BY P H I L I P M. C R A N E
• A n e v a l u a t i o n of G o l d w a t e r a s a presidential candidate.
ARIZONAN
. . . documents the processes by which the forces of F a bian Socialism have largely taken over the Democratic Party and made it their tool for altering the total political and social structure of America. The dilemma lies in the conflict between the traditional p r i n c i p l e s o f the Democratic Party and those Socialist goals which are now clearly visible.
$4.95
NOW!—Receive
2 0 % Discount
On
Regnery
Books
Through
Y.A.F.
Young Americans for Freedom, 514 C Street, N . E . , Washington, D . C . Please send me • Barry Goldwater: Portrait Of An Arizonan at the discount rate of $3.96 (regularly $4.95); • The Democrat's Dilemma by Philip M . Crane at the discount rate of $3.96 (regularly $4.95). I enclose my full payment of $ .
Regnery 714 West Illinois Street Chicago, Illinois 60610
Name
Please Print
Address City
State We pay all postage. Allow three weeks for delivery.
Zipcode
This M o n t h . . .
THE NEW GUARD The Magazine of Young Americans for Freedom, Inc. Editor: Carol Bauman Associate Editors: Ben
Stoker, Allan Ryskind Contributing Editors:
T . A . Quinn, Jameson G . Campaigne, Jr.
• Fifty-three thousand cheered Barry Goldwater in Dodger Stadium in L o s Angeles; more than 200,000 greeted him in Adanta; 100,000 in Memphis; 10,000 in smaller towns in the Northwest. While it is enormously encouraging to hear of the great numbers which greet Sen. Goldwater, what is more important is the obvious dedication of these crowds. "There's definitely something in the air; something is stirring in America," comments one reporter after a sweep over the country in the G o l d water 727 jet.
Kenneth E . Thompson, Ken Tomlinson, Gary Russell, Fred J . Eckert, Richard Derham Alfred S. Regnery, Terry Catchpole Robert M. Schuchman CONTENTS
October, 1964
•
V o l . I V , No.
10
ARTICLES Editorials
Sen. Strom Thurmond
3 6
is a l l A b o u t Willmoore Kendall H o w to S a v e T h e A l l i a n c e Richard Derham T h e Politics o f P o v e r t y Charles A . MacBryde
8 10 13
A M a n of C o u r a g e
. .
What Goldwaterism
BOOKS Why
Democrats Are
Leaving the Party
To R u s s i a W i t h L o v e YAF Roundup Letters Y A F A r o u n d the Nation
M a r k Michaels L i n d a Cott
15 16 18 22 23
INSIDE THIS I S S U E . . . 1 ^ 1964 is a year of unparalleled acts of political courage. T h e N e w G u a r d is honored to feature a message by a most courageous Senator—Strom Thurmond of South Carolina. Professor Willmoore Kendall of the University of Dallas discusses what the candidacy of Sen. Goldwater means to conservatives. Conclusion: When Democrats argue with Republicans, they are really arguing about something! The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has been much bantered about by political candidates lately. C o lumbia L a w student Richard Derham reminds us that the present treaty expires in 1969, and that it is vitally important that a new treaty strengthen the shaky alliance. H T * A n Inside Report on the mechanics of passing an anti-poverty bill appears on page 13. We review The Democrafs Dilemma (which Sen. Thurmond has already solved). A tender mash note to the Soviet Union by an affectionate Communist, is received by L i n d a Cott, still in her teens, but a fine and promising writer. W e welcome her to our pages. H r Y A F Roundup takes the form of four pages of exciting pictures from the Sharon Conference. T h e faces, some old, some new, reflect a certain amount of selfsatisfaction (not undeservedly). The New Guard is published monthly by Youno Americans for Freedom, Inc., in Washington, D. C. Copyright 1964 in the U . S . A . by Young Americans for Freedom, Inc. A l l correspondence, manuscripts, circulation orders and changes of address should be sent to: The New Guard, 514 C Street, N . E . , Washington, 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.
OCTOBER
1964
• J . Evetts Haley, that meticulous T e x a n who dared document the unsavory past of L y n d o n Baines Johnson, claims that 7.5 million copies of his paperback, " A T e x an L o o k s at L y n d o n : A Study in Illegitimate Power," are in circulation. Now if what Haley says about L y n d o n Johnson is true, we do not see how any American in good conscience could support L B J on November 3. A n d if the persistent M r . Haley is wrong, then the book is libelous and President Johnson ought to sue. It will be curious to see if he does. • Thousands of young Americans rioting on beaches in Oregon and New Hampshire over L a b o r D a y bear u n happy testimony to the decline in standards of behavior. The L a b o r D a y riots are symptomatic of a disturbing trend in the U . S . : Disregard for authority; disrespect for the law—these are the elements of a society bordering on anarchism. A n d who is to say that those riots had anything to do with social or intellectual deprivation? • A recent U P I dispatch reports that one Isaac D . L e v y , a former radio executive and a founder of C B S , has placed full page ads in college dailies calling on the youth of A m e r i c a to "organize throughout the country," to fight Barry Goldwater. L e v y implored American students not to "surrender to the Birch Society or the K K K . " • We want to know the reasons why William H . G o del, deputy director of management in the Department of Defense, was summarily fired recently. No explanations have been given by Secretary McNamara, although wire dispatches imply Godel's dismissal had something to do with fund irregularities in his agency. Another scandal in the wind? • Chalk up another high point in cynicism. W e refer to the vote in the U . S . Senate (50-37) whereby the M c Closkey kickback scandal was referred to the Senate Rules Committee where it is sure to be tightly shut up, instead of to Sen. McClellan's Government Operations Committee. Sen. Williams of Delaware continues to press for a meaningful Senate investigation. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, L B J has asked the F B I , of all things to investigate this latest piece of dirt. T h e San Diego Union rightly characterizes that ploy as "smacking of L B J investigating L B J . " 3
Law and Order A young mother is brutally raped, beaten and left to die, and her two children are callously tossed into a nearby river. A n elderly spinster is found viciously stabbed to death by a neighbor she had befriended and often helped financially. Women of all ages carry tear gas pens, switch blade knives, or old-fashioned hat pins to ward off attackers. Y e t there are those who insist that violence in our cities is not an issue in a presidential election. F o r those who are fond of statistics, here's one: C r i m e is up a full 15 percent for the first half of 1964 over last year! A n d last year's rate was considerably higher than the year before that, and before that. Something is amiss in our society, and it doesn't take a presidential candidate to spell it out. The marked decline in moral standards and respect for the law has marred America in the Sixties from top echelons of government down to the 12-year-old who cheats in school. Sen. Goldwater's classic example of A d l a i Stevenson's remark to a Colby College assembly bears repeating. Stevenson told the students that "in the great struggle to advance civil and human rights, even a jail sentence is no longer a dishonor but a proud achievement. Perhaps we are destined to see in this law-loving land people running for office not on their stainless records but on their prison records." "The violence of the street will grow, I fear, until there is a leadership in this land that will demand respect for the law," Senator Goldwater remarked. Sen. Goldwater's accusation that the Federal courts, especially the Supreme Court, foster the welfare of the criminal defendant rather than the rights of the victims of their crimes strikes a responsive chord in all A m e r i cans. I n their hearts, they know he's right.
Toward A True Choice Elsewhere in these pages the Senator from South Carolina, Strom Thurmond, ( R . - S . C . ) that is, sets forth for our readers his reasons for placing principle above party. A year ago at a Y A F R a l l y in Fort Lauderdale, Senator Thurmond was introduced to six thousand conservatives as "the greatest South Carolinian to serve in the United States Senate since John C . Calhoun." I f proof was ever required before, it is at hand now. With his announcement last month that he would not only campaign for Senator Goldwater for President but was in fact changing his party label (for that in fact was all that was changed), Senator Thurmond has again demonstrated that he too knows no guide but the conscience of a conservative. Many things can be said about the T h u r m o n d decision to accept political reality. It is the harbinger of a needed realism amongst Southern politicians; it is the deathknell 4
of liberal Democrats in the South; it is the true beginning of the two-party South. B u t these are not the most promising aspects of this great American's courageous decision. T h e greatest portent of all is that at last we may look forward to the day when the two political parties in this nation will in fact and in deed offer a choice and most decidedly not just an echo. South Carolina and the Nation owe a great debt to a great man—Strom T h u r mond.
Give 'Em H.H.H. Although L B J did not plan it that way, his talkative vice presidential running mate, Hubert Horatio H u m phrey, has spent most of the campaign trying to explain away his deep involvement with the far leftist Americans for Democratic Action. T e n years ago it would have been unbelievable that even the Democrats would risk nominating a founder and vice chairman of A D A as their candidate for vice president. T h e views of A D A have long given aid and comfort to the cause of galloping socialism, and on many occasions they have paralleled the Communist line in matters of foreign policy. Nonetheless, some Americans have been actually shocked by revelations about Hubert and his A D A . Y o u n g Americans for Freedom is well acquainted with Hubert the Left. It was on the triumphant Y A F night of M a r c h 8, 1962, while more than 18,000 young conservatives cheered Barry Goldwater at New Y o r k ' s Madison Square Garden, that Hubert Humphrey chose some strange bedfellows for public politicking. A s a counter for the massive Y A F rally, leftist elements decided to hold a protest rally at St. Nicholas Arena, a half mile uptown. Casting about for a last minute Liberal speaker they picked—you guessed it—Available Hubert. T h e left-wingding was sponsored by the Students for Democratic Action (the junior A D A ) , the N A A C P , C O R E , and Students for a Democratic Society. While Hubert starred as the major lefdst at the rally, his chosen associates are of equal interest. They included such institutional Liberals as James Wechsler of the New Y o r k Post and R o y Wilkins of the N A A C P . No surprises there. But also added to Humphrey's Follies were such questionable types as New Y o r k attorney Mark L a n e , then an Assemblyman from Manhattan. Since then L a n e has made his mark as the attorney for L e e Harvey O s wald's mother and has consistently argued that the W a r ren Commission was covering up "right-wing involvement" in Kennedy's murder. L a n e has also visited behind the Iron Curtain and denounced the U . S . in a talk which newsmen described as "vitriolic and vituperative." O n the same Humphrey bill of fare at St. Nick's A r e n a was Michael Harrington, the young Socialist, and the perennial presidential candidate for the Socialist Party, Norman Harrington (who recently said of candidate Hubert; "Humphrey is the kind of Democrat I like and one who would be a Socialist if he got to England.") A s frosting on the leftist radical rally, Shelley Winters publicly emoted, and every mention of Mayor Robert Wagner was greeted with loud and extremist booing. THE
NEW
GUARD
Was Hubert uncomfortable to be in the company of a mere 3,000 radical leftists? Not so's you'd notice. He did not flinch when Mark Lane was accorded a standing ovation. He smiled approvingly when radical reform Democrat Congressman William Ryan blasted "Don Quixote Goldwater." And when a lady hollered from the gallery; "Why isn't there a Communist on the platform?" Hubert silenced her with the witty quip; "You're at the wrong meeting, lady." ( A natural mistake!) But the wordy worthy from Minnesota went himself one better. Surveying row upon row of empty seats at the Liberal anti-YAF rally he struck just the right note: "The problem in America is not empty seats but empty heads." No one should know that better than the Democrat's A D A offering for the vice presidency of these United States.
Four, Three, Two, O n e . . . . SCENE OPENS: Prematurely bald young businessman-type sits in shadowy Capitol office counting stack of thousand dollar bills; "One, two, three, four . . . " Page boy enters left of screen: "Senator Johnson needs you on the Floor, Mr. Baker." SCENE
DISSOLVES
TO WHITE
HOUSE
OFFICE:
President Elbie Jay sits in padded rocking chair and, smiling sweetly, murmers to nodding newsmen; "Bobby was just an employee of the Senate elected by all the ICQ Senators. Count them. One, two, three, four. . . ." OR SCENE OPENS: Camera sweeps over wildly shouting crowd of young Negroes screaming as they hurl bricks, jagged bottles and rubble at steel-helmeted police in city street. As a police private's face is gashed open and blood spurts forth, a veteran police captain's hand moves toward his holster and he grits his teeth as he silently counts to himself; "One, two, three, four. . . . " DISSOLVE
TO
PRESIDENTIAL
DESK:
Amid
gravely nodding Congressional types, a canary-eating smile wreathes Elbie Jay's rugged western countenance. Intones he; "This here legislayshun is to protect you all, you all. Count them Titles; I , I I , I I I , I V " OR SCENE OPENS: Wildly cheering crowd of rich proletarians in Cadillac Square cheers E l Presidente as Walter Reuther beams nearby. Non-political phrases roll over crowd as Elbie Jay cries: "We will keep the peace. There will be no war. There can be only one hand on the nuclear button—not one, two, three, four. . . . " DISSOLVE TO: Sun-drenched and steamy airport in Saigon. A U.S. Air Force jet is being loaded with olive drab coffins, each with serial numbers and names stenciled on sides. A military policeman in crisp U.S. Army uniform counts quietly as he checks off a sheet of paper on a clip board; "One, two, three, four. . . . " OR SCENE OPENS: Big city ward-heeling machine type sits in darkened alley by garbage can. As he quickly OCTOBER 1964
stuffs fake ballots into a ballot box between his knees he counts furtively—"One, two, three, four. . . . " DISSOLVE
TO STEPS
OF U.S. CAPITOL:
Cold,
clear, and sunny weather. On traditional platform newly elected President Lyndon Johnson makes solemn pledge in stentorian tones; "The Father of Our Country, Franklin Roosevelt, has set the example for Us. No President should serve more terms than one, two, three, four. . . ."
IN
OUR
NOVEMBER
ISSUE:
^
Special 7 9 6 4 Election Report
^
Europe as a Third Power
^
The High School
Challenge
Political Explosions For months Democrats have been excoriating Senator Barry Goldwater as a warmongering madman, itching to ignite a nuclear Armageddon. Vicious television commercials directiy suggest that the election of Barry Goldwater would mean the nuclear destruction of our children, or at least the deadly contamination of their food. All that Sen. Goldwater was saying, of course, about "peace through preparedness" has been shunted to the background while columnists and commentators argue that the "nuclear issue" has killed Sen. Goldwater before the campaign has really gotten underway. But Sen. Goldwater stuck to his position. "Peace can only be kept by those strong enough to keep it," said Goldwater. Sen. Goldwater, through the assistance of honest journalists at Time
and U.S. News & World
Report,
now
seems to have been vindicated on the nuclear issue. Goldwater has been saying that in order to be militarily alert and poised to deter aggression, the supreme commander of N A T O , by tradition an American military officer, should have the authority to use "tactical" nuclear weapons in the event of attack. L B J reacted with pained horror. Such a policy is mad! "Whose finger do you want on the nuclear button?" Democrats screamed. According to former N A T O Commander Gen. Lauris Norstad, there was never any doubt that he had the authority to act in the event of an attack. Norstad told friends privately that he had full authority to respond with tactical nuclear weapons during the 1962 Cuban crisis. Nor is this anything new. President Johnson has delegated nuclear authority even as Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy before him did. According to U.S. News & World Report, some military men say that after November, it will become clear that the Johnson Administration and Sen. Goldwater were not far apart at the time the issue was first brought up in the campaign. 5
A M a n of C o u r a g e In this special m e s s a g e to Y o u n g A m e r i c a n s for Freedom the Senator from South C a r o l i n a tells in his o w n w o r d s w h y he h a s chosen to place principle a b o v e party. Ever since Young Americans for Freedom was founded in 1960, Senator Strom Thurmond has been one of our most outspoken supporters. Of YAF he has said: ''The vital work that these young people are doing is without doubt the most encouraging sign on the American political scene today.'* At the now famous YAF Madison Square Garden Rally in 1962, and again at our Fort Lauderdale convention in 1963, the Senator gave us his eloquent words of encouragement. On numerous occasions he has spoken before YAF groups in all parts of the Nation. Now he tells us why he has made a decision that few men in public life would have the courage to make: I t has been wisely said that "For evil to triumph, it is only necessary that good men do nothing." Particularly is this true i n time of crisis. Seldom before i n the history of our N a tion have we faced so great a crisis. The people of South Carolina have placed me i n a position of trust i n the National Government. F r o m this position, I have observed at close hand the conduct and factors which have brought about this crisis. I would, therefore, be most derelict i n m y duty were I at this time to remain silent. I have no choice but to speak openly, frankly, and fully on the crisis that confronts us. The Democratic Party has abandoned the people. I t has turned its back on the spiritual values and political principles which have brought us the blessings of freedom under God and a bountiful prosperity. I t has breached the trust reposed i n it by the people. I t has repudiated the Constitution of the United States. I t is leading the evolution of our N a t i o n to a socialistic dictatorship. The Democradc Party has forsaken the people to become the party o f minority groups, power-hungry union leaders, political bosses, and big businessmen looking for government contracts and favors. 4
The Democratic Party has used the Government as a propaganda machine to distort the truth and deceive the public to the extent that a sub-cabinet official can publicly defend the A d ministration's "right to l i e " and remain i n office, unrebuked. The Democratic Party has invaded the private lives of people by using the powers of government for coercion and indmidation of individuals. The Democratic Party has rammed through Congress unconstitutional, i m practical, unworkable, and oppressive legislation which invades inalienable personal and property rights of the individual. The Democratic Party has encouraged lawlessness, civil unrest, and mob actions. A Violation of Trust The Democratic Party has violated its trust by using the power of government to suppress information on scandals and corruption of its leaders in government and party offices. The Democratic Party has succored and assisted our Communist enemies through trade and aid at the expense of the American people. The Democratic Party has established and pursued for our government a no-win foreign policy of weakness, indecision, accommodation, and appeasement.
The Democratic Party, as custodian of government, faltered at the Bay of Pigs and i n the Cuban crisis of 1962—at the very moment when victory was at hand—and thereby forfeited Cuba to Soviet domination, subjected our Nation to the peril o f an armed enemy camp 90 miles from our shores, and opened the doors of the hemisphere to Communist subversion. The Democratic Party, as custodian of government, has sent our youth into combat i n Vietnam, refusing to call i t war, and demanding of our youth the risk of their lives without providing either adequate equipment or a goal of victory. The Democratic Party now worships at the throne of power and materialism. The Democratic Party has demonstrated a callous disregard for sound fiscal policies and practices. The Democratic Party, while hiding behind the deceitful gimmick of a darkened White House, has increased deficit spending and squandered, at home and abroad, billions of hardearned dollars taken from the A m e r i can people. Party of Socialism The Democratic Party has utterly disregarded the disastrous effects of the resulting inflation on people w i t h fixed incomes, such as retirees, pensioners, Social Security beneficiaries, and those who have their savings i n vested i n insurance. The Democratic Party, as custodian of government, has adopted the practice of taking your money by taxation and then using that money to attempt to buy your votes. The Democratic Party is attempting w i t h alarming success to change the Congress from an independent body representing the people to an amen chorus for Presidential proposals. The Democratic Party has endangered the security of the Nation by negative decisions on military preparedness, preoccupation w i t h bilateral and unilateral steps toward disarmament, and by use of the military services domestically as instruments of social reform. The Democratic Party has attempted to degrade and downgrade our men in uniform i n order to discredit their warnings of the grave dangers t o our security from the Administration's weak and senseless defense policies. The Democratic Party has n o m i THE N E W G U A R D
'For me, there is no alternative . . . the future of freedom is at stake/ nated for Vice President a key leader of the Americans for Democratic A c tion, the most influential Socialist group i n our Nation. The Democratic Party has encouraged, supported, and protected the Supreme Court i n a reign of judicial tyranny, and i n the Court's effort to wipe out local self-government, effective law enforcement, internal security, the rights of the people and the States, and even the structure of the State governments. The Democratic Party is converting our Constitutional Federated Republic into the same type of disciplined and submissive servant of an elite power group, as i t has made of the Democratic Party itself, as all who watched the Democratic Convention on television can bear witness. The party of our fathers is dead. Those who took its name are engaged in another reconstruction, this time not only of the South, but of the entire Nation. I f the American people permit the Democratic Party to return to power, freedom as we have k n o w n it i n this country is doomed, and individuals w i l l be destined to lives of regulation, control, coercion, intimidation, and subservience to a power elite who shall rule from Washington. Belief in Freedom Fortunately, for those of us who cherish the traditional freedom entrusted to us by our forefathers, there is another choice this year. Although the party of our fathers is dead, the principles of our forefathers live now in the cause of a Presidential nominee. The man w h o has gained the Republican nomination for President against all the odds and opinion polls, and who now has control of the Republican Party, is one who believes i n and abides by our Constitution. H e has demonstrated his fidelity to freedom, independence, and the Constitution by his actions and his votes i n the United States Senate. I personally know h i m to be able and responsible. He is an honest man of courage and conviction, who trusts the American people to hold the reins o f government and rule themselves. I cannot foretell what success w i l l reward Senator Barry Goldwater's efforts to return the National Government to its Constitutional role and OCTOBER 1964
our Nation to its rightful place of strength and respect in the world. N o r can I predict with certainty how long those ideas and ideals of Senator Goldwater which I share w i l l prevail in the councils of the Republican Party which he now heads. I do know that we have a fighting chance under Barry Goldwater's leadership and that we are welcomed to his banner. I know also that the course for the Democratic Party has been set toward socialism and arbitrary rule. I know further that the Democratic Party's line of succession is Hubert Humphrey and Robert Kennedy, w i t h Walter Reuther and Joseph Rauh pulling strings behind the scenes. The Only Alternative I have worked within the framework of the Democratic Party, because experience proves i t necessary to work within the framework of one of the two national parties to be effective. I have, nevertheless, maintained independence of judgment on issues and have conscientiously tried to represent the people of South Carolina, seeking to protect their rights and freedom. I shall always maintain my independent judgment and action and put the people first. T o do this i n the future I must w o r k within the framework of the Goldwater Republican Party. For me, there is no alternative. The future of freedom and constitutional government is at stake, and this requires that I do everything i n m y power to help Barry Goldwater return our N a t i o n to constitutional government through his election to the Presidency. This also requires that I join h i m i n his fight, successful as o f now, to make the Republican Party a party which supports freedom, justice, and constitutional government. I t w i l l be a long and hard struggle, with many batdes to be fought. A t
Next Month T.
A.
this time, one objective takes precedence over all others—electing Barry Goldwater President. As we give the Presidential race our undivided effort, I hope all our people, and particularly our young people whose future hangs in the balance, w i l l join this cause with enthusiasm. To my friends who have conscientiously advised me against this step, because of a sincere belief that I could best serve the country by following a course designed to keep myself i n office, I can only say that I fully realize the political risk involved i n this step and that my chances for re-election might, because of this step, go down into oblivion. But i n the final analysis, I can only follow the course which, i n m y heart and conscience, I believe to be i n the best interest o f our State, our country, and the freedom of our people. I have chosen this course because I cannot consider any risks i n a cause which I am convinced is right.
GOLDWATER STAI^PS HELP
BARRY
WIN
by
placing
GOLDWATER "TRADING STAMPS" on
all of y o u r
letters,
envelopes,
p a c k a g e s , c h e c k s , etc. Each b e a u t i f u l g o l d s t a m p ( 1 " x 11/2") f e a t u r e s Barry's slogan
picture
and
("Trade-in
campaign
Johnson
BARRY G O L D W A T E R ! " ) .
for
Millions
being used throughout the nation. P r o m o t e B a r r y e v e r y time a
letterl
Give
stamps
YOU to
friends.
Help w i n critical votes!
C L I P THIS C O U P O N NOW •
. . .
Quinn
Studies the 1964
Elections
Don't Miss It! 7
mat Goldwaterism Is All About
by Willmoore Kendall
A whole new phase in American history is being ushered in with the candidacy of Barry Goldwater, and it means the return of true dialogue to politics The following are excerpts from the opening remarks by Willmoore Kendall in a recent debate with Max Lerner. We reprint them here because we think they represent a good consensus of American conservative thinking regarding this Presidential election.
A m e r i c a n Conservatism was not bom, or even re-bom, with the Goldwater nomination. Indeed, the Goldwater nomination, properly understood, is one event among many in the history of American Conservatism. American Conservatism ante-dated, and in fact produced, Goldwater and Goldwaterism, rather than the other way around. American Conservatism does enter a new phase with the Goldwater nomination and the Goldwater acceptance speech. American Conservatism, though it produced Goldwater, becomes, with Goldwater's nomination, something different from what it was before that nomination—^why different, and how different, it becomes my task to t r y to say. . . . F r o m now on, at least until the first Wednesday after the first M o n day i n November, the Conservative, any Conservative who supports Barry Goldwater, w i l l have a ready answer to the questions: " D o you speak for anyone besides yourself?" and " A r e you talking about anything?" F r o m now on the Conservative, any Conservative w h o has embraced the Goldwater cause, can answer to the first of these questions, " I speak for all those who have rallied behind the Republican Party for purposes of the present election—for, therefore, one of the two political groupings between which the American people must choose i n November; and he can answer to the the second question, is he talking about anything. Yes, I am talking about what may be official U.S. policy come January 1965— that is, 130 days hence. He can say—a new experience for him, believe me—(as I can say to M r . Lerner), "Let us not waste time on irrelevant questions, such as, "Is there a Conservative position you can get
your teeth into?" and " A r e there people, enough people to matter, who actually believe the kind o f thing M r . Kendall believes?"—let us not waste time on such irrelevant questions, because History has now answered them in the affirmative, and i n terms so clear that even a Liberal columnist, even a man w i t h the trained incapacities of a Liberal intellectual, can u n derstand them. Henceforth we must, even Liberal intellectuals must, talk about Conservatism as one of the two realistic alternatives as regards the future of America and, by the same token, the future of the world. The
Conservative Eggheads
N o more interminable pauses and digressions during which to argue which Conservative egg-head has the correct definition of Conservatism. N o more plays to the effect that this issue, or that issue, or that issue yonder, has already been decided once and for all, so that they are not really up. For all the Conservative eggheads, all Conservative spokesmen, have in fact rallied under Barry G o l d -
water's banner, and put behind them the minor differences of emphasis that, before June, made them seem disunited and at cross-purposes. American Conservatism, politically speaking and for the moment anyhow, is Barry Goldwater's brand of Conservatism, and this turns out, as far as it goes at least, to be a brand of Conservatism that all Conservatives can adopt, sincerely and enthusiastically, as their own. A n d that brand of Conservatism also turns out to be— or at least to be recognized by its enemies to be—a matter of all-out, straight-down-the-line opposition to the Liberal Revolution. The issues concerning the Liberal policies that have prevailed at the White House through recent decades turn out to be not closed issues, but wide-open issues; not questions to which a definitive answer has already been given, but questions that w i l l in fact be answered anew, have to be answered anew, i n November, Conservative proposals. Conservative criticisms of prevailing White House policies, above all the Conservative claim that Conservatives are i n fact i n the majority out there in the American electorate, that only a Conservative administration can i n fact express the heart and mind of America—all these, I say, must now be discussed on their merits, must now be discussed with an eye exclusively to w h o has the better case. The discussion has entered a new phase, and those who would have liked to perpetuate the old phase— the phase during which Conservatism could be dismissed on the grounds that it was not a realistic alternative —had best swallow hard, and begin to learn to live with it. Or rather, as I prefer to put it, the discussion has emerged from an old phase into which it should never have entered to begin with, and for this reason: The o l d THE
NEW GUARD
'A dialogue, not a monologue phase distorted and concealed the realities o f American politics; it i g nored the real lay o f opinion out i n the country—that is, the failure of the Liberal Revolution to plead its case successfully before the bar of public opinion; and it led, i n the long run—to, I believe, our great misfortune as a self-governing people—to the virtual disappearance from our midst o f meaningful political debate. The
Confrontation
First: the question who are the majority, who are the minority is what, presumably, we are holding the election to find out: that question w i l l be answered, and answered i n a way that there's no talking back to, i n November; and let no one pretend, meanwhile, to know, really know, what the answer is going to be. Second: i f at this point we are going to venture any predictions, we must base them, for the most part, on the historical record—which, I hasten to add, we on our side o f the fence do not read i n the way i n which it is read on the other side o f the fence. As we read it on our side o f the fence, the historical record says that it is the Liberals who have been, even through recent decades, the minority i n American politics—'nay more a desperate and largely impotent m i nority, hanging on for dear life, hanging by their fingernails for dear life, from the brow of the cliff, and able from election to election to keep up the appearance o f being a majority only by a stratagem that only a minority movement would ever think of adopting, namely: the stratagem by which, i n election after election for nearly 30 years, the American people have been denied the opportunity to vote for—nay, even to listen to—a Conservative candidate for the presidency. Government of Laws T h i r d : The big and unambiguous fact o f the decades i n question—^the decades, that is, during which Liberalism has been a factor i n our politics— the big unambiguous fact, I say, has been Conservative domination o f Congress and so Conservative domination of the statute-book. T o put it a little differendy, the elections that the L i b erals have been winning, the elections to which they point as evidence o f O C T O B E R 1964
or a soliloquy^
their majority out i n the country, are the presidential elections, not the congressional elections, which is to say: ingenious and resourceful though the Liberals are, they have yet to come up w i t h the stratagem by which they can w i n and retain control o f our national legislature—which, just to the extent that we are a government o f laws not o f men remains the key branch o f our political system, and exercises ultimate, "last-say" control over national policy. Nobody, moreover, knows this better than the L i b erals, who spend half their time deploring i t and half their time, paradoxically—but a pinch o f paradox is a necessary ingredient o f Liberal stew —explaining i t away.
On two counts, then, the Liberal claim to a historical majority out i n the country turns out to be spurious, as does the claim that the American people have ratified the Liberal program i n election after election. The proof, as far as the historical record is concerned, is brought off w i t h m i r rors. A n d Conservatives, as far as electoral history is concerned, can look forward w i t h confidence to the November election when for the first time they w i l l be able to make their votes count i n the presidential balloting as well as the congressional. Y o u w i l l not, i n the course of the campaign, find out much about what a Goldwater administration w i l l i n fact do, and most o f what you w i l l find out w i l l , i n the nature o f the case, confuse rather than clarify your u n derstanding o f what the election is about. This for several reasons, which are perhaps worth ticking off: The major implicit, or i f you like, tacit
proposal o f the Goldwaterites—^you w i l l find it secreted i n a single sentence of the acceptance speech—is this: Let us put a stop to the war between the White House and Congress; let us return the American presidency to its traditional role in American politics, which is that of executing laws hammered out in Congress, not laws reflecting a program to which the President, but not Congress, stands committed; let us, in short, get the White House and Congress moving together, and abandon the fiction— for that is what it has always been, a fiction—that the President calls the turns. No Mandates To demand o f the Goldwaterites a detailed British-style program is, in a word, to misunderstand the meaning of the Goldwater movement, and to demand o f the American political system something that no one ever got out of it yet, namely, what they call i n Britain a mandate, for a clearlyarticulated program. A g a i n : Goldwater is, as I have said to begin w i t h , the product not the producer of the forces about to take over i n American presidential politics, and by no means necessarily their most accurate spokesman: what the Goldwater administration w i l l do, once i n power, w i l l have to be decided—by a President and Congress moving together—as the problems arise and get themselves discussed. But the big point here is this: the choice i n November is not going t o be a choice between two programs, i n the British sense of that term, but between two ways o f squaring off to the nation's problems, two states o f mind, I would like to say i f it were not pretentious, two political philosophies. Nor, I suggest, w i l l anyone ever come to understand the approaching election unless he grasps it i n those terms. But to say that, and push i t deeper, leads back as I indicated i t would to the big question: W h a t do I mean by the new phase i n the history of the American discussion process? Back to Dialogue Well, i n the first place—I have already intimated this, but I want now to say it loud and clear—^the American (Continued on page 12) 9
How to Save The Alliance
by Richard Derham
1969 is the deadline for finding a permanent solution to the confusion of the current status of the NATO Alliance
O,
^ne of the most vital, i f least discussed, issues i n the current election campaign is the future of our Atlantic Alliance. Though many people remain unaware of it, 1969, the end of the Presidential term now contested, marks the termination and presumably the renegotiation of the twenty-year N A T O treaty. Whether N A T O w i l l emerge stronger or weaker depends i n large measure on the policies we pursue i n the next four years. D u r i n g the past four years the cohesion of N A T O has been dangerously undermined as the Democratic administration has failed to deal w i t h new problems and tensions among the N A T O powers. I n four years the Democrats have succeeded in reversing the entire direction of our post-war policy and i n doing grave damage to the Alliance, damage which must be repaired i n the ensuing four years i f a healthy N A T O is to emerge from the renewal negotiations. Basically, the Democrats failed to recognize the success of our bipartisan, post-war policy i n Europe. Through the Marshall Plan, N A T O and our support for the Shuman Plan, Euratom, the abortive E.D.C. and finally the Common Market, we have encouraged the European nations to find collective solutions to common problems and we have helped a war-torn continent return to economic prosperity. Implicit i n our policies has been the assumption that a stronger Europe would assume a greater share of the burdens of defending the Free W o r l d . I t was always understood that a revitalized Europe would not be as willing to follow the American diplomatic lead as a Europe still dependent upon the U.S. would be.
A
Changing World
Yet now the administration is shrinking from the implications of success. While we have implicitly recognized that the old Atiantic relationships have changed, by our urgings that European nations assume a part of the burden of aid to underdeveloped nations and by less successful pressures on our N A T O allies to increase their commitments of forces to the common command, the administration's definition of unity within the alliance seems, as Henry Kissinger has pointed out, to carry overtones of tutelage. While this may have been appropriate i n the past, the Johnson administration is guilty of forgetting that we live i n a changing world. Rather than an increasing respect for European opinions and interests in the formulation of global policies, the past four years has seen an everincreasing tendency to by-pass our Allies i n favor of bilateral conferences w i t h the Soviet U n i o n , even on subjects of immediate importance to our N A T O partners. A n d while we have been chasing the will-of-the-wisp of rapprochement w i t h the Communist countries, our European allies have begun to wonder just how deep our commitment to them lies. F o r they are deeply conscious of the narrow isolationism into which our country has receded i n times of w o r l d crisis i n the past, and they can be excused for wondering whether the Kennedy-Johnson era may signify a similar trend. Isolation? Signs of a new isolationism are, i n fact, already appearing i n our foreign policy. Important leaders of Congress
' 1 ..ft. r.
are calling for U.S. withdrawal from the frontiers of freedom i n South Viet N a m while the President is unable to make up his mind what policy should be followed. The growing tendency to by-pass Europe may forebode a lessening of commitment i n that area as well. The "hot line" between Moscow and Washington is merely a symptom. Other indications of a change in policy, or at least a change in emphasis, were provided by the negotiation of the test ban treaty, the sudden removal of medium range ballistic missiles in Turkey and Italy at a time which indicated a secret agreement reached during the Cuban crisis, and the reduction of troop strength in Germany. While the latter has been justified on the grounds of increasing air-lift capacity, the "Big L i f t " cannot be as assuring to our Allies as troops already on the ground. Whatever the technical skills, there always remains the possibility of a political decision to delay or not to come at all, an experience which France, for one, remembers vividly; but once in the field, American troops would be committed to fight for the defense of Europe. Inevitably such actions as these must lead to an i n creasing pressure for autonomy, and to a declining faith i n the American commitment. Current problems i n our Atlantic relations derive principally from two factors: the renascent France of the Fifth Republic and the European desire for greater security. Recovery of France I f the recovery of Germany was the miracle of the first post-war decade, the decovery of France is the miracle of the second. W i t h the economic and political recovery accomplished by DeGaulle since 1958 has come an i n creased role in w o r l d affairs for France, something from which neither DeGauUe nor other French leaders are inclined to shrink. While this new THE
NEW GUARD
^Several years of patient action to restore factor i n the Western equation of power unquestionably complicates things for our policy planners, the i m portant thing to remember is that we are fundamentally striving for the same goals. While we may differ, as even the best of friends may at times, our u l timate objectives are identical. N o r should we be so sure that we are always right and they are always wrong. I t should be our task to listen respectfully to their views and to recognize their interests i n those areas of the w o r l d where they are equal to or greater than ours. Unfortunately, we seem instead to be more interested i n "understanding" Russia than to u n derstanding this oldest of our allies. A n d we should begin by understanding the concern of France, and indeed of most of Europe, that our nuclear shield may not always be available for their defense. The fear of Europeans is not, or at least not yet, that we w i l l abandon them should they be attacked. Our o w n security is too much involved i n theirs for that to be believed. There is, however, a greater fear: that we w i l l allow a limited war to be fought across the face of Europe, committing only a fraction of our capabilities to repel the attack. W i t h the growing Soviet ability to bring down nuclear devastation upon our homeland, many Europeans question our w i l l to defend them w i t h all-out war and are understandably reluctant to allow their national security to rest on the good w i l l and resolve o f a future President. T o Europeans our military policy i n recent years has seemed to confirm this fear. Since the late 1950's we have been urging a greater reliance on conventional means to repel any Soviet attack on Western Europe. W i t h the growth o f Soviet nuclear weapons and delivery systems we are properly reluctant to commit ourselves i n advance to fight a nuclear war when the opportunity may exist for containing the conflict, and securing victory, at a lower level. European analysts have themselves urged such a policy of nuclear restraint i n conflicts not involving their homelands. Rut our suggestions that conventional power i n Europe should be increased have met w i t h cool responses from European allies who fear that such a policy would reduce the O C T O B E R 1964
confidence'
credibility of our nuclear deterrent and thus encourage the Commuists i n thinking that a limited aggression i n , say, Greece, Scandinavia, or even Germany, might succeed. Though such an aggression seems not to be an immediate danger today, shifts in the Soviet line have occurred before and defense calculations must assume they may occur again.
However, i f nuclear forces are under the control of Europeans, they argue, Russia would be assured of their use to prevent a limited defeat or negotiated truce to the West of the present demarcation line. The result would thus be a much greater deterrent than would either the U.S. nuclear force or an increased European conventional army. Moreover it might have significant value merely as an increased assurance to the Europeans themselves. Thus France and England want an independent, i f small, nuclear force and other European nations are not unalterably opposed to this view. Militarily an i n dependent French or European nuclear force is wasteful and unnecessary, since it cannot compete i n size or sophistication w i t h that of the U.S. But man does^not live by bread alone, and technical solutions must yield to political requirements. I t is not the reality of our intentions to defend Europe that is relevant; it is the perception of reality which controls events. I t is not the job of a statesman to take chances w i t h his nation's survival and so long as European leaders remain uncertain about our future i n tentions, they w i l l want a stronger control over defense policy. A n d so long as Atlantic cohesion remains an important objective, we must meet their desires in some manner.
A Cohesive Force Several alternatives could be suggested to meet the political needs of the Alliance. Perhaps the most p r o m ising is an international force, formed by the merger of the French and English nuclear forces and administered through a collective agency of the European countries. Since the administration's actions at the Nassau Conference and the subsequent French rejection of the British bid to enter the Common Market, the achievement of such a force seems a distant prospect, but nevertheless one toward which we should work. Somewhat less desirable than a truly integrated European nuclear force is the independent nuclear force which De Gaulle wants. Smaller, by definition, it would also have all the disadvantages of proliferation of nuclear weapons. Unlike the European force, there would be only one, and not many, fingers on the "trigger", or more precisely on the safety catch. Thus, the decision to use nuclear weapons would be more readily reached than i f all European nations, or at least all Common Market nations, had to give their approval. Moreover, an inevitable result would be an increased influence for France within the European community, making further integration more difficult. On the positive side, however, it would place a nuclear force on the continent, controlled by a continental power, and thus would assure France and her neighbors that Europe could not be overrun except at great cost to the aggressor. Kissinger's Solution Least desirable of all the proposals, because it is not accepted by the E u ropeans as a solution to their strategic problem and raises difficult administrative problems of its own, is the multilateral force proposed by the current administration. T o begin w i t h , the mixing of crews of several nationalities would give operational control to all nations only, as Professor Kissinger has suggested, through the threat of mutiny. B u t the threat of mutiny could at most have a restraining effect, preventing, not forcing, the use of the Polaris missiles. What the Europeans want is not a veto over a small portion of our
II
nuclear weapons, but assurance that the weapons w i l l be used. Assignment to N A T O gives no such assurance since the N A T O commander is, by tradition, always an American, and, moreover, these weapons provided by the United States may be employed only under express authorization from the President. Thus, increased European participation i n nuclear decisions under the M L F is more apparent than real and the Europeans would have no greater assurance that nuclear weapons would be used i n their defense than they have at present. I n deed, when N A T O must resort to what is, i n reality, a gimmick to handle political problems o f the highest magnitude, its members may feel they have cause to wonder how deeply the U.S. is interested i n meeting their desires. Deadline: 1969 Only the guidelines o f a solution to the quiet crisis i n N A T O can be suggested here. A s it has taken sev-
N. B. The November
eral years f o r the rifts t o become evident, so too must i t take several years of patient action for confidence to be restored. Herein lies the urgency of the problem, for we must start now i f the 1969 deadline is to be met. What is necessary, primarily, is a reassertion by the President o f our traditional post-war policy toward Europe. We must acknowledge our European allies as our equal partners in the struggle against Soviet i m perialism. This does not mean following De Gaulle's advice over South Viet N a m ; it does mean full consultation and coordination of our policies; not integration o f strategy, but coordination. A n d it means acknowledging the psychological need of Europe to a defensive nuclear force under its own control. We need never fear that an area which has experienced totalitarianism before w i l l become a " t h i r d force" i n the neutralist sense. We should i n stead welcome them as a "second force" in the defense o f freedom, one which may serve an invaluable role as a complement to the activities of the U.S., as well as providing valuable counsel to the not-always infallible American State Department. Only one candidate can execute the necessary policies. President Johnson, one of the architects of past failures, whose platform ignores the deep splits i n the Alliance, cannot. But Senator Goldwater has long spoken out on the problems o f our Atlantic alliance, whose platform is unmistakably clear, only he can be relied upon to restore a sense of unity to the N A T O alliance.
issue of the NEW GUARD will arrive BEFORE Nov. 3rd!
Every American should read— A T E X A N LOOKS A T L Y N D O N by J. Evetts Haley. Sent postpaid $1.00 N O N E DARE CALL IT TREASON by John Stormer. 75^ P.P. Better Books, 8 0 0 Biggs Terr., Arlington, Texas
SUBSCRIPTION
SERVICE
CHANGE OF ADDRESS
PUoM include a NEW GUARD address label to insure prompt service wlien ever you write us about your subscription.
ITTipll A l l flull
I Mail to: NEW OUARD Subscription • Service 514 C Street, N.E., Washington, D. C. 2002
HERE
LABEL
If youVe moving let us know five weeks before changing your address. Place magaline address label here, print your new address below. If you have a question about your subscription place your magazine address lobel here and clip this form to your letter. (Please Print)
To subscribe mail this form with your ^^ew Address) ($4.00) payment, and check: • new subscription • renew my present — — r subscription.
I
Subscription Rates in the United States address and Canada: 1 year, $4.00. Free subscription envelopes will be sent to you upon request. city
I 12
state
zip code
Goidwoterism (Continued from page 9) discussion process is about to become, for the first time i n many a long year, a discussion process, a dialogue not a monologue or soliloquy, and a dialogue between debaters who really disagree about important things. What is up for grabs i n the debate about to begin is not merely the axioms of the monologue about to end: What is up for grabs is the status of a whole governing class— of the entire elite upon w h o m we have depended i n recent decades for our political wisdom, our picture o f the world, our guidelines i n public policy. What is up for grabs—again something for which the phase that is ending has i l l prepared the audience —is status of the Lippmanns and Kennans and Restons and Roveres and M a x Lerners. The Goldwaterites, implicitly or expliciUy, are i n fact saying that our governing class, the East Coast governing class, have failed us, are fraudulent, and must be swept aside. Again y o u w i l l miss the point in the new phase unless y o u understand that is is what the argument is about. A House Divided I spoke, to begin w i t h , of misgivings that I as a Conservative feel about the debate that lies ahead of us. So let me, by way of conclusion, nail that down: The American political system, as I understand it, is a good system for a self-governing people that is i n agreement about fundamentals. I t is not, on the record, a good system for a house divided; and the grim significance of the Goldwater acceptance speech is just that: W e are no longer a people i n agreement on fundamentals. We are no longer a people even that agrees as to the k i n d o f w o r l d i t lives i n . A n d I must add this disturbing reminder: The last time we fell out about fundamentals we had to fight a Civil W a r in order to determine which direction to move i n . I think we can count on Senator Goldwater, whether elected or not, to t r y to keep i t , this time, from coming to that. But can w e — I pose the question i n all seriousness —can we count on his opponents also to try to keep the civil peace? THE N E W G U A R D
The Politics of Poverty by Charles A . M a c B r y d e
L a s t Spring the President o f the United States, with great fanfare, submitted to Congress his proposed "war against poverty" program. The "poverty package," as i t later came to be known, consisted of a general, overall proposal, the Economic Opportunity A c t of 1964, and a specific, regional approach, the Appalachian Regional Development A c t of 1964. The methods w i t h which both bills were handled in the Congress are indicative of the ruthless and unscrupulous handling of Administration "must" proposals. F r o m the moment the general waron-poverty bill was introduced by Rep. A d a m Clayton Powell of N e w Y o r k and from the moment the A p palachian bill was introduced by the now lame duck Rep. Charles A . Buckley, also of N e w Y o r k , one thing was increasingly evident—the war on poverty had purposes other than solely aiding the poor. Both proposals and their subsequent handling by the Congress reeked w i t h political vote buying that has constantly characterized the programs of the Johnson Administration. Rubber
Stamp
The Economic Opportunity A c t , designed to "mobilize the human and financial resources of the nation to combat poverty," was sent to the House Committee on Education and Labor where an A d H o c Subcommittee on the W a r on Poverty, chaired by Rep. Powell, was established to rubber-stamp the proposal. The A p palachian Regional Development A c t , designed to provide "public works and economic development programs and the planning and coordination needed to assist in the development of the region," was sent to the House Committee on Public Works where an A d Hoc Subcommittee on Appalachian Regional Development, chaired by Rep. Clifford Davis of Tennessee, was formed to go through the motions of conducting hearings. O C T O B E R 1964
a philosophical or a practical perspective. N o t a single request to testify against the bill was received by the committee. The public hearings were c o n cluded, and everything seemed reasonably peaceful. The opponents of the bill had definite ideas about necessary revisions and even complete overhauls of the bills, should it appear that they could not defeat the bills. Then it happened. 'Railroad'
The Democrat-Liberal Republican coalition i n the Senate with a two-toone plurality over the Conservatives, makes i t unnecessary to even discuss the transactions concerning these two bills i n that body. Even w i t h the outstanding Conservative leadership i n the Senate, railroading actions do, unfortunately, take place i n the Senate. Second T r y Both proposals were so badly drafted when submitted to the Congress that revised bills later had to be introduced and considered by the backers of the bill to prevent embarassment to the Administration. The redrafted legislation removed some of the objectionable features of the proposals, but there were more equally objectionable features i n the new bills. Bill Moyers, 31 year-old Special Assistant to the President, allegedly, personally directed the entire drafting o f Poverty b i l l s — I and I L The public hearings before both committees were held i n an air of cordiality. The Administration sent its elite to Capitol H i l l to testify for the proposals. Organizations normally expected to endorse such legislation — A F L - C I O , United M i n e Workers, Rural Electrive Cooperatives—came to add their approval to the measures. Before the subcommittee on the Appalachian bill there appeared not one organization or individual to testify against the measure either from
Since the general poverty bill was introduced several weeks before the Appalachian bill, it was natural that the first signs o f a push would be felt there. Rep. Phil Landrum o f Georgia introduced the re-drafted bill, and the Education and Labor Committee went almost immediately into closed-door sessions. Opponents of the bill stated that supporters l i t erally dared anyone to offer an amendment. Even after it was clearly revealed that there were sections o f the re-drafted bill still inconsistent with existing Federal programs, the bill was "railroaded" through the committee. I t was reported to the House without a single amendment. Twenty Votes Short Five days before the vote on final passage o f the poverty bill by the House, it was well known that the Administration was probably short some twenty votes. D u r i n g the entire week of debate, supporters devoted much time pointing out to wavering congressmen the political attractiveness o f the bill during an election year. Passage of the poverty bill by 226184 i n the House and by 62-33 i n the Senate is now a matter for historians, but for future reference, it would be wise to consider its objectionable features. Objections Some of these features are: authorization for appropriations for urban 13
and rural renewal and development; preferential treatment to cooperative associations over private, jirofit-making organizations; discouragement of employment and investment incentives for profit organizations i n fields effected by the legislation; poor outlines for administration of the program and for coordination w i t h State and local authorities; and, failure to consider the $31 billion already spent annually by the Federal government, direcdy or indirectiy, to combat poverty. Other objections to the bill are: failure to consider the decreasing percentage of families w i t h an income of $3000 or less, using 1962 dollars as the standard; the creation of a $190 million Job Corps for 40,000 enrollees at $4,700 per enrollee; failure to utilize practical programs for rehabilitation for community services rather than programs which stress communion with nature (i.e., the CCC-like Job Corps); utilization of rehabilitation enrollees i n programs for private organizations of a secular as well as a political orientation; and, creation of a $150 million work-training program w i t h no concrete benefits or results outlined. The program further forms a $72.5 million workstudy program to assist college students, thus, allowing further encroachment of the Federal government into education. The Appalachian bill was pushed through the Congress and its committees in a manner similar to the passage of the general poverty bill. The
prohibit Federal district courts from issuing reapportionment orders to state legislatures the week before the Appalachian bill went before the Rules Committee. Rep. Howard Smith of Virginia, Chairman of the Rules Committee, was a strong supporter of the reapportionment b i l l . Smith informed Speaker John M c C o r mack that the Appalachian bill would not be granted a rule until the Speaker put the reapportionment bill on the House Calendar for Floor debate. Since McCormack wanted the A p palachian bill granted a rule, the reapportionment bill went to the Floor. Smith began hearings on granting a rule for the Appalachian bill, but he made sure that a rule was not granted until after final action had been taken on reapportionment.
hearings, which had been prepared for some two weeks, were not ordered to be printed u n t i l the Friday before the re-drafted bill was to be introduced on the following Monday. As a result the closed-door sessions of the committee began without copies of the hearings available for reference. The re-drafted bill was introduced on Monday, and the first closed-door sessions were scheduled for the next day. This deprived the opponents of the opportunity to examine the new b i l l carefully to examine changes. Arm-Twisting The subcommittee met for two days, and the bill was railroaded out of the subcommittee w i t h the chairman gaveling down any attempts to discuss the bill. The bill then went before the full Public Works Committee. The supporters of the bill knew that the opponents would have a valid argument should the backers of the bill also r a m it through the full committee, but only a demand for a full reading of the re-drafted bill prevented the supporters from pushing it through with haste. N o hearings were even held on the re-drafted bill. The committee acted entirely on the hearings of the original bill, many features of which were different from the redrafted bill. Almost every political scheme possible was employed to maintain the features of the bill which the Administration deemed necessary.
Rep. W i l l i a m Cramer of Florida, a major opponent of the Appalachian bill, literally filibustered against i t i n the Rules Committee. Members of the Rules Committee who also opposed the bill tried to keep Cramer on the witness stand until it would be impossible to get a rule for debate before the Democratic National Convention. The Appalachian bill was scheduled for Floor action by the House on September 2. Only one hour before the debate was to commence, the Floor action was suddenly canceled. There is only one reason during an election year for stopping a give-away measure from getting to the F l o o r — after all his work L.B.J, didn't have the votes.
The Rules Committee had granted a rule on a reapportionment bill to
Help Prove the Pollsters Wrong . . . Join the B A R R Y G O L D W A T E R Here's •
Barry Card
GoklWater
accepts
the and
Charles
Hoffman.
so-called
Opinion
said
the Club's
membership
Black
for
•
Official
Autographed
0
100 Barry
Goldwater
for
Goldwater"
Barry
and Gold Photo
•
Specially-designed
•
Subscription
to
of
Your
No.
wallet-sized the
Senator,
"Trading
Club
the
What
America's
•
Membership
proves
Hoffman Polls
rapidly-exponding
Goldwater's
support
across
the
among
people
of
walks
all
colled
"ofF-base"
seated
14
Support
Membership
suitable
sticker
Means:
Conservative
Membership
Stamps"
bumper
Club's
1
for
Card framing
for use on
letters,
etc., reading
reading
am
Barry
"I
a
"Trade
Goldwater
in
Johnson
Fan"
Newsletter
JOIN
UP N O W . . . . M A I L TO
1
No. 1 in the Fan Club on behalf
©f his wife, PegSYr ^'om National President
Proven
Fan Club
"deep-
nation of
and
Barry Goldwater Fan Club, P.O. Box 9308, Washington, D . C. 20005 Please enroll me in the Barry Goldwater Fan Club and send me my official membership card, (preferably check or money order payable to the Barry Goldwater Fan Club).
j | |
Name (please print)
|
Address
I
City (
state
'
) Please send me information on how to start a Barry Goldwater Fan Club in my neighborhood.
I
life."
THE N E W G U A R D
B O O K S Why Democrats Are Leaving The Party b y M a r k Michaels In a 1962 television interview with Eric Goldman, the aged Socialist campaigner, Upton Sinclair, declared: "I don't think we've ever been as near socialism as we are at this hour. I think we're moving nearer to it every minute." Goldman stated: "In one sense you're like Senator Goldwater. Y o u believe in creeping socialism, don't you?" "I certainly believe in creeping socialism," Sinclair replied, "and the only difference between Goldwater and me is that I want it and he hates it." Upton Sinclair was the founder of the American equivalent of the Fabian Socialist Society (the League for Industrial Democracy). At the time of its inception, 1905, it numbered only "100 odd men and women." The Democrat's D i l e m m a , by Philip Crane, Regnery, Chicago, $4.95
Today its membership is legion. Its friends, sponsors, and alumni permeate every walk of life: politics, the campus, the media of expression, organized labor, and even the business community. Get Them Young Its tool for achieving its ends is power—political, social, and economic. Recognizing the impracticality in the United States of achieving these ends through the communist tactic of revolution, the Fabians chose the parliamentary path to power. They were quick to recognize the importance of educating a generadon to socialism. The first task was to educate a faculty, a cadre of propagandists, dedicated and able. They established the Rand School, "Socialism's West Point." They established college affiliates where tomorrow's OCTOBER
1964
leaders were skillfully indoctrinated. When Roosevelt issued his memorable declaration, "Clear it with Sidney," he was acknowledging a fact well known to America's Fabians, the tail was now wagging the Democratic donkey. Socialist Sidney Hillman was just one of the stable of labor commissars who had ridden into control under the New Deal. Walter Reuther, who founded a Fabian campus organization at Wayne University, headed up the United Auto Workers. David Dubinsky, of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union, has long been an influential friend of the American F a bians. James Carey, of the Electrical Workers, is yet another.
they were within "20 or 30" Representatives in our Congress from enjoying majority control, and that they already enjoyed control of the United States Senate. Of course Americans do not know these successes as "Socialist" triumphs. They are never called that. As Sinclair noted: ". . . I'd like to make plain I don't expect socialism to come under that name and I don't expect it to come all at once and I don't expect the majority of people to know it's coming or even when it's happening . . . I'm just as well satisfied to call it 'progressive,' to call it 'advanced democracy' or whatever name you please."
Laboring Left Today, thirteen members of the Executive Council of the A F L - C I O have attachments to the American F a bian movement. The A F L - C I O , in turn, has an annual budget in the neighborhood of $1.5 billion and a manpower reserve of approximately 15 million. Millions of dollars are spent annually by the A F L - C I O to advance the Fabian goals of Upton Sinclair and his little band of Socialists who met in New York back in 1905. In addition, the American Fabians have played a significant role in establishing such familiar organizations as the N A A C P , C O R E , A C L U , A D A , C O P E , and a host of others. A l l are geared to aid in advancing the overall objectives of the American Fabian. The magnitude of their success can be measured by more than the happy boast of Upton Sinclair in 1962. That same year, James L . McDevitt, national director of the Committee on Political Education of AFL-CIO, could proclaim to presidents of national and international unions that
Sinclair summarized the situation succinctly when he stated that "it will be the Democratic Party and not the Socialist Party which will bring this great change to America. It will not be called socialism; its opponents will insist that it is communism, while its friends will know that it is industrial democracy." Democrats in the tradition of Jefferson, Jackson, Cleveland, and Wilson are at a crossroads. Do they reject their noble heritage for a mess of collectivist pottage or do they, like A l Smith, courageously condemn this cancerous growth within their party and acknowledge that the party of their fathers has left them? 15
"Now this is pretty tough on me to have to go at my own party this way," A l Smith declared, "but I submit that there is a limit to blind loyalty. . . . There can be only one National Anthem. The Star Spangled Banner or the Internationale."
The Democrat's Dilemma is the history of this epochal movement. Authoritative and meticulously researched, it traces the growth and permeation of our national life by the American Fabians.
To Russia With Love b y L i n d a Cott
"Russia Re-examined" is a hymn of praise to the Soviet Union. Joining in the chorus with author William Marx Mandel are the Communistfronting American Russian Institute, which provided the photographs, and publishers Hill and Wang. They had previously published two books - by Ben Adams on Hawaii and Alaska. After his death Adams was revealed as being Adam Lapin, a long time West Coast Communist and former Washington correspondent for the Daily Worker. It should come as a shock to very few that author Mandel is an identified Communist. Those who saw the film "Operation Abolition" will remember him—the gentleman who addressed H U A C members as "honorable beaters of children, and sadists," and who declared that the Committee had his "utmost contempt." Russia Re-examined, by William M a n d e l , Hill & W a n g , N e w Y o r k , $4.50.
Now Mr. Mandel is not always in such a contemptuous mood. In fact love seems to be the dominant theme of his book. Love for the Soviet Union, that is. And to make affection come easier, he does two things: 1) Realizing that some of the unpleasant aspects of Communism are not easily forgotten by Americans, he sweeps the bad things under the rug by blaming them on Stalin and Stalinism. 2) In order to assuage consciences which may feel uneasy because the Russians live under a totalitarian system, he tries to convey the impression that they are better off than before and that they actually love Communism.
Nikita the Good Like any current apologia for the Soviet Union, "Russia Re-examined portrays Nikita Khrushchev as enlightened and benevolent. The cruder 16
picture of Stalin is given alongside in order to enhance this image. Mandel contrasts Stalin's stiff suppression of the arts with Khrushchev's supposed relaxation of censorship, citing toleration of such critics as Yevtushenko as evidence of the present system's mellowness.
As further evidence of the present government's benevolence, Mandel says that the K G B , which "knocked on the door at 3 A . M . in Stalin's day and [whichl tortured confessions out of innocent people," no longer exists under Khrushchev. Ot at least that it what is implied. Mandel describes Stalin's persecudon of the Jews, while Khrushchev's anti-Semitic acts go unsung. When Mandel can no longer deny that anti-Semitism sdll exists in Russia, he blames it on "the influence of Nazi propaganda" during World War I I .
Certainly no pro-Soviet book would be complete without glowing descriptions of the future the Soviet Union has planned for its citizens. By greatly emphasizing this, an author is saying, in effect: Things may not be perfect now, but wait until the next Twenty Year Plan. In the sections of Russia Re-examined claiming to deal with present conditions of agriculture or industry, projected statistics are given. We do not learn, for example, what Soviet fertilizer output is now, but only that it was "trebled from the last year under Stalin to 1963," and that "by 1970 it is to reach three times that American figure [of 1962]." As the coup de grace, Mandel devotes a whole chapter to the glorious life the Russian people will have when the current Twenty Year Plan is completed. He admits that a housing problem still exists, but claims that by that wonderful year 1980 it is to be solved. By 1980 Russian industry is to produce six times as much as in 1960, creating a living standard superior to those of the United States and Western Europe as they will be at that time. And how will the international situation be in 1980? Idyllic. Nary a word is even whispered about Soviet plans for world conquest— we're all for coexistence now. And so Mandel's love song to the Soviet Union ends on this note of appeasement.
G O L D W A T E R
FOR A BETTER AMERICA
G O L D W A T E R R U B B E R STAMPS for home, club or office. Do your part by making every letter a Goldwater endorsement. Other styles available. Only $1.00 each, prepaid. Qty discount avail. WILLIS STAMP COMPANY 1462 Green Berry Road Jefferson City, Missouri
Emergent A^AN By Dwight D. Murphey
A powerful and positive statement of the vitalistic philosophy of liberty, written by a young Denver lawyer with deep intellectual roots in the writings of Rand, Mises, Friedman and Jose Ortega. An eloquent affirmation of the meaning of human freedom. Send order to: Emergent Man $2.45 1900 Security Life BIdg. 389 pp. Denver, Colorado 80202 Pb. THE N E W G U A R D
Subscribe to the N E W
G U A R D
I DO N O T CHOOSE T O BE A C O M M O N MAN. It is my right to be uncommon . . . if I can. • I seek opportunity . . . not security. I do not wish to be a kept citizen, humbled and dulled by having the state look after me. I want to take the calculated risk; to dream and to build, to fail and to succeed. • I refuse to barter incentive for a dole. I prefer the challenges of life to the guaranteed existence; the thrill of fulfillment to the stale calm of Utopia. • I will not trade freedom for beneficence nor my dignity for a handout. I will never cower before any master nor bend to any threat. It is my heritage to stand erect,, proud and unafraid; to think and act for myself; enjoy the benefits of my creations and to face the world boldly and say, this I have done. • All this is what it means to be an A m e r i c a n .
r-'i^ Copias suitable for framing $1.00 ea. or l O x 12 beautifully laminated lifetime plaque $7.50 ea. Americreed Inc., P. O. Box 1921. Dallas 21. Texas.
A u H 2 O in 'M 33 stickers to a sheet—perforated for easy tear out. 8 sheets of 33 stickers $1.00 20 sheets of 33 stickers $2.00 Will-Rich Enterprises P . O . B o x 1189
*'We as young conservatives believe: That foremost among the transcendent values is the individual's 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 rightful 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.).
Topoka, K o n t o s
r
CONSERVATIVES Help Barry and the U.S.A.
Use attractive "Goldwater For President" stickers on all your mail. 200 for $1.00
W M. R M A S L 0 350 S. 5th St. • Reading, Pa. a
STYLE ORDER
A
Self-sticking Ail-Vinyl or Mylar Nameplates — surface-printed... permanently protected
SWEATSHIRTS
MacCLEAN'S
OCTOBER
o m - M i s Self-bonding onodized and etched Aluminum Foil Nameplates _
STYLE B
NOW!! GOLDWATER
Top quality/ region sleeve, black only, with gold (of course) flocking. S m a l l , M e d i u m , Large & E x - L a r g e (same for men or w o m e n ) . I n d i c a t e s i z e o r s t y l e . $ 3 . 9 8 p r e - p a i d or $ 1 . 0 0 & b a l a n c e C . O . D . plus c h a r g e s . M o i l check or M . O . t o :
Box 4026
Po#y-l»late« Self-bonding Nameplat#s of miracle Mylar* with permanent $ub-$urfaCe metalizecj printing •OuPont's Reg. TM
Dept.
1964
N.G.
Hammond,
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.'
Indiana
17
YAF
Celebrate
O n S e p t e m b e r 11 i n N e w Y o r k C i t y , Y A F held its fourth a n n u a l m e e t i n g . The following d a y a p i l g r i m a g e to S h a r o n , Connecticut, the place of o u r founding, w a s made by more than 2 0 0 Y A F members. Here a r e the highlights of t w o d a y s that w e r e p a c k e d w i t h action a n d useful e x c h a n g e of political ideas. Special thanks for the success of t h e S h a r o n C o n f e r e n c e g o e s t o M r s . J a n e Buckley Smith for h e r unfailing a s s i s t a n c e , M r s . W i l l i a m F. B u c k l e y f o r o p e n i n g ' ' G r e a t E l m ' ' to u s o n c e a g a i n , a n d e s p e c i a l l y to L o u i s e S c i u b b a o f Connecticut Y A F w h o d i d more tha n a n y o n e else to m a k e t h e milestone meeting a pleasure a n d a success. O n c e a g a i n Y A F e x p r e s s e s its u n dying appreciation t o Bill Buckley, without w h o m the Sharon Conference, a n d i n d e e d , Y A F itself, w o u l d n o t h a v e been possible.
The
Lawn outside the Patio at Great Ehn.
Return T o Sharon
Frank Meyer of National Review: A Superb Keynote at Sharon.
Tom Huston, national vice chairman; David Jones, Executive Director and Dick Allen, Midwest Field Director ponder a point.
Its Fourth
Anniversary
David Jones and WFB, Jr.
National Board member Alan MacKay, WFB, Jr. and MacKay family; four years and three more MacKays later.
The Wisconshi Story: Ed Treick (back), State chairman A l Regnery, and Jim Sensenbrenner.
From the Steps at Great
New England Regional Director Dan Carmen of Boston.
Business Manager Richard Viguerie and Balthriore Council Chairman Randal Grindle, over a brew.
L . to R. Frank Meyer; Mrs. Jane B. Smith; Priscilla Buckley; Mrs. Aloise B. Heath; Mrs. William F . Buckley, WFB, Jr.
Elm—
Founder Alan MacKay.
Founder and N E W G U A R D Editor Carol Bauman.
John Buckley welcomes Y A F to Sharon.
•
The Panel on • m a t Is Conseryatism?"—Members of the National Advisory Board Ot Y A F , L . to R.: WUliam A . Rusher, W. F . Ridcenbacker, Frank Meyer and Brent Bozell, all of National Review.
Down to Business: YAF At Work
TO YOUNG AMERICANS FOR FREEDOM: Congratulations to you today as you commemorate your Fourth A n niversary. I regret that I cannot be with you, but I want to assure you that Young Americans for Freedom is in my thoughts today. When I joined Y A F ' s Advisory Board four years ago, I was greatly encouraged by this outgrowth of youthful conservatism. I shall always remember the sight of more than 18,000 Americans at your Rally in Madison Square Garden in 1962. Since then, I have never underestimated the force of youth with a cause. Y A F is unquestionably one of the most responsible youth groups in the Nation, and the quality of its leadership is extremely high. The support of Young Americans for Freedom made my decision to seek the Presidency an easier one, for as you know, I have always felt a keen responsibility to the young people of this Nation., I am deeply grateful for what you have done for our common cause, and what you continue to do every day for the campaign ahead. Let us now unite so that we can climax four years of labor with a victory celebration in November. BARRY GOLDWATER
TO YOUNG AMERICANS FOR FREEDOM: It was with deep regret that I had to forego the pleasure of attending your Annual Meeting in New York City on September 11 and 12, but I am with you in spirit and am wishing you the best of success in the splendid work Y A F is doing. Please convey to all present my personal good wishes and my hopes of seeing you during the campaign. WILLIAM E . MILLER One of Y A F s Best Friends: Hon. Charies Edisoo of New Jersey.
The VIPs: All members of the Y A F Advisory Board, L . to R.: William A. Rusher; Rev. Edward Keller of Notre Dame; Theodore Lit, editor of Fulton Lewis newsletter; Marilyn ManloD, national Y A F secretary; Eugene Lyons, author and editor of Reader's Digest; William F . Buckley, Jr.; Bob Bauman; Frank Meyer; Robert Schuchman, first national chahman of Y A F ; Douglas Caddy, the first Executive Director of Y A F , and one of its founders; national vice chairman Tom Huston; and Devfai Garrity of the Devin-Adah* Co.
Bill
Rusher.
Rev.
New Libby
YAF Miller,
president
Member—At daughter
of
n o m i n e e , is m a d e
Edward
Keller.
right
Miss
GOP
vice
an
Randal Teague a n d Fred
Coldren.
Tom
Huston.
honor-
a r y m e m b e r of Y A F . L o o k i n g o n a t left is R e p r e s e n t a t i v e E d F o r e m a n of who
gave
annual
Texas
the principal a d d r e s s at the
meeting.
N a t i o n a l B o a r d o f D i r e c t o r s M e e t s — O n September 1 0 , p r i o r to the a n n u a l meeting, the b o a r d m e t i n N e w Y o r k ; L . to R . : D a n C a r m e n , J a m e s o n C a m p a i g n e , J r . , B i l l B o e r u m , J a c k C o x , M a r i l y n M a n i o n , B o b B a u m a n , T o m H u s t o n , R a n d a l T e a g u e , D i c k D e r h a m , B u d W a n d l i n g , D o n D e v i n e a n d F r e d C o l d r e n . S e v e r a l b o ^ d m e m b e r s w e r e absent w h e n this photo was made.
Letters to the Editor Some U.S. History
Tearful a n d Glorious
Dear Sir: In your June 1964 issue, you published an article by Mr. John L . Doane which contained this remarkable statement: "Had the law been enforced earlier allowing Negroes to vote, it is unlikely that the schools would have remained segregated." For the information of Mr. Doane, Negro voting rights were in fact enforced in the South—at bayonet point— for a number of years after the end of the War Between the States. In my state, the Federal troops were here until May, 1877, at which time they were withdrawn by President Hayes. Negroes, however, continued to vote in large numbers for a period of some years thereafter, and sent members of their race to Congress from this state until about the turn of the Century. The men who were elected to office by Negro votes—many or most of whom were white Northerners—did not find a public school system in existence, nor did they establish one. They were far too interested in stealing everything they could lay their hands on. The public school system was eventually set up by native born white men, elected mostly by white votes, but the first thing they had to do was to restore public credit. I gather that Mr. Doane is a graduate of Yale University. I have known several Yale men in past years. They would have been just as shocked by this display of gross ignorance as I am. BEAUFORT COPELAND Laurens, South Carolina
Dear Sir: You wrote a most beautiful article concerning Y A F in San Francisco. Tears came to my eyes as you recounted our glorious activities that won, with the help of others, the GOP nomination for Barry. I do have a question: Does your phrase that John Patton and I "risked life and limb" refer to my driving? If so, I may sue the N E W G U A R D , and if I win, I'll use the money to repair my fender. JON M A C K Chattanooga, Tennessee
for a Democratic Society, which euphemistically could be labeled as "left of center." It was only after I had participated in the subcommittees which drafted resolutions that I became fully aware how intricate a role the SDS was actually playing. If these delegates who were at the Congress are representative of the students in this nation's universities, then I believe that we should begin our "lastditch effort"—prayer. I urge you to continue this fight against NSA. I shall, even if it is solely because I believe it to be right and just. J E F F R E Y E . FOSSUM Boulder, Colorado
'More Important
We
Things'
Dear Sir: I recently returned from the National Student Association's 17th Annual Congress in Minneapolis. As a delegate from Colorado University, I experienced and witnessed events which cause me not to be simply worried or concerned, but even frightened. I arrived in Minneapolis expecting to participate in discussions on how best to improve such things as student government, student-faculty relations, and curriculum reform. The anticipated intellectual climate was there, but the aforementioned topics were cast aside for supposedly "more important" things. Some of the "more important" things were, as I saw them, how best to make NSA a sounding-block for the Students
GOLDWATER
#278G
Apologize
Dear Sir: In " Y A F Around The Nation" in the August Issue, N E W G U A R D erroneously identified William Y . Ellicott, Professor Emeritus of Harvard University, as a member of the Americans for Democratic Action. The assistance and always-helpful advice which Faculty Advisor Elliott has given to the Harvard Y A F Chapter over the years demands that the record be set straight. Professor Elliott is indeed one of us, and is far too honorable a man to be defamed in such a manner by his fellow conservatives. R I C H A R D A. D E R H A M New York, New York Our sincere apoligies to Professor E l licott.—The Editors.
BUTTONS W CELLULOID BUTTONS
#378G
b l a c k a n d gold (shown f u l l s i z e ) # 1 7 8 G G O L D W A T E R IN '64 # 2 7 8 G Gold H2O symbol # 3 7 8 G Gold H2O g l a s s
100 $6.00 6.00 6.50
250 $12.00 12.00 13.50
500 $18.00 18.00 20.50
1000 $28.50 28.50 33.50
# 1 3 G 31/2" C E L L U L O I D BUTTON red, w h i t e a n d blue w i t h photo
# G F 2V2" F L A S H E R c h a n g e s from photo to slogan
# 8 4 " METAL LITHO BUTTON black and metallic gold
(larger buttons shown V2 s i z e ) # G F Flasher # 1 3 G 31/2" C e l l u l o i d # 8 4 " Metal
25 $10.00 11.75 7.50
50 $15.00 18.25 12.50
100 $25.00 28.50 20.00
250 $60.00 57.50 50.00
1000 $200.00 162.50 150.00
500 $110.00 90.00 90.00
Super Deluxe 9-inch GOLDWATER IN '64 Button. Sample only $2.00 postpaid. Write for quantity prices.
A. G. TRIMBLE CO. 22
3006 Jenkins Arcade, Pittsburgh, Pa. 15222
Area Code 412 281-4090 THE
N E W GUARD
YAF AROUND THE NATION B o b F r e n c h , Republican Congressional Candidate, recently addressed a joint meeting of Y A F Chapters in Alabama . . . Goldwater Victory Teams growing in strength throughout the Midwest under capable direction of D i c k A l l e n . . . J a m e s G a r d n e r , Republican Congressional Candidate, addressed Y A F Chapters in North Carolina . . . T o m H u s t o n National Vice-Chairman, held highly publicized press conference at N S A Congress in Minnesota revealing facts about N S A . . . Press C o n ference received national coverage . . . Y A F was an organization high on the list responsible for the nomination of Senator Goldwater says the U n i t e d M i n e W o r k e r s J o u r n a l . . . Central DuPage Chapter (Illinois) promoted Conservatism with a booth at the DuPage i County Fair this month . . . Y A F Chapters across the Nation are observing United States D a y on October 23 . . . Lake County Y A F (Indiana) distributed Goldwater Rep. Younger and Y A F materials at County F a i r . . . Largest signs at Goldwater's Atlanta address was 30 foot by 6 foot " Y A F B A C K S B A R R Y " sign . . . California Y A F membership growing strong after San Francisco Convention . . . New stale chairman is L e e S l a u g h t e r of San Jose . . . MiddlesexMonmouth County Chapter (New Jersey) distributing copies of N O N E D A R E C A L L I T T R E A S O N . . . T i m O h r is new Chairman of Bay A r e a Council of Y A F Chapters in Florida . . . D i c k A l l e n , Midwestern Regional Executive Secretary, is running for State Legislature in Indiana . . . M a u r i c e F r a n k s , long-time Y A F ' e r in Arkansas, running for Justice of Peace as an Independent . . . St. Augustine (Fla.) Y A F busy pushing Goldwater Trading Stamps and conservative books . . . Rep. J . A r t h u r Y o u n g e r addressed newly formed South Peninsula Y A F Chapter in Redwood City, California . . . Y A F working vigorously Maurice Franks for Republican Candidate, J a y M c G l o n , in Miami to unseat down-the-line-Liberal Congressman Dante Fascell . . . Greater Cleveland Y A F and Goldwater Victory T e a m rallied for Senator Goldwater in Cleveland . . . Tennessee Y A F held state convention . . . North Carolina Y A F had registration booths on over 25 college campuses in the state . . . F r e d C o l d r e n spoke before F a r m Bureau in Manhattan, Kansas . . . T o m Huston has made a nine state tour to organize Y A F chapters . . . O s c a r G o n z a l e s S u a r e z , former president of the Puerto Rican Bar Association, addressed Norwalk, Conn. Chapter. . . . Tennessee Y A F stressing voter registration . . . Peekskill ( N . Y . ) Y A F Chapter recently assailed Supreme Court's decision on state legislative reapportionment . . . J a c k M o l e s w o r t h , Massachusetts Y A F ' e r , running Lee Slaughter for Speaker John McCormack's congressional seat . . . T o m P h i l l i p s , National Field Director, has made extensive tour of New England . . . Y A F organizing advertisement campaign in largest publications. . . .
THE N E W G U A R D . . . now reaches well over 25,000 young conservatives. For
ad rates, write: Advertising Department The New Guard 514 C Street, N.E. Washington, D.C.
GOLDWATER STAMPS
I..-
HELP BARRY W I N by p l a c i n g GOLDWATER " T R A D I N G STAMPS" on all of your letters, envelopes, packages, checks, etc. Each beautiful gold stamp ( l " x 11/2") features Barry's picture and campaign s l o g a n ( " T r a d e - i n J o h n s o n for BARRY G O L D W A T E R ! " ) . Millions being used throughout the nation. Promote Barry every t/me YOU mail a letter! Give stamps to friends. Help win critical votes! CUP
THIS C O U P O N NOW ^
<D
a E
E
—• CO to
a
<D
I I 12
2
fid < lU I-
< O
oSg:
^ O X I Oc2
S S —
• •
E o Z
<
.J
FOR REAL WESTER1I-ST7LE FUN, HEAD FOR KNOTT'S Bring your family, come early and plan to spend the whole day! Ride the stage coach, pan for real gold, ride through the Calico Mountain Gold Mine. Highlight the day with a delicious dinner . . . Mrs. Knott's famous fried chicken or western-style steaks.
Mrs. KnotVs Jams and Jellies are as delicious as ever. You can buy them at the Farm—or at your favorite food store.
KNOTrS In
Buena Park, 30 minutes from Los Angeles
On Highway 39 (Beach Blvd.)
OCTOBER 1 9 6 4
BEHST FABM ScEBOSI lOM
2 miles south of Santa Ana Freeway
23
FOR
THE
CONSERVATIVE
W H O
HAS
EVERYTHING' (^Especially a sense of humor)
No sacred cow is safe from these wide-ranging spoofs as anti-fluoridation campaigners, ban-fhe-bombers and the high priests of A m e r i c a n politics step into the spotlight!
Folk Songs for Conservatives Written by Noel E . Parmentel, Jr. and Marshall J . Dodge I I I , the greatest political satirists since Cohn and Schine. Illustrated by David Levine— whose caricatures of literary and political figures habitually grace the pages of the New York Review of Books and Esquire.
... MEANWHIU Back at the RmcA
Based on the best-selHng record, which T I M E (September 18, 1964) reports was "purportedly recorded at a 'hotenanny' where groups like the Four Bigots and Noel and his Unbleached Muslims sang such traditional folk material as Hang Earl Warren to a Sour Apple Tree.'' Now you can have these and other songs (why let the Lefties have all the best songs?) illustrated with the cleverest political cartoons since Thomas Nast overthrew Tammany Hall.
A l s o by Noel E . Parmentel, Jr. with cartoons by D a v i d Levine. A hilarious expose of the foibles and the flunkies of the L B J Administration, this book proves
once again that effective ridicule is
the
Ultimate Weapon. Y o u ' l l want to order several copies to give to any friends who may be considering voting for someone other than Barry Goldwater this year.
Invite your conservative and liberal friends to hear such old favorites as: Wont You Come Home Bill Buckley Cool Goldwater I Dreamed I Saw Roy Cohn Last Night Let's Test Again (Like We Did Last Summer)! D'ye Ken John Birch Hang Down Your Head Tom Dewey Rock's Big Candy Mountain
Unicorn Press, Inc. 790 Madison Ave. New York 21, N.Y. Gentlemen: Please send me: copies of F o l k Songs F o r Conservatives at $2.95 apiece
(slip cover case
and postage and handling included). copies of Meanwhile Back at the Ranch at $2.95 apiece. sets of both books at the special rate of $5.00 per set of two. ( A gift card in your name will be sent with all books ordered for friends and/or political opponents) Name Address City
Zone
LI
State
i
514 c STREET, N. E.
Y O U N G A M E R I C A N S FOR F R E E D O M
WASHINGTON 2, D. C. Bulk Rate us
Postage
PAID Permit
40616
W a s h i n g t o n , D.C.