OCR Text |
Show Foreign Policy And The Public Editor : i The Chronicle editorial of April 2 represents the most hideously illogical attempt at analysis seen on these pages in years. The idea that Lyndon Johnson's decision was a harm to the republic is totally without with-out fact or supposition to support it. Several specific points need to be answered. The idea that Lyndon Johnson was a captive of historical events is completely unsupportable. The fact is that he created those fundamental changes that captured him. He decided to engage in burning and bombing helpless people. He decided to intervene in a vain attempt to crush a popular revolution that was on the verge of success. It now appears that Cornwallis will be recalled because he failed to su-press su-press those upstart revolutionaries. If the editor would read history more carefully he would find that some of the worst presidents in U. S. history were the worst precisely because they allowed themselves to be carried car-ried along in the course of history. For example James Buchanan allowed himself to be captured by the long history of divisive sectionalism and his inaction lead to the Civil War. We could follow this reasoning to its ultimate conclusion and conclude that since the nuclear nuc-lear arms race seems to be a fact of life we should just resign ourselves to the fact that the human race will annihilate itself one of these days. What's Wrong With Isolationism? The first point on which the republic is said to be in danger is the isolationism of the modern liberal. Here the Chronicle chooses to deal in lurid sensationalism sensation-alism as a substitute for reasoning. The editor expects ex-pects us to regard isolationism as the eighth sin. Until the editor chooses to debate this proposition his words fall on deaf ears. If internationalism means, as it has, fighting a war so that a nation can continue to exploit Chinese resources, if it means sending the Marines into Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic because American money interests will be hurt, then it seems abundantly clear that we can and we must do without this debased internationalism. ;j The attempt to compare today's realities with those , of the 1930's ignore a fundamental difference: In the 1930's the U.S. Was fighting lor the right of the people I i to decide; today the U.S. will support any fascist dictator dic-tator who shows himself to be anti-communist. We have supported a dictatorial, corrupt regime in Vietnam Viet-nam that continues to arrest students in Saigon for disagreeing with it. If President Eisenhower was right that 80 per cent of the Vietnamese people supported Ho then it is entirely clear that the dictators in Saigon must have remained in power through some other means. It doesn't take long to see what 20,000 Americans Amer-icans died for. If Lyndon Johnson's decision represents repre-sents the final realization by the government of the bankruptcy of their policy then it is to be welcomed. The history of the twentieth centry is one of revolution and struggle for a better world for everyone not just for the American businessman. History may have finally caught up to Lyndon Johnson. Who Follows Whom The final and most ridiculous assertion made by the Chronicle is that a president should not be bound to follow public opinion. This is a rejection of a fundamental tenet of democracy. The people should decide. The populace, not the barons of government or industry, should make the fundamental choices and decisions. If the Chronicle fears for our republic now what would it become if the president assumed the powers of a dictator on the advice of the Chronicle. The idea that the president should lead not follow public opinion has failed. Johnson formulated support for his policies as long as he could. Are we to follow the Chronicle in its reasoning until the Thought Police are allowed to manipulate support for some future war? I hope not. Richard Sherlock EDITOR'S NOTE: Among other things, Mr. Sherlock lias confused our republican form of government with philosophical democracy that form of mob rule which so appalled Plato. The Chronicle has never advocated ad-vocated dictatorship, but it was and still is our firm conviction that an American President, of necessity if he would exercise dynamic leadership, must lead and not be led by public opinion. These are the hard realities of polities irrespective cf Mr. Sherlock's personal per-sonal opinion. |