-1
"Everyoiw in Southern "Oregom
Read. Tha MU Tribune"
frubliinad DUy except Saturday by
33 North Fir SUJhi-li
ROBERT "vTWltt, Editor
HERB GREY Adverti.ini ManS
GERALD T LATH AMu. Mr
ERIC W ALLEN JR. Mn. Editor
IaRLH ADAMS City Editor
HARRY CH1PMAN. Teleg Editor
RICHARD JEWETT, Sports Ed tor
OLIVE STARCHEB Women'! EdltM
DALE EB1CKSON. ClrculaUon MgT
An Independent Newapapel
Entered ai aecond elasa nutter
Medtord. Oregon, under Act of
subscripti6n BATES
ma. 11 In A rliran f
Daily end Sunday 1 yr 8 "J
Daily and Sunday moa. 10.00
Dally and Sunday 3 moa. S00
Sunday Only-One year $5.00
Single Copy (Mailed) S0o
By Carnei And Motor "out.
Dally and Sunday 1 year Ml -00
rally and Sunday 1 mo. ja
. Sunday Only 1 mo.
Carrier and Vendora .CapyjOo
oTflclal Paper of City of Medforj
Official PaperofjMnCjunty
United Preia International
v.. 11 liiaed Wire
O. P. 1. Tclepholo Newirtcturee.
A1EMBER OF AUDIT BUKt.AU
CIRCULATIONS
V CS RofiERTs" iSSOCl.
ATES Of'lcaa In New York, Chi
cago. Detroit. San Francisco
Ar,ie!a. Seattle. Portland.
Denver.
NIWSPAPil
PUIUSHIIf
ASSOCIATION
NATION A I
EDITORIAL
In
Member California Newspaper
PubUahera Aaaoclatlon
Flight o' Time
Medford nd Jkspn County
History from the filet of Th
Mail Tribune 10, 20, 30. 40
and 50 years ego.
10 YEARS AGO
July 21. 1953 (Tuesday)
District attorney plans to
present to the grand Jury the
results of his Investigation of
the death of a 62-year-old
Camp White member, who
died after spending 41 hours
In the city jail without med
ical attention.
20 YEARS AGO
ii 9i. lfli-i iTumcUy.
Plans announced for 26-unit
turn utorv. aoartment house
nn North Ivy st. to cost
S1RS.O00.
vmm Arthur Perry's "Ye
smudge Pot" column: "Hard
liquor continues that way to
not hereabouts. The thirsty
are spitting cotton, and if the
drought keeps up, preaic.
they will turn into a cactus.
30 YEARS AGO
Juiv 21. 1933 (Thursday)
N. R. Walters eleted first
commander of local DAV post.
Work ready to start on
Fourth st. railroad crossing.
40 YEARS AGO
July 21. 1923 (Friday)
Spark from threshing ma
chine destroys grain on Jack
nnrrett farm.
Babe Ruth hits 22nd homer
of season.
SO YEARS AGO
Julv 21. 1913 (Sunday)
Surjerlntendent at Crater
Lake National park is for
Ihlv elected.
Fire destroys fish market
on North Fir st.
What's Your I.Q.7
Nl.. ten correct It uMtieri
even or eight Is eicellant) five er
III M good.
1. Docs the wombat most
nearly resemble a small bear,
bat, or a bird?
2. Thomas Jefferson's like
ness is depicted on two dif
ferent kinds of U. S. money;
what are they?
3. Are olives classed as
fruits, or vegetables?
4. In football, how many
points are scored by a field
goal? ,
8. The German autobahn Is
road where automobiles are
banned, a highway, or an au
tomatic elevator?
6. Was the Battle of Shiloh
a part of the Revolutionary,
Civil, or Spanish-American
War?
7. Nitroglycerin, the explo
sive, is sometimes used me
dicinally; true or false?
8. At how many years Inter
val is the Holy Year celebrat
ed hv the Catholic church?
6. To block one's view of
the full moon would you need
to use a silver dollar, half doi'
lar, or dime held at arm's
length?
10. Cattle have four atom
achs: true or false?
Answers! 1. Small bear. 2.
Two dollar bill and nickel.
3, Fruits. 4. Three points. S.
Highways. 6. Civil . 7. True.
8. 25. (. Dime. 10. True.
HO SECRETS STOLEN
Waehlngton-aiPB - Defense
Secretary Robert S. McNa
mara said Friday that no cur
rent U.S. military secrets have
been stolen In the recent wave
of international spy cases.
SUNDAY. JULY 21. 1863
Rockefeller's Attack
Gov. Nelson Rockefeller, who has suffered a
drastic loss of political
vorce and remarriage,
least in part, in offsetting the loss by means of
his blunt and outspoken
rieht lunatic fringe."
His attack may have diverted attention from
his purely domestic affairs, and back again where
it belongs to the real
of the day.
He has joined such
figures as Sen. Thomas
Hatfield m declaring that the extremists or the
right are "every bit as dangerous to American
principles and American
cal left."
C OVERNOR Rockefeller set forth six "articles
of faith" which he said are fundamental to
the traditions of the Republican party, and have
always been found in the consensus of its respon
sible members. These, he said, are :
1. Unswerving dedication to the preservation of
our own freedom and the extension of freedom
throughout the world through a firm, resolute and
positive foreign policy.
2. Equality of opportunity for a better life for
all Americans regardless of economic status, geo
graphic location, race, creed, color or national origin.
3. Faith In our federal system of government as
the best assurance of freedom and equal opportunity
and as the only hope of keeping democratic govern
ment close to the people and responsive to their will.
4. Faith in the private enterprise system as the
dynamic, creative base for social progress in a free
society and of freedom of individual Initiative with
out which men cannot be really free or equal.
8. Faith in the fundamental importance of fiscal
Integrity in government as the indispensable political
base for economic growth and the vitally needed ex
pansion of job opportunities.
6. Faith In our heritage of freedom of speech and
of Information and In the right and need of the people
to know all the facts on the issues confronting them
as essential to the preservation of a free society.
THESE principles are now in danger of subver
sion from the radical right, as they have been
from the left, the Governor stated.
The radicals of the
program . . . except distrust, disunity and the
ultimate destruction of the confidence of the peo
ple in themselves.- They are purveyors of hate
and distrust in a time when, as never before, the
need of the world is for love and understanding."
He also hit at the tactics of totalitarianism
employed by the extremists in taking control of
the recent San Francisco convention of the
Young Republicans: "ruthless, rough-shod intim
idation.
IN RECENT months there has been proposed a
Republican strategem
off" the cities, the industrial north, and the mi
nority groups, and wooing
west.
"The transparent purpose behind this plan,"
Governor Kockefeller stated, "is to erect political
power on the outlawed and immoral base of seg
regation and to transform
from a national party of all the people to a sec
tional party for some of the people."
And this, he added, "would be an act of poli
tical immorality rarely equalled in human his
tory." It "would in and
the Republican party in
it altogether."
rpHE reaction to this biting denouncement has
-- hpon nveriiptahlv (thrill.
tioned by name in the
Goldwater is identified
proach" strategy, and it
the statement was shot
that of his followers.
The Oregon Draft Goldwater Committee got
out a press release, the gist of which was that
Rockefeller had only hurt himself, and was not
contributing to the party unity for which he
called.
This may be, but we
vast majority of thinking
ed with Rockefeller's
less than agree with all
IT WOULD be interesting to know what com-
bination of motivations finally persuaded the
New York governor to come out swinging.
Undoubtedly his descent in popularity had
something to do with it.
But on reading the rather lengthy statement,
we were struck (as was Walter Lippmann) with
its evident sincerity and honesty. We are con
vinced that the Governor meant exactly what
he said; that he is indeed concerned with the
possible ravages from the far right; that the
threatened subversion of his party is a real dan
ger, and that he feels he must speak out against it
IT WILL be another year before we can assess
the full impact of Governor Rockefeller's do
mestic affairs and of this statement, which has
been widely interpreted as both a declaration of
his own candidacy and an attempt to slow down
Goldwater by exposing the crass opportunism
of the "southern strategem."
It is far too early to count Rockefeller out of
the race. As has been demonstrated in a number
of instances, personal vagaries do not of them
selves defeat candidates. And we do not expect
any substantial number of Republicans to buy
the Goldwater line.
Also, it occurs to us that, whatever his mo
tives, Rockefeller has done his party a service
by outlining principles and pointing out fallacies.
E.A.
popularity since his di
may have succeeded, at
attack on the radica
political and moral issues
prominent Republican
Kuchel and Gov. Mark
institutions as the radi
right, he said, "have no
which involves "writing
the south and the mid
the Republican party
of itself not only defeat
1964, but would destroy
Thoutrh ho is not men
statement, Sen. Barry
with the "southern ap
is balantly obvious that
off in his direction and
would judge that the
Republicans, confront
declaration, could do no
or much of it.
MLDFORD
Wall-To-Wall Under-The-Carpeting
-:hSIIlllllll.l J II It
. 101 y. I 1 A
II
Matter of Fact
(c) New York Herald
WHAT WILL IT PROFIT US?
Washington Why is Ni-
klta S. Khrushchev so par
ticularly anxious for agree
ment on a nu-
clear test ban
at this paric
ular time? In
the answer to
that question
lies most of the
significan c e
of the crucial
n e go tiations
now going on
Alanp
in Moscow.
If the experts may be trust
ed, morover, the answer to
the question is remarkably
Interesting. In brief. Khrush
chev wants a test ban, partly
as tangible proof that peace
ful co-existence is feasible.
but mainly as a departure
point for quite profound
changes in domestic policy.
It cannot be said too often
that the mainspring of Krem
lin inner-politics is an unend
ing argument about invest
ment priorities. Who gets
what share of the national pie
is always the theme.
RATIONAL defense, agrl
' culture, heavy industry,
light Industry, housing, re
sources development-all these
and other investment areas
are in perpetual, bitter com
petition with one another,
And there Is not, and there
never has been, enough to go
round.
Kliruslicncv s own career
has quite largely hinged up
on the course of this hidden
argument. He gained his first
advantage over Georgyl Mal-
enkov, for instance, because
Malenkov incautiously come
out for more spending on con
sumer good. Khrushchev then
counter-attacked, with the
strong, far from disinterested,
support of the Soviet mar
shals and colonel-generals,
with a demand for contin
uing priority for heavy in
dustry and national defense.
Even after he reached su
preme power, however, Khru,
shchev has never managed to
win a clean-cut victory in
the Kremlin argument around
investments. For instance, he
tried, and failed, to make a
drastic cut In the swollen
manpower of the Soviet army
Again, in the political crisis
that gripped the Kremlin this
winter, he was clearly forced
to submit to Increases in de
fense spending.
TjOR reasons which are still
mysterious, this Kremlin
crisis is now ended with
Khrushchev more completely
in the saddle than at any time
in some years. In a recent
speech at the Soviet War Col
lege, the Drfcnse Minister,
Marshal Rodion Mallnovskv,
previously a leader of the op
position and perhaps In dan
ger of losing his job for that
very reason, actually went
out of his way to salute Khru
shchev as "commander-in-chief
of the armed forces. '
There have been other signs.
mi
Not the least of these signs! cannot control the Chinese In
is the simple fact that Khru-1 this or any other realm and
shchev has renewed serious; Mr. Harriman cannot control
negotiations for a nuclear the French. But each man is
test ban, which the marshals; in remarkable control of him
and colonel-generals do not ' self, and it should be an inter
want, and has done so, more-; rating exorcise for this reason
over, by placing the nrgntia-uf no other.
tions on a new basis which
me ov.r, ... .. h '"" dor said to this writer, "If the
always ferociously rejected. Rl,ss,an, hrc ( , h
.1f.,",..!!.!Avorcll icnlnS on them all
denlv begun to talk about
triolina the output of chcm -
leal fertilliers in two years ) !sio oovirt negotiator is ary, 1948. proclaiming the
time. This is a vast project : ''kcly to out-wait or out-stare iron policy of concentrating
which cannot possibly be scri- tllr former New York govcr- on heavy industry for arma
ously attempted without cut- nor; whose nature was clearly : ment rather than on consumer
ting other investment pro-1 designed for private diplo-! goods for his naked and de-
grams. It seems to doom the
defense increases
IXR another thing, there arc
all sorts of Indications that
the Kremlin is giving real.h'ghly sensitive antcn n a e. j the end of the cold war but
consideration to a complete : And should he come home 'saying it was a phony war
withdrawal of the Soviet gar-i w-lth an agreement which j from the beginning, precipi
rison in Hungary. Thi is an-; many would take as the s.vm-Mated and prolonged by Amer
other move which cannot 'bolic ending of the cold war, I ican hostility as much as by
please the marshals and col-i there would be a certain his-, the Russians, had better so
MAIL TRIBUNE. MEDFORD,
11t W-vJ-V"'' POST-
By Joseph Alsop
Tribune Syndicate
onel-gcnerals any more than
a prospect of a umitea test
ban.
Adding up the signs, there
fore, it really begins to look
as though Khrushchev in
tends to use a test ban agree
ment as the signal for a ma
jor revision of existing So
viet investment programs. The
agreement, if reached, will
be .hailed as proof of a "re
laxation of tensions."
In the new atmosphere,
spending on the armed forces
will be sternly held down,
and another shrink-the-army
drive may even be launched.
Meanwhile, massive invest
ments will be diverted to
more productive purposes.
Above all, a serious effort
will at last be made to solve
the root-problem of Soviet
economy, which is the weak
ness of Soviet agriculture.
SUCH is the current projec
tion. If this nrniention is
correct, and above all, if the
revised investment priorities
produce the desired results,
this development will have
enormous signifiance.
After Stalin's death, the
U. S. policy-makers found
themselves quite suddenly
dealing with a different
KIND of U. S. S. R.-though
not, one must add, a U.S.S.R.
that was invariably easier to
deal with. A great shift ill
investment priorities, leading
even as far as a semi-solution
of the Soviet farm prob
lem, will produce another,
quite comparable change in
the Soviet Union.
What will such a change
profit us? The answer to that
question comes in two parts.
On the one hand, a more ra
tional, much more productive
Soviet economy will certain
ly create some grave prob
lems for us. But on the other
hand, it is well to remember
that Mao's China actively de
sires a thermo-nuclear war,
or so the Soviets say; whereas
Khrushchev's Russia plainly
does not want a thermo-nuclear
war. In other words, fat
enemies are indeed to be pre
ferred to enemies made vici
ous by hunger. Hence the
change that may now be com
ing in the Soviet Union will
not be pure, undiluted profit,
but it will still offer us real
hope of net profit.
Caution, Hope Mixed in Russian Talks
By ERIC SEVAREID
Highly advertised - If not
high - hopes have gone with
Mr. Avcrcll Harrlman to Mos-
i cow. They are
ulSv i hopes for an
r3l enriinR to the
V'ii cold war with
ine o o v i e i
Union, in fact
if not in
spirit,- by
agreeing to
cease nuclear
testing. Mr.
Khrushc h e v
r i
" !' "
l '
niacy. never for public poli-
tics. This sinewy, somewhat
humorless American possesses
'hat rare combination, phlcg -
matic doggedness along with
OREGON
GREAT IDEAS...
WELFARE STATE
Dear Dr. Adler: In ont
ef your past column., lha
wriier aikad about medical
car for iho aged. This
brought to mind th atti
tude of civilization today,
that of a welforo state in
which the state or society
is responsible for th wel
fare of the individual. It
seams to me that tha stale
is assuming too much work
which formerly r a s t d
upon tha individual. What
do tha great thinkers have
to say about the responsi
bility of the state? Do you
lean more in favor of th
welfare state or mora
toward th state where
th individual is more on
his own?
Robert Black Jr.
14 Pleasant Street
Fort Kent, Maine
Dear Mr. Black: If we look
back only at the past three
centuries of political thought
and practice, we may see how
new the welfare state is, and
yet how it grew out of the
ideas of past thinkers. In the
16th and 17th centuries, for
instance, Hobbes and Locke
saw the state as a police pow
er exercising necessary re
straints on individuals to as
sure the common good. For
Hobbes, the welfare assured
by the state was safety of life
and limb-the peace and order
of civilized society.
Locke differed from
Hobbes in his emphasis on in
dividual goods and rights,
rather than on the good and
power of the collective whole.
It is the "life, liberty, and
property" of individuals that
must be secured, not only
from the depredations of oth
er individuals, but also from
the state. For Locke, the locus
of happiness in society is the
individual person and his ac
tivity, especially his economic
activity. In his view, govern
ment exists to insure that men
may pursue such useful pur
suits without being frustrated
or robbed, and thereby it
ft N
"Kids nowadays teem lo enjoy banding together
to defy th law. 'Course, teeing governor, and
whole states do It doesn't helpl"
toric aptness in the phenome
non.
It was Harriman in 1945
who was among the first
Americans, if not, indeed, the
first, to understand absolutely
that a cold war was on and
what it would mean for this
generation. At every point
where our people were nego
tiating with Russians, at the
end of the war, a plate glass
window suddenly came down
between us and them. We
could see them; we could not
reach them. One night Harri
man walked out of the opera
in Moscow and unexpectedly
found himself beside Maxim
Litvinov, then already slip
ping into obscurity. Harriman
asked one quick question:
"What can we do?" Litvinov
whispered one short answer,
It is useless. You can do
been taken.'
ahead.
And he hurried
n was only months later.
i with Stalin's speech of Febru
spoiled people, that most of
, us understood, with sinking
heart, that the fruits of peace
; would be bitter fruit. Those
'who are now not only hailing
From the Great Books
By Mortimer J. Adler
(c) 1963, PublUhen Newipaper Syndicate
achieves the general welfare.
Hobbes, however, insisted
that the state must support
those who are no longer pro
ductive members of society.
The poor laws in England,
which provided relief to those
out of work, put this principle
into practice. And on the Con
tinent, Rosseau objected to
Locke's theory of the state as
biased on the side of the prop
ertied classes and against the
unpropertied. He asserted that
it is a basic function of gov
ernment "to prevent extreme
inequalities of fortune."
Thus the original view that
the state exists to protect life
and property was in practice
extended to protection from
economic dangers-from starv
ing to death. The further ex
tension of state action to pro
viding or promoting educa
tion, health, jobs, and social
security involved a long pro
cess of social and economic
development, as well as a de
cisive change in political phil
osophy. According to the new
philosophy, it is the task of
the state to take positive action
in order-to assure widespread
exercise of the rights to lib
erty, property, and the pur
suit of happiness.
The first important thinker
to present this new view of
the role of the state in social
welfare was T. H. Green, a
19th-century British moral
philosopher. It is not enough,
he said, for the state to pro
tect a man from being killed
or enslaved, if it does not do
something to insure that he
may use his life and liberty to
attain self-fulfillment and
thereby contribute to the com
mon good. He held to the old
principles of individual free
dom and responsibility as the
springs of moral action, but
he believed that their exercise
requires a general social con
dition of well-being in which
as many individuals as possi
ble participate.
Hence, like Locke, Green
believed that the state must
protect the individual's life,
ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGES NOT
ALLOWED ON
PUBLIC BEACHES
back and study this period
again.
Thirty short years after the
Bolshevik revolution, there
lay the promise of Lenin be
fore their eyes; capitalist
Europe in ruins; capitalist
America withdrawing her
power; colonialism cracking
everywhere in Asia with Af
rica clearly to follow. Of
course Stalin thought the time
had come to press the Com
munist advantage. It was the
Soviets and no one else who
precipitated and prolonged
this cold war If they now
understand that they cannot
pursue it any longer, save by
indirect subversion in outly
ing places, that is all to the
good - at least until they re
veal their price for peace,
something about which the
Germans will have much to
say.
At this stage,-perhaps all
one can say is that we no long
er confront one, general cold
war against Communism, but
two very different cold wars.
One against Russia, the other
against China, and the latter
may well prove to be much
more dangerous than the
former. For we face the cstab-
' lished church of Communism
j in the first Instance and the
church militant in the second.
One might put it this way -
with the Russians we face
what can be called "cold
peace." That is. a situation in
which both sides talk as if
they are at peace, without
formally ratifying the peace.
Today & Tomorrow
By Walter
19fi3. The
MR. K. AND THE CHINESE
The letter of the Soviet
Central Committee of the
Communist Party about the
dispute with
China is long,
about three
pages of news
paper print.
Anyone who
drives himself
to read it all
will do well
to remind
himself that
the Sino - So
L.lppmann
viet conflict in Central and
Eastern Asia existed long
before either country became
Communist. The conflict ex
isted when the Romanovs and
the Manchus were in power.
For Russia and China have
long had conflicting vital in
terests. The Russian empire
pushed eastward to the Pa
cific; the Chinese empire
pushed northward into Man-
liberty, and property. But he
also believed that it must act
to insure decent levels of
health, education, and living
conditions, so that all may
share in the promise of the
good society. Later economic
liberals, such as L. T. Hob
house, were influenced by
Green's emphasis on "positive
freedom" and on the "organ
ic" aspect of the common
good. Justice Cardozo spoke
in this spirit when he said:
"If the moral and physical
fibre of its manhood and its
womanhood is not a state con
cern, the question is, what is?"
I agree that the state should
act to assure the welfare of
its citizens. But I think that
the means used in present day
welfare states endanger indi
vidual freedom and responsi
bility. In my opinion, welfare
is more prudently assured by
the widest possible diffusion
of income-producing property
than by providing social in
surance and medical care to
the propertyless. A more
equitable share in the wealth
that produces income, rather
than adding "fringe benefits"
to incomes, is the safest route
to the good society, which was
envisaged by the economic
liberals.
You can win a 54-volum
tet of th Great Books of
th Western World by writ
ing a letter, not to exceed
ISO words, incorporating a
quettion of general interest
for Dr. Adler to consider
for inclusion in this col
umn, Each week he will se
lect as first prize winner!
the writers of the three bast
letters. He will use ONE
of these letters as a basis
for a future column and
will answer it in terms of
th intellectual heritage of
th Great Books 443 works
by 74 authors, spanning 30
centuriet of thought. Ad
dress the letters to Dr. Mor
timer J. Adler, in care of
this newspaper.
Migrant Labor Camp
Sanitation Improved
Salem-iUPt! - Sanitation at
farm migrant labor camps has
"improved tremendously" this
year, a State Bureau of La
bor spokesman said Friday.
, A. W. Gardner, whose di
vision inspected the farm la
bor camps, praised farmers
for their cooperation in the
santitation efforts.
With the Chinese we remain
at cold war - that is, both
sides talking as if they were
at war without actually de
claring war. The difference,
as history flows along, can be
considerably greater than one
of semantics.
The break between Russia
and China is an historic
event, and it carries the seeds
of profound troubles between
the two. It may be this alone
that is prompting Khrushchev
to make his apparent gestures
of peace toward the West; it
may be this in coincidence
with the serious stalling of
the machinery and planning
of the Western Alliance. But
those so easily and quickly
convinced that this time peace
has really broken out were
singing the same joyous song
after the 1955 summit meet
ing in Geneva; they sang it
again at the time of Camp
David. After the first affair,
the world had Hungary; after
the second it had the Paris
summit fiasco and the Wall.
It remains the course of
wisdom to pay more attention
to this Western alliance and
, less to Khrushchev's troubles
j with China. Until we know
i much more than we do now.
! it remains a better posture to
; lean on Khrushchev in the
j Harriman manner, and not in
j tha manner of those who,
when he steps back a pace,
i stumble into his embrace,
j (Distributed 1963. by Th Hall
Syndicate, Inc.)
I (All Rights Reserved)
lippmann
Washington Post
churia and toward Siberia.
This conflict is still unre
solved. Unless we bear this in mind
we must wonder why the So
viet letter says that the Com
munist states began to quarrel
in April, 1860 when "tho
Chinese comrades openly dis
closed their differences with.
tne world (i.e., Soviet) Com
munist movement. . ." Why
1960? By then, the Soviet
Union had given China mas
sive aid in the task of indus
trialization. What caused tha
Soviets to pull away thereby
lniuriating tne Red Chinese?
At bottom, it seems, it wa
because Mr. Khrushchev rec
ognized that the old and basic
conflict was manifesting itself
in inina as a willingness, per
haps even as a will, to pre
cipitate a war between the So
viet Union and the UnitoH
States. The letter quotes a hor-
ruying-recKiess statement ap
proved by the Central Com
mittee of the Chinese Commu
nist Party which welcomes a
thermonuclear war: "On tho
ruins of destroyed imperial
ism, me victorious Deonlp
will create with tremendous
speea a civilization a thousand
times higher than under tha
capitalist system."
THE Soviet letter, which at
A this point is surely straight
Khrushchev, remarks, "It is
permissable to ask the Chi
nese comrades if they realiza
what sort of 'ruins' a world
nuclear - rocket war would
leave behind."
Here is the crucial issue be
tween Peking and Moscow.
The issue is whether a war
would be acceptable or intol
erable, indeed desirable or
disastrous. The Red Chinese
who profess to regard nuclear
war as so tolerable that it
need not be avoided, so desir
able that it might profitably
be provoked, have not yet
been able to understand the
actual nature and the revolu
tionary consequences of nu
clear weapons. The most im
portant thing in the Soviet
letter is the elaborate demon
strations of how well Khru
shchev realizes that the exist
ence of nuclear weapons has
changed radically the prob
lem of revolution and reform.
An understanding of the in
tolerable nature of nuclear
war-which could be catastro
phic alike for capitalism and
communism - is what impels
Kennedy and Khrushchev to
seek an understanding. The
two governments which make
and own nuclear weapons
know better than anyone else
the infernal character of nu
clear weapons. It is ignorance
of the true nature of nuclear
war which creates the opposi
tion in both alliances.
About Cuba, for example:
Khrushchev's argument with
the Chinese is substantially
the same as Kennedy's with
Sen. Barry Goldwater. Both
Kennedy and Khrushchev are
accused of cowardly caution.
l ney were wrong, say their re
spective critics, to be cautious
when, says Goldwater, the So
viets never have fought a nu
clear war; when, say the Chi
nese, the Americans are a pa
per tiger.
HPHE Soviet letter goes on to
spell out in general terms
what has happened to the
Communist doctrine of revo
lutionary wars. This has been
a prime cause of friction be
tween President Kennedy and
Chairman Khrushchev, and
the locus of the friction is
Southeast Asia. The Soviets
do not, of course, promise to
abandon support of revolu
tionary movements. That is no
more to be expected than an
American promise to abandon
our clients in Korea and Tai
wan and Viet-Nam.
But if I read the Soviet let
ter correctly, it does say that
the prevention of nuclear war
is the paramount necessity
and has the highest priority.
Therefore, revolutionary
movements must not be sup
ported to a point where they
engage directly the great nu
clear powers.
There is no reason to think
that there will not be contin
uing friction arising from the
revolutionary conditions of so
many of the backward coun
tries. But it is not, I believe,
too optimistic to say that the
friction can continue without
easy resort to the use or to the
threat of nuclear war.
AN IMPRESSIVE part of the
Soviet letter is the confi
dence It shows In the superior
attraction of communism in
time of peace. It insists that,
without military aggression,
the backward part of the
world will follow the Soviet
example.
We have reason, I believe,
to feel no less confident, that,
despite all our faults, the mag
netic attraction of western
civilization will increase as
the threat of war diminishes.
If we have the courage to look
forward, we can be reason
ably sure that if the two sys
tems co-exist peacefully for
several generations, they will
both be very different sys
tems than they are today.
7 J