Page 2
University Daily Kansan Wednesday, May 2,1962
De Gaulle and Algeria
The French people voted overwhelmingly on April 8 in favor of peace in Algeria. They also voted, with somewhat more reservation, for an extension of emergency powers to President de Gaulle, to enable him to crush rebellion and pave the way for an Algerian referendum within three months.
The April 8 referendum subject was so phrased that it was impossible to vote approval of the cease-fire and disapproval of emergency powers. Had the two been separated, a significant difference might have been noted. But De Gaulle is known to feel that he cannot carry the Algerian cease-fire into a permanent peace without neardictatorial powers to deal with insurgents. His contempt for the French form of parliamentary government is so great that he will never willingly restore it to the power it enjoyed under previous Republics.
THIS FACT, and the use to which it was put in obtaining this endorsement, has caused much dismay to people who wholeheartedly admire De Gaulle's patient achievement of an Algerian accord, agree that extraordinary powers are needed to put it into effect, but who are afraid of what might happen under this continuing extension of power. De Gaulle alive and active is, even his critics agree, incorruptible even if dictatorial. Should he die or become incapacitated, and the likelihood is not remote, given the savage fury of the Secret Army and the President's own failing health, the very chaos he seeks to avoid could descend overnight.
There is no other man the mass of the French people would trust with such power. But other men would willingly seize it, given the legal opportunity. This is why a ringing endorsement carried with it undertones of uneasiness this week.
THE PRESENT French Government has another year of power, but Premier Michel Debre is expected shortly to resign. The President may
either announce new elections then or he may appoint a new Cabinet to serve until 1963. There is a general expectation in France that he will ask for elections now, in order to confirm public approval of his policies, and to give him a clear field in France and Europe for reforms he has long wanted to make.
All of these speculations, of course, must wait upon events in Algeria. The Secret Army is by no means silenced. The referendum has only increased the hatred of its die-hards and they have three months in which to do their worst to provoke the Moslem masses into retaliations that would force the fire of French troops. This now is the only hope left to the Secret Army, and it is one in which the European settlers in Algeria are losing faith rapidly. But it could be fulfilled at any time, as murderers and bombings continue to kill defenseless people. One outbreak in which the regular French Army and police forces fired on Moslems and former troops of the Moslem rebel movement fired back, could wreck the cease-fire and postpone the Algerian referendum indefinitely.
THE APRIL 8 MASSIVE gesture of approval will, therefore, have two undoubtedly useful effects. It will impress the French Algerians again with the eventual hopelessness of their cause. It will convince waverers in the Secret Army and doubters in the regular Army that the power of the President is greater than ever, and it will strengthen the effort to hunt down and capture the ringleaders of the rebellion. A few more strategic arrests, a few more summary sentences of Europeans who murder Algerians may do much to change the picture. All this and much more must have been in the minds of those "yes" voters who approve the man and the policy they affirmed, but whose continuing grant of total power goes against political and moral beliefs which are very important in France.
(An editorial in the April 10 Louisville Courier Journal)
Reader Criticizes Editorials Editor;
... Letters ...
I disagree with the implication found in your editorials of April 25 and 26 that moral arguments are unimportant in discussions of nuclear testing. Do you really believe that the goal of national security justifies any means used to attain it? If this is our national philosophy, are we, in any real sense, a Christian nation. Christians believe that God has a purpose for man and it is from man's understanding of the nature of this purpose that moral considerations arise. Such considerations must have precedence in decisions and cannot be considered as less important than self interest. If we believe that moral arguments are unimportant, then why do we object to the "godless atheism of communism."
The teachings of Jesus hinge upon the concept of self-sacrificial love. If we had the faith and courage necessary to act upon the premises that it is better to be killed than to kill and that our enemies should be objects of love and concern, then we would have the moral stamina to defend what we believe to be right without reliance on destructive power. Such a struggle involving moral and nonviolent methods would involve less death and destruction than nuclear war, even if Russia remained militarily armed. And the probability of success in defending our rights and values and in building a democratic world society would certainly be greater in such a nonviolent struggle.
MORAL arguments are relevant to the international situation: I believe that moral maturity is the only answer to our present dilemma. Many of our intellectual leaders have stated that our present course can only lead, sooner or later, to a catastrophe. It is time to reject contests of physical destruction and raise the level of our struggle with communism to the moral and intellectual plane.
The moral maturity necessary for such a struggle is certainly an
idealistic concept, but it is a possibility of the Christian life. If we do not have the courage necessary to adopt a course of action that will avert the catastrophe of nuclear war, I hope that those peoples who survive such a catastrophe will be able to build a better civilization than ours, one which fosters the development of moral maturity as well as intellectual maturity.
Dwight Platt
Dwight Hatt
Lawrence graduate student
*   *   *
Recipe For Peace Marchers Editor:
(1) Avoid direct, sincere statements about what you are doing and what you feel. If you must speak, use slogans. Sincerity violates the "Hi - how are you" code for campus conversation and makes people uncomfortable and suspicious.
I am submitting the following suggestions for those who might be considering further public demonstrations in opposition to the continuation of the nuclear arms race. I hope these suggestions will be of use:
(2) CHOOSE marchers carefully.
Get Joe College and Little-Girl types. This will fend off the charge that you are a bunch of individualists and irresponsible nonconformists. The younger the marchers the better. Make it clear you are too young to know what it's really like
out there in the real world. Those who see you will be less defensive.
(3) Pose all pictures. Give the impression that you are building a disciplined mass organization. Your demonstration will then be considered purposeful and realistic.
(4) CULTIVATE the editorial writers on the campus newspaper. They will feel forced to comment but embarrassed by having to criticize someone for taking a stand after their long campaign against apathy. Point out to them the useful argument that although voicing of individual opinions is fine in principle, in fact it is useless.
(5) Don't challenge the simplicity of the "Red or Dead" argument. People become upset when faced with alternatives. Just be against war. Everyone is against war—the arms race is for peace.
(6) State your case entirely in terms of self-interest. Morality is meaningless in today's world where the greater force is the greater good. Mention of morality will lose hearers for your cause.
(7) Or just forget the whole thing. Drink beer, watch Ed Sullivan, and take frequent showers to remove radioactive ash. Promote educational TV so you can be educated in your shelter. Repeat over and over that our leaders know best and that by speaking out people weaken our system.
Coffeyville graduate student
Charles McReynolds
Daily Hansan
University of Kansas student newspaper Founded 1889, became biweekly 1904, triweekly 1908, daily Jan. 16, 1912
Telephone VIking 3-2700 Extension 711, news room Extension 376, business office
LITTLE MAN ON CAMPUS by Dick Bibler
Member Inland Daily Press Association. Associated Collegiate Press.
Represented by National Advertising Service, 18 East 50 St., New York 22,
N.Y. News service: United Press International. Mail subscription rates:
$3 a semester or $3 a year. Published in Lawrence, Kan., every afternoon during the University year except Saturdays and Sundays, University holidays and examination periods. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas.
THE TRAGIC MUSE, by Henry James. Harper Torchbooks, $2.25.
WHAT MAISIE KNEW, by Henry James. Doubleday Anchor, 95
cents. THE AWKWARD AGE, by Henry James. Doubleday Anchor,
$1.45.
One moves slowly to these books, if one is a reader of Henry James. Critics give the most lavish praise to the last three ("The Ambassadors," "The Golden Bowl," "The Wings of the Dove"). The general reader is more likely to select "The American," "The Portrait of a Lady," or "Washington Square."
But these are good Henry James. From a standpoint of style they fall in between the relatively simple earlier novels and the complex trio of giants. Two of them are almost in the high comedy tradition; the third has grim and sordid aspects that seem almost foreign to James, occupied as he was with problems of good and evil.
Nick is a painter, one who has set out on a course that to conventional society indicates failure. He cannot bring himself to enter business; he breaks off with his wealthy fiancee; he leaves his post as a Liberal member of Parliament. Ultimately it is only Miriam who triumphs in this novel.
"THE TRAGIC MUSE" IS THE STORY of an actress and her effect upon a circle of British folk living in Paris and then in London. The muse is one Miriam Rooth, based upon the famous actress Rachel, and she is an open, ingenuous, at times comic, invention. James' greatest failure in this novel is Nicholas Dormer, his hero. No matter how hard James tries, this young man, an Englishman, emerges as an American type.
IN "WHAT MAISIE KNEW" WE have any ugly story of divorce and its effect upon a little girl. She alone emerges relatively untouched by the nastiness of first her mother and then her father and then her step-parents moving from lover to lover. Whether Maisie could remain unscathed is another matter. It is a fine novel, one of James' best.
"The Awkward Age," like the other two books, eschews James' usual infatuation with the "international theme." This American could ignore his country in dealing with the British society which he much preferred. But the theme of innocence, so common in James, is present here as in "What Maisie Knew."
There are two heroines, one the unprotected Nanda, the other the sheltered Aggie. Each is launched into society. And we gradually see that the protected girl does not possess the innocence and integrity of the unprotected one.-CMP
P B
$$
* * *
$$
SONS AND LOVERS, by D. H. Lawrence. Signet, 50 cents.
Here is a modern classic, one of the truly fine novels of our time, one that deserves the recognition given by many to Lawrence's more sensational book, "Lady Chatterley's Lover." It is an absorbing and honest depiction of family life in a coal-mining town in England, and it is known to be autobiographical.
It is a compassionate story as well. Paul Morel is the victim both of his father, brutalized by industrial society, and his overpossessive mother, a sensitive woman brutalized by marriage to the wrong man. Paul finds himself unable to attach himself to any woman other than his mother, and even her death does not sever the silver cord.
There is idyllic beauty in this story, and grimness as well. There is idealized young love; there is adulterous love. Throughout there is the marvelous feeling of Lawrence for an England being converted from a pastoral to an industrial world.—CMP