University Daily Kansan
12.
ss.
22.
es:
on
ity
w-
Page 3
Guilt by Proximity
During a recent visit on campus I had my attention called by a faculty friend to an exhibit at the Student Union of what purported to be a scale range of right- and left-wing literature. "Here's something I think I should protest to the chancellor about," said my friend, pointing to the right-wing case. And after looking I shared his concern. The exhibit was arranged to represent someone's idea of a spectral range of right-wing thought. The extreme was anchored by some blaring pamphlets on the Ku Klux Klan and material on nazism. Because of their bold typography, these two stood out far above anything else in the case, with one exception—up the line a few progressions was a picture of Sen. Barry Goldwater.
weeds water
early ae of include
want hav-
ern- and
omic gen
of th.
A CASUAL OBSERVER could not help but get an association between the senator and terroristic cowardice wearing a white hood and the fascist wolf pack reputedly headed by George Lincoln Rockwell, a "leader" who leads nobody and is only important because he makes of himself a symbol of venom and thus piques some people's ideological curiosity. It might be suggested that the nutty young man also lends himself to a certain smear program by posing as the nadir of the far right. The classification is his.
Barry
or in-
erler is
in his
and
play
meri-
I could not escape the conclusion that the exhibit, through what might be termed "guilt by proximity" was a smear, and a vicious one, whether intended or not, on Sen. Goldwater. Several with me shared the conclusion.
From grave concern I took occasion to call the exhibit to the attention of Chancellor Wescoe. His reply stated that he and several colleagues had viewed the exhibit "objectively" and could see nothing offensive or unfair about it. "The explanatory material that is included with the exhibit," he wrote, "presents the picture adequately, honestly and forthrightly. One side of the board relates to organizations that have been categorized as being politically to the right." And he went on to point out that where the Senator's picture appeared were publications of legitimate conservative organizations.
True.
The People Say...
from the morgue
On Feb. 15, 1932, the Kansas Board of Regents established functions and duties of the Senate of the University.
Among the functions of the Senate, subject only to regents' veto, were:
2. Subject to limitations prescribed by the regents—to determine opening, closing and holiday dates.
1. Appointment of University Senate committees. (The committee report recognizes some committees as Senate committees and others as purely administrative, and responsible directly to the chancellor.)
3. To accredit work from other institutions of learning.
4. To make general regulations concerning scholarship, advanced standing, eligibility of students participating in student activities; absences of students for student activities, sports, glee clubs, or on class "inspection" trips; University honors, scholarships and honor organizations; convocations; University publications and student loans except such as are entrusted to the Endowment Association.
THERE ARE TWO weaknesses in this explanation. First, there can be no denying that an association was established, of graduation, Goldwater to KKK and fascism. And second, one wonders as to the logic and authority of whoever it was fixed the category.
The University Senate was made up of heads of all departments and members of the faculty of professorial or associate professorial rank from all the schools. The chancellor ex officio was president of the Senate.
In today's semantic jungle, the terms "right" and "conservative" are used interchangeably, and so, as a conservative, along with the many in Kansas, I feel maligned also. I agree with most of Sen. Goldwater's political and ideological stands, and I certainly do not concede that my philosophy in any way, shape or form is linked to or bears the slightest resemblance to the psychotic madness of Klan or Hitlerism. The implication is a serious reflection on all citizens of conservative mind, I, for one, resent it.
Would that some project be launched to restore some of our overworked words to the molds of honesty from which they lately have been freed to frolic and fraternize with all manner of ambiguous villainy.
WE SPEAK GLIBLY of right and left of center, and yet I would defy anyone to establish a center position. And right and left in what manner and by whose judgment and consent? The terms liberal and
Goldwater-conservative are just as equivocal, rendered relatively meaningless in this age of smear-conditioned tag words. It is our tragedy that truth cannot be spoken when words lose integrity or exact meaning, nor sense be recognized.
(Continued from page 2)
"EVERYTHING ABOUT Goldwater fits the ideal of that romanticism—from his personal good looks to his long one-man stand against big labor, big government and the dreary lavalike flow of what passes as political liberalism. He appears as the last of the rugged individualists, the underdog who won't stay down, the lone figure striding out to whip Big Brother.
"He combines idealist sentiment with frank appeal to individualistic myths of the good old days.
"Whatever the value of his own proposals, Goldwater has found an appealing idea to found them on—the defense of the rights and pre-rogatives of the individual in the age of the mass. He has become himself the symbol of that idea in the eyes of his followers.
"ANOTHER FACET of his attractiveness to the people is his ability to propose simple solutions to vastly complex issues. For example:
"Castro? Smash him."
"Berlin? Tell the Soviets it's none of their business."
"This way of handling problems, though perhaps it means nothing, has the ring of action and the appeal of decisiveness," the Times concludes.
GOLD WATER'S INFLUENCE and personal appeal are wide among college students. Goldwater gives something to the college students, something political observers call "a feeling of swimming against the current with no danger of drowning, a chance to rebel and conform at the same time."
And lastly, Charles M. Weisenberg, writing in the Commonweal, says: "There is in 'The Conscience of a Conservative' a stern and yet comforting father voice that speaks of the complexities and fluctuations of the modern scene from the vantage point of what appears to be solid rock. Senator Goldwater's view of political and social realities is a relatively simple one and it holds out the promise of a controlled future. It is much more acceptable by a high moral tone and an avowed dedication to individual freedom and nature."
In a clarification attempt I would say that the constant theme of all Goldwater utterances is that of men free to, as Sen Carl T. Curtis (R-Neb.) recently phrased it, "meet their responsibilities in life with a minimum of reliance on government." All points of his philosophy explain this key premise. Simply, this is the credo of the right, of conservatives. The liberal or leftist, on the other hand, subscribes to belief in the socialization of property, all or in major part, with government the caretaker and master of the individual citizen.
This then is Barry Morris Goldwater—the man, the record, and the support. Will these three elements be strong enough to carry him to the White House? Only time will tell.
The far extreme of the right would be the extreme of individual freedom—anarchy. The extreme of the left—statism, regimentation.
To make any sense at all, fascism would have to home in on the extreme left.
Yours for Goldwater type forthrightness.
Dwight Payton Ellsworth, Kan.
Friday, March 6, 1964
Rockefeller—
(Continued from page 2)
Then, on the eve of the Republican national convention, Nixon flew to New York to iron out differences with Rockefeller. After accepting Rockefeller's refusal to serve as a vice-presidential candidate, Nixon worked Rockefeller's views on defense, reorganization of the executive branch, economic growth, farm policy, medical care for the aged and civil rights into the party platform.
Nixon for not speaking out on issues of the day,
ROCKEFELLER WAS rebuffed by his first legislature as the New York budget rose from $1.6 billion to $2.9 billion. His plan for fallout shelters was rejected (but a watered-down version was passed by the following session) along with his school aid plan and an antidiscrimination housing bill.
He came up for re-election as governor in 1962, and observers said a landslide victory would assure him the presidential nomination that slipped away in 1960. Although he did well in Democratic areas against Robert M. Morgen-
Rockefeller's program for 1964 included a major anti-crime program, stepped up housing for the aged and middle and low income groups, increased urban renewal, repeal of the state's railroad full crew laws and no tax increase.
thau. Rockefeller did not make the spectacular 800,000-1,000,000 vote victory that had been predicted.
IN RECENT WEEKS, Rockefeller has been the target of the New York liquor lobby as he has proposed legislation to revise the state's liquor laws.
Among his creations as governor have been an Atomic Research and Development Authority and a State Housing Finance Agency. Finding 600,000 unemployed when he assumed office in 1958, he had increased the number of jobs in New York by 450,000 by 1962.
It shouldn't be counted off as coincidence that Rockefeller has toyed with programs and plans in New York that he might be dealing with as president of the United States. In no less than 13 of 23 presidential elections since the Civil War, the governor of New York has been a candidate.