4
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Friday, November 22, 1968
Third party depends on many variables
In addition to the organizational liabilities of the American Independent party, is depends heavily if not entirely upon a backlash that the course of events could dissipate in a hurry. A few years of tranquility at home and abroad could dull the Wallace cutting edge. It would take crisis far in excess of what we are now experiencing to broaden the Wallace support. And it seems clear that Wallace will not broaden his appeal. Rather, if he is to get national support, the elements he appeals to now must flourish.
Another variable which could determine the success of a new third party would be the amount of dissent occurring within the present Democratic party. Not only would defections from the Democratic party nbe needed, to provide the necessary surplus in the electorate, but more importantly, a third party effort would be greatly assisted by the addition of present ranking party and national leaders.
This then would add a still more conservative element to the present two major parties, which in turn could have the possibility of driving some liberal elements out of the present parties; increasing the ranks of the steadily increasing bloc of independent voters.
Other recognized politicians, besides McCarthy, could broaden the appeal of a third party while at the same time adding the possibility of an expanded power base. For example, if activists like Julian Bond of Georgia, Don Peterson of Wisconsin, Al Lowenstein of New York and even Jesse Unruh of California could be persuaded to affiliate
Barring then some unforeseen crisis, the Wallace movement is likely to dissipate. What then of his followers, who now apparently account for roughly 15 per cent of the population? They most probably would be taken into the folds of the present parties.
Editor's note: This is the final part of a two part series examining the possibility of a Sen, Eugene McCarthy-led third party arising. Today's article continues the discussion of some of the variables which could determine the success of such a party, and speculates as to the probable degree of that success.
--with a new third party, the party would have the makings of a diversified national organization.
In a sense, it would take the effort of politicians not only sympathetic to a third party movement, but politicians with strong personal vote appeal who count that as their biggest asset, rather than the present Democratic party organization in their state. But indeed, this kind of politician is a rare commodity and, as we shall see later, there are liabilities on the other side of the ledger which likely would prove fatal.
From this elite would come the core of a proposed third party. But obviously, more support would be needed to form a viable political force.
The immediate appeal of McCarthy led third party would be to the young and the intellectuals. This is what made up the core of his early success in the regular Democratic party. The remaining support came from the periphery of the regular Democratic party and dissidents of nearly every persuasion.
But assuming that some other key politicians could be persuaded by McCarthy to support a third party movement, the appeal of maverick McCarthyism would have to be broadened if such a party were to survive.
The most apparent source for this additional support would be the disenchanted black and white minorities and the low income groups in general. With the addition of these elements, this
proposed third party takes on the appearance of the old Democratic coalition. But as blue collar workers and the black minorities indicated this year, they are no longer firmly in the Democratic camp. If it seems absurd that blue collar workers, who appeared to be a Wallace gold mine late in the campaign, could be enlisted in a radical new politics movement, it would be well to check the polling results of this year. Ironic as it may seem, a substantial number of people who voiced preference for candidates such as Sen. Robert Kennedy, Gov. Nelson Rockefeller, and McCarthy later indicated preference for Wallace.
But the aggregate of these hypothetical situations amounts to an enormous "if." It is doubtful that other notable public office holders, regardless of their sympathy to the new politics or their dissatisfaction with the present two-party system, would sacrifice the one foot they have now in the Democratic party or relinquish the power base they have formed in their respective states. Politics is not a game of uncalculated chance. A rising politician is not as likely to risk a promising career for a shot in the dark of a new party. Also, there is no certainty that the course of events will provide the stimulus needed to bolster a third party.
Even if the course of events and the ambitions of individuals would play into the hands of a third party, it is doubtful that such a party would have any lasting affect upon our political processes. Most likely the party under discussion would, like so many other third parties in U.S. history, be absorbed by one or both of the present parties, most probably the Democratic party. And its greatest achievements would likely be to influence into the ideology and platform of the present parties.
Richard Lundquist Assistant Editorial Editor
Creative madness
By SCOTT NUNLEY
It is a simple matter for the art commentator, any "judge" whether dignified with a pulp by-line or not, to step back in pursuit of objectivity and lose complete contact with the actual world of the artist.
Experiencing creativity only at second hand, we all need what Ingmar Bergman's new film "Hour of the Wolf" so powerfully offers—a trip, a step, a moment's ascent directly into the divine creative madness of the artist.
Or perhaps more precisely, into the madness that we, the Public, "generate" when we reach out to clutch at our poets and painters and filmmakers.
So very righteously aware of our own sanity, we define the world we see as being Real. We apply our own acid tests and our own semantic labels and we order its Reality in logical plodding patterns after the ponderous process of our usually rather mudbound minds. Nothing new about that.
But the hypersensitive man, the visionary, the artist who can fly before or above us and who dares to bring back a description of the new perspective he has found is obviously un-sane. We may be charitably condescending and call him by pet names such as "imaginative" or "eccentric" but we all understand what we mean. In the world of safely Revealed Reality (even is the Priest is now our Scientist), where value equals utility, of what tangible value is the sadly un-sane poet?
Un-sane productions, such as the cineramic "2001," disturb us
Un-sane productions, such as the cinerakis 2001, by The thousands we sit in the darkened theatres and struggle to order the mad vision, to explicate its potent symbolism, to pull its stark raving fangs. Sometimes some of us, perhaps on a second visit, do succeed in abandoning our "judgment" and in entering directly into the world of the vision itself.
As more and more contemporary commercial films, " $ 8\frac{1}{2}, $ " Blow-Up," reach in to this source of highly personal prophey within the artist himself, contemporary audiences are more and more often left too distant from the primary creative experience. Denying its sweet madness to their own structured lives, they must overthrow themselves first in order to recognize its power on the screen.
Within the special environment of the University, of course, we foster an Elite Public—and without our cash support, filmmakers like Bergman would not reach the town at all. We are young, we are curious, and (hopefully) we are iconoclastic. Trying new things and refuting old rules is why we've called this meeting together.
So, complacently, we may nod that we would never buy an expensive painting and hang it callously upside-down merely so that we could ask the painter to dinner and watch him suffer. This is the General Public's usual mode of behavior toward the freak artist, of course. But not us: not the Elite Public? We'd never torture our sensitive men—?
Bergman's "Hour of the Wolf" lets us sit in the chair, lay on the rack, and experience at least a flash of the other side of the horrible blood feast that is held between the Public and its artists. "Hour of the Wolf" is neither difficult nor depressing to view. It is brutally enlightening and so, yes of course, it is frightening.
Letters to the editor
Different ideas on patriotism
As of now I've read enough "reporting" on how things were during the Veterans Day parade. My greatest desire now is to express a somewhat different view—that of the student marcher, marching for peace.
To the Editor:
In the University Daily Kansan, Nov. 18, I read of the Lawrence citizens criticizing the peace march. It was said that "the many, many good students should suppress those who would protest against our government." The march was "pretty deplorable" because we "tore down the government of our country and the heritage of our country. The only way they (the peace marchers) will ever get anything done is to get a shave and a haircut."
So now we're all branded as being a pretty deplorable bunch of bearded bad students who lack respect for our country. It seems to me that someone has really missed the point . . . by about eight miles.
Before the march was started, a man and lady broke into the line to tear up signs. They didn't stop to ask why we were against the inevitable "what has to be, has to be." A fat lady leaned out her window, after the march had started, to spit and yell obscries at the participants. As we
A student newspaper serving the University of Kansas, Lawrence.
Published at the University of Kansas daily during the academic year except holidays and examination periods. Mail subscription rates: $6 a semester at Lawrence, Kan. 66044. Accommodations, goods, services and employment advertised offered to all students without regard to color, creed or national background necessarily those of the University of Kansas or the State Board of Rogens.
prog assed down Massachusetts, I noticed that the "peace march critics" seemed, for the most part, to be those staggering out of nearby bars. One yelled, "You guys are a bunch of phonies."
Well, that's how things are in Lawrence, Kan. People preoccupied with seeing only what they want to see will open their minds only that far. I marched, as a participant of the march for peace, in question of a need for such a war. Open to hear opposing views, I question the absence
of General Walt after promising to talk to all those outside the dinner held that night at the Kansas Union.
One hundred and 50 conscientious people join together to express their deepest desire for peace and the commander of Veterans of Foreign Wars, Post No. 852, says, "It's ridiculous when a bunch of these hippies lay down and chew gum during playing of taps." Yes, that really explains a lot.
Bill Higgins Lawrence sophomore
'Next thing y'know they'll be tellin' us the earth is not flat!'