OCR Text |
Show THE UTAH INDEPENDENT November 13, 1970 Page 3 Readers Outlook JH,anion (Continued from page 2) With respect to the Executive Order, a copy is enclosed for your information. As you will note , the order was issued under authority granted by Congress, and that it deals with the organization and conduct of the Executive Branch, which is, of course, under the exclusive direction of the President anyway. As a general rule, Executive Orders do deal with the conduct of the Executive Branch and thus are outside the scope of legislative action. There are, of course, areas where jurisdictions overlap, in which cases the courts must decide where the authority lies. Congressman Lloyd marked on a copy of Executive Order 11490 the statements where Congress gave authority for this order. It reads as follows: Whereas the Congress has directed the development of such national emergency preparedness plans and has provided funds for the accomplishment thereof; and. . . NOW, THEREFORE, by virtue of the authority vested in me as Resident of the United Sates, and pursuant to Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1958 (72 Stat. 1799), the National Security Act of 1917; as amended, and the Federal Civil Defense Act, as amend- By Marilyn Manion J um TO DESTROY AMERICA Sometimes a little perspective can do a lot of good. Take the turmoil in our country today, for example. Everyone is adamant on one side or another. The poor average citizen is accused of every ism from race to imperial. Is it any wonder that most of the pundits who try to explain our dilemma usually end up confusing things even more? Maybe it takes an observer from abroad to set things straight. Or maybe it is just a coincidence that Professor Arthur A. Shenfield is from England. Anyway, what Shen-fiel- d has to say is vitally important to anyone who wants to know the why behind the whats in the news. Professor Shenfield was a visiting professor of economics at Rockford College last year, and before he returned to England, Dean Clarence Manion interviewed him over the Manion Forum Microphone. Here is what the professor said: There are people in America who want to destroy America, or at least undermine it, because of' its alleged faults. They have no clear idea of what kind of new America they would build. Though they themselves are not Communists, they are doing the same job that the Communists want to have done. And because for the most part they are persons of repute, often persons of academic repute, they can do this job far more effectively than any Communist could do. If these people pretend that they seek to build a better America, how can we prove that they actually want to destroy America? Heres Shenfields answer: I think you can demonstrate this by five tests. First, there are, of course, always disputes, and there always will be, about what is truth and what is error. But there are some errors so egregious that their propagation by men of intellect bespeaks motives other than the pursuit of truth. Thats my first test. My second test is this: there are many evils in the world and no man is morally required to attack them all. But if you find that men attack minor evils but ignore or bless major ones, or attack an evil which they find in one place but ignore it or bless it in another place, then one may conclude that their purpose is not at all to destroy or remove evil, but to destroy the society which harbors the evil they choose to attack. This is an especially sound indication of the true purpose of most of the intellectual enemies of American society. My third test is this: If the assault on the alleged evils in a society is conducted in such a manner as to deprive the or its pride in its past, then the society of its purpose of the assault is not to remove the evils, but to destroy the society. No society can really put itself right if it loses its My fourth test is that if the assault of alleged evils takes a form calculated to persuade the society to abandon its will to defend itself against aggressors, externally or internally, then the critics are waging a war against that society and not against its supposed evils. My fifth test is that if an analysis of the assault on the alleged evils shows that it is calculated not to remove or diminish the evils but to aggravate them, then one may conclude that the motive of the critics is not to deal with the alleged evils but to destroy the society. And I say .that the attacks on Western society, and in particular American society, by the people that I am concerned with here fits those five tests, and that's where I say they are waging a war to destroy America, not to correct it, not to improve it, not to take away its defccts. For book, page and verse of what the destroyers are doing and how they flunk every one of the Professors tests, send 20 cents to the Manion Forum, South Bend, Ind. Ask for Broadcast No. 824. American Way Features self-respe- ct, self-respe- ct. ed, it is hereby ordered as follows... Otherwise Congress has or- dered and approved the forming of this Executive Order for Dictatorship by the President. All that is missing is the National Emergency. Sincerely, By John Houser A Jesse Helms NEW HEW GUIDELINES FOR SCHOOLS Voters Analysis Of Election Dear Editor, The Utah voters really did it up brown! They sold our state constitution down the river. They pushed the American Independent party out of the state. They voted many freedoms down the drain. Can the Utahns sing, God Bless America in their hypocrisy? Shame on many people in Utah! November 3, 1970 marks the brightest day in Satanic Com- munism history in modem America. Satan is thrilled with his victories on that election day here in America. They arc try ing to get us legally of illegally; or fight for it or get us peacefully. Are wc going to let Satan and his stooges destroy us? Boland Mather 71 5 Laconic Court, SLC Anyone yet harboring a lingering hope that the Federal Government is not planning a complete takeover of the public schools is invited to take note of a little announcement out of Washington recently that was given only obscure coverage in the news. As so often happens, the Washington reporters were unable to fathom the bureaucratic gobblcdygook, so the significance of the announcement was lost. It happened on October 1, to be exact, and the man doing the double-talkin- g in this instance was one J. Stanley Pottinger, the bureaucrat who came to North Carolina some months ago to twist the arms of a local school board. Mr. Pottinger seldom says clearly what he means in the kind of language that can be understood. Certainly he did not, on October 1, when he disclosed that the Department of Health, Education and Welfare is drafting another guideline calculated to destroy further whatever remains of' quality and effectiveness in public education. Mr. Pottinger, as we say, didn't make clear what he was talking about, so the significance of his announcement floated off virtually unnoticed into the stratosphere. The Washington reporters, as so often happens, simply relayed Mr. jargon, and let it go at that. The Associated Press, for example, simply reported that H.E.W. is drafting a prohibition against one form of inschool discrimination reportedly accompanying desegregation in the South. Figure that one out, if you will. The Associated Press story went on to explain: This is the grouping of pupils according to ability. Pottinger was quoted as saying that "ability grouping . . . appears to be a significant and growing problem in the South and probably in other areas of the country. We consulted a prominent school official about the meaning of this latest H.EAV. guideline. The official was glad we asked. The people, he said, just don't understand what is happening. The whole process of learning is being dragged Pot-tinge- down. r's What, then, is the real meaning of Mr. Pottinger's guideline? To illustrate, let us suppose that an integrated eleand mentary school has three classrooms of second-grader- s, that in the three classrooms there is a total of 90 children. 30 chilFurther, let us suppose that of the 90 second-graderdren have a reading ability equivalent to a third- - or fourth-grad- e level; and that another 30 are average, and can read at the second-grad- e level; and that the remaining 30 are below-averag- e, having a reading ability at first-gralevel, or lower. What is the logical thing to do, from an instructional standpoint? For years on end, school administrators have thought it wise, and fair, to challenge each student to do his best. The brighter students have been encouraged to improve their ability even further; they have been given more difficult assignments than others with lesser ability. The average and below-averastudents have been challenged correspondingly, but with assignments commensurate with their ability. In that way, the bright students did not become bored, and the dull students did not become discouraged. But Mr. Pottinger and his flock of experts at H.E.W. have now declared such treatment of students is unlawful. If a student is bright, he must sit around and twiddle his thumbs until the others catch up, if they can and if they will. In other words, the quality of education is being pitched to the lowest existing level. It is discrimination against blacks, according to Mr. r, to permit children to advance in proficiency to the limit of their ability to learn. Therefore, the H.E.W. guideline demands that the bright child be held back to the level of the group with the least ability. Oh, yes. This guideline is just one of many being prepared for distribution by H.E.W. The manual of new guidelines hasn't yet been published because there are so many other similar discriminations which H.E.W. intends to forbid. Do you sec, now, who's running your schools? American Way Features s, de ge Pot-tingc- |