Ijoan nyland
suitable for comment
My current pessimism has
something to do with knowing
this nation is not coming up
with solutions to our
problems.
To name but a few pro
blems: We have the largest
unemployment since the
Depression — much of it due
to a shift from manufacturing
and professional jobs to ser
vice jobs. We are in the fourth
decade of avoiding ending
nuclear warfare. We lack
leaders.
I could be bullish about the
future if I thought these pro
blems were being met with in
novative solutions and carried
out by caring public servants.
But they are not. And it looks
like the generation to come,
my own, is even less in
spiring.
To the problems of
manufacturing and unemploy
ment in the major U.S. in
dustries such as auto and
steel, the solutions being of
fered and implemented in
clude increased protectionism
and automation. The first
means higher prices for good
and more time for domestic
manufacturers to revamp or
procrastinate retooling their
plants, witness last year's
20-percent decrease in auto
imports from Japan
Automation, with the
parallel move to manufactur
ing in Third World countries
where labor is cheaper, means
fewer fobs, more unemploy
ment and more wealth for the
few here.
My favorite "non-solution”
is the suggestion that we pro
tect dying industries and let
the private sector come up
with all the creative solutions
to the problems of change —
sort of like letting the criminal
reform himself.
Many firms and the federal
government are unwilling to
risk investment in new ideas,
hence they continue to pour
money into outdated and
unresponsive industries.
What I consider non
solutions for decreasing
unemployment include such
gems as more vacations, job
sharing and shorter working
hours. Free time is appealing,
but it is an inadequate option
when most families cannot
make it on one budget and I
question the quality of life in a
leisure society that is anti
intellectual if not uneducated
(note the National Commis
sion on Excellence's Report)
and poor.
The federal government
could aid major industrial tran
r
sitions by retraining workers
or even funding the art and
leisure education. However,
education costs money and
government expenditure
raises inflation.
As anyone can see from a
cursory look at the federal
education and defense
budgets, the current ad
ministration would rather in
crease defense spending than
help workers. In 1983 Reagan
asked for $238.6 billion for the
Department of Defense (the
real money grabber) and $13.5
billion for Education. The Jour
nal of Commerce foresees,
should the trends in both
budgets continue, a
$377-billion defense budget
and a $13-billion education
budget by 1988.
The nuclear freeze move
ment has not influenced Con
gress as the passage of MX
funding shows. We are im
mersed in double talk when it
comes to real solutions for en
ding nuclear warfare — not a
particularly novel thought,
perhaps that's what makes us
all so pessimistic about long
range planning.
I still would like to think
some of the “best" minds in
the country hold strong con
victions and leaders will pre
sent themselves. But the dire
selection among the 1984
presidential hopefuls and
popular support for Reagan
makes me dubious. And as
friends usually point out, “Do
we blame them for not coming
forward to get shot?"
I have some basis for op
timism. There are creative
solutions being tried — in
research here at the Universi
ty, in the vegetable gardens of
friends, In my own life. I just
don't see them happening at a
national level (New
Federalism?) and I don’t see
much hope for a change
soon.
Perhaps the most
disheartening aspect of being
in college in 1983 is the lack of
idealism among my peers.
They do not seem to care for
politics or poetry or
philosophy — which is sad
in a society that needs
change and will have more
leisure.
But they are "realistic" if
shortsighted. They are either
bent on getting out of here and
making money before it isn’t
possible (the next market
crash) or they are, like myself,
pessimistic about the future
even if they are optimistic
about choices they are making
in their own lives.
'’SuShOwMSEEN ME AT MUIANSBURG — URBANE,RELAXED,TOlSED,OBVIOUSLY W6U-FR
SMVE,DEBONAIR, y#TTV,flE6ANT,.. WOW!'
your turn
MX watershed marked
The passage of funds for
the development and flight
testing of the MX missile by
the Congress marks a water
shed and provides cause for
reflection.
With this vote, conser
vatives, industrialists and the
Pentagon have gotten virtually
everything they’ve wanted. We
certainly now should feel
secure with the MX,
Minuteman III, Pershing II, air-,
sea-, and ground-launched
cruise missiles, Nimitz-class
supercarriers, Trident sub
marines, B 1 and next the
Stealth bombers, not to men
tion the reconditioned and
retrofitted B-52's and that Joy
of Detroit, the Chrysler M-1
tank. Don't mention the cost.
The liberal Democrats in the
House of Representatives did
their about-face in voting for
the MX on the basis of a
blanket promise by Pres.
Reagan that he could now
push for • meaningful” arms
control negotiations and
reductions. He gave no
specifics.
The Democrats have a craf
tier reason for the vote; they’re
sure now that Reagan will trip
all over himself on the arms
issue in the 1984 elections.
Under the leadership of Tip O'
Neill et al, the recent history of
Congressional legislation
shows exactly who has done
the tripping.
The credibility of the
American peace movements,
or rather fragmented
movements, has been shat
tered; they have neither teeth
nor friends, least of all the
Limousine Liberals of the
Democratic Party
All they and the Freezeniks
were able to do was to get the
Oregon daily
emerald
the Oregon Daily Em*,aw ■* published Monday through
Friday *«c#pt during »«am mm* and .Beetroot by lb* Oregon
Oally Emerald Publi*hrng {>> at the unireraity -,l Oregon
Eugene. OH f?403
the Emerald operate* independently of tn* Om*er*ny
w«h office* on me thrrd Moor of the ld> Memorial Onion and i*
a member of tfie Aneoc rated httt
WHil
M*IM2
mi hm
Me AMI
MtMtl
Editor
Managing £ dll Of
N#W* tdllo*
A**i»t*n! New* Editor
Editorial Pag* Editor
PhOtO Editor
Spout Editor
AUOCMWa Sport* Edttor
Entartainmani Editor
N.ght Edttor
Aaaaclata Editor*
Migha* Education
Da pan man!* and School*
Studanl Govarnmant
E nature*
Pontic*
Studanl SemcevCommuntt /
Qawarat ft tatt
Adearttamg Manager
Ctekattied Adwerttttng
Production Manager
Control tar
air*
Marry Esleve
John Mealy
Manan Green
Cort Far natd
Joan Mytand
Bob Baker
Mike Rtpirnger
Paul Danger
Jonathan Sregte
John Mealy
Sandy John none
Frank Shaw
Richard Burr
Swan Mayer*
M.cheie Matasva
Aiata Zak
Gartene Gore
Salty Ol(ar
vctona Koch
Jean OwnOey
house to pass a watered
down, non-binding resolution;
a suggestion. Then the same
Democrats capped Reagan’s
$1.5 trillion military dream
with the force of law.
With $625 million now com
mitted to the MX, basing and
deployment are certain. What
Congressman wants to face
his or her constituents having
spent those millions on a
missile only to blow it by not
allowing a place to put it?
So now we have committed
ourselves to the "new genera
tion" of strategic weapons:
multiple warhead missiles,
cruise missiles, space plat
forms and launch-on-warning
(or even first-strike) systems.
The American peopJe
always have opted for the con
cept of “peace through
strength” ever since Pearl Har
bor. And for many, the MX vote
is a reaffirmation of that con
cept, although using the Peart
Harbor analogy to compare
our military capabilities with
the Russians is ridiculous.
And the American people
also have sided with the.
military-industrial complex
because they believe there will
be more jobs. Witness organiz
ed labor’s endorsement of the
MX in particular and military
spending in general. Just what
kind of jobs are created for
how many and what kind of
people is not mentioned.
What the Russians will do is
not at all clear. They can say
with ali logic that the current
Administration has not offered
one shred of evidence to con
vince them of our peaceful in
tentions. Two scenarios arise.
One is that, the Soviets,
convinced that an arms race is
impossible, will now enter into
serious negotations. The other
more hideous prospect is that
the Soviets will become alarm
ed at a gigantic, and to them
unjustified, American military
buildup and so respond. After
all, their land-based missiles
are their Key strategic force.
Should American land
missiles become dominant,
our naval and bomber triad
"legs” would be intolerable.
They would have no choice but
to rearm.
One thing is clear. Through
our elected representatives,
we Americans have paid our
money and taken our choice.
MAD must go on. We deserve
everything we are going to get.
Michael Peterson
Peterson Is a Eugenean cur
rently working as a cook. He
hopes to attend the University
next fall.
letters
Active issue
The May 31 issue of the
Emerald quoted Mary Hotch
kiss in reference to the ROTC
issue as saying, "if there’s ac
tive discrimination, then it
becomes a student body
issue." I would like to remind
our new activist student body
president of two things: First,
discrimination is, by defini
tion, active. Second,
discrimination is a student
body issue, not only when it
reaches a certain level of
awareness.
Debi Lance
senior, psychology
letters policy .
The Emerald will attempt to print all letters containing fair
comment on topics of interest to the University community.
Letters to the editor must be limited to 250 words, signed
and the identification of the writer must be verified when the
letter is turned in to the Emerald office The Emerald reserves
the right to edit any letter for length, style or content
>our turn is an Emerald opinion feature submitted by
members of the University community "Your turns" must be
limited to 500 words and typed This editorial column will not
be edited by the staff, but selection will be based on appro
priateness
Letters to the editor and "Your turns" should be turned into
the Emerald office. Suite 300 EMU
Unsigned editorials appearing in the Emerald are based
upon the majority opinion of the editorial board