-
LETTERS ambassador in error Bakimore. Md DEAR SIRS: The article
on Brazil by Dom Bonafede in your May 26 issue [Blunder in Brazll.
Washington Backs the Pooh Bahs] contams a number of hlstorlcal
errors which call for correctlon . . .
The charge that the U S armed forces acted as coun- sel and
banker to the BradIan armed forces when they deposed JOaG Goulart
in 1964 has no foundatlon what- soever As I testlfied m Senate
hearings in 1966, that ac- tion was a purely Brazilian affair. We
not only did not instigate it but were unaware of a serious
movement to that end until a few days before It happened . . .
I did welcome the revolutlon when It took place because the
speeches and actlons of Goulart over the prevlous nlne months, and
especially from March 13 through March 30, 1964, made It crystal
clear that he was embarked on an effort to estabhsh a Populist
dlctatorship of his own, In the pattern of hls mentor Getullo
Vargas three decades earlier I dld then believe, and st111 belleve,
that success by Goulart in hn campalgn mlght well have led to a
subsequent Communlst capture of power, because of Gou- larts own
weakness . . .
The charge that I later became a virtual viceroy to President
Castelo Branco and was consulted at every turn is equally unfounded
My relations with Castelo Branco were cordial and frlendly, but he
consulted me less than President Kennedy consulted Davtd Ormsby-
Gore in Washlngton. Our AID mlssion and I dld Indeed consult
extenslvely and frequently with Plannlng Minlster Roberto Campos
and Flnance Minister Octavio Bulhoes . . .
The most extraordmary assertlon In Mr Bonafedes artlcle is that
the Flfth Instltutlonal Act of December 13, 1968, and the
subsequent extremely arbitrary actlons of the present reglme, were
inevitable. They were no more inevitable than the resignation of
President Quadros in 1961. the clash between Castelo Branco and
Carlos Lacerda, and many other critical events in Brazilian
polltlcal history. F e n I wrote hopefully in July 1967 of
prospects for constitutional democracy, it was because much
evidence then pointed to the taking root of the 1967 constitution .
. . with effective guarantees of press freedom ind of individual
civd llbertles. I turned out to be wrong. . . .
The real tragedy, which goes back to late 1964, 1s that neither
Castelo Branm nor Presldent Costa e Silva made use of the
opportunity to build a new politlcal infrastruc- ture for Brazilian
representatwe government on a more stable basis than the three
increasingly obsolete and lr- relevant polltlcal parties that
dommated the scene from 1946 to 1964. From early 1965 on, I tned,
as a frtendly outside observer, to make this point with Presldent
Castelo Branco and his associates . . . It IS a true measure of how
little a viceroy I was that these efforts made no headway.
Lincoln Gordon
Wadzingron, D . C. DEAR SIRS It seems that when on the
defensive, Mr. Gor- don resorts to the blunderbuss technique of
claimtng his- torlcal error on the part of his critics, as he did
in re- sponse to my article in The Nafion, and earller to The New
York Tzrnes editorial to which I made reference.
However, in a glarlng oversight he fails to support his charge
against the thesis of my article with substantwe evidence In no
instance does he even attempt to cite one error of fact Instead, he
makes an impassloned argument m defense of hls ambassadorial role
durlng the 1964 Bra- zllian revolutlon. Yet he demolishes the
appeal wlth hls own words
As a case In point, he denles betng ~n on the ground (Conttnued
on page 83)
66
EDITORIALS What Price Moondust?
There is cause for genwne admiration, even awe, at wh,at the
Apollo program has accompllshed At this wnt- ing, the spacecraft 1s
on Its way, an,d there is reasonable expectation that the rest of
the trip wtll be accompllshed on schedule. After the traglc failure
in January of 1967, American engineering talent took hold, and the
most com- plex machme ever concelved by man has performed almost
faultlessly on every test. The courage and self-control of the
astronauts is to be applmauded; there may even be some unforeseen
benefit to mankmd m what they brlng back from the moon, but even
the most unsurprlslng results wlll serve to extend human knowledge
of the universe.
But knjowledge of another type could be gamed from the
undertaking. knowledge of ourselves Our natlonal response to the
flrst Sputntk has astonished the world- Includmg, probably, the
Russians Its appearance In the skles on October 4, 1957, triggered
U.S. production of adrenalln to a new record Not Pearl Harbor, nor
Sen. . Joseph McCarthys discovery of the Communlst con- splracy,
had caused the collective Amerlcan pulse to pound at such a rate
Had a flve-pomted Red Star, m place of the moon, been seen In the
heavens the following nlght, our natlonal panlc could not have been
greater. The event was subsequently alluded to In NASAs public
relatlons pronouncements as a disaster. creatlng a nat~onal emer-
gency Webbs Magical Flymg Clrcus was off the ground from then
on.
Had there been no Soviet satelllite in 1957, Amermans would not
by now be reachmg for the moon. Our whole space program has been
fuelled by the U.S. relactlon to the f m t and subsequent Russlan
explolts. A predictable, almost Pravlovlan reflex has developed;
the Russians and the world have learned much, in the process, of
what makes us tlck. Have we learned as much about ourselves7 Over
the past twelve years, we have successlvely been challenged,
enraged and spumed Into action-and have demonstrated to all our
courage, strength, speed, ingenuity and technical sk~ll.
The Russlans role in the lunar rlvalry may perhaps have been as
reflexively competitwe as our own, or It may have boen more
sophisticated and more subtly motivated. But wlth Luna 15, whlch
was threatening at the last pos- sible moment to beat us to the
moondust strlke (at a small fraction of the cost and risk), Pavlovs
bell rang once more. The sallva has already started to flow. Mr.
Agnew has urged, as a new ob~ectlve, a landing on Mars. And T m a s
0. Pame, who succeeded James Webb as head of h.\SA, indlcates hls
approval. It was Paine who, after the successful return of the
Apollo 8 astronauts, defen,ded NASAs budget by saying that the
technology involved wou18d be helpfull m wlnnmg the next war, a
comment thmat somewhat barnislhes the Space Olympics image of the
moon race, and a further reason for greet- ing the agencys mnnulal
budget demands with more than leglslatlve huzzahs.
THE NATION/IU~Y 28, 1969
-
NASA has spent 8 total of $50 billion since the start, half of
which has gone toward the Apollo program. Much has been qmte
rightly sald about the uony of spending billions getting to the
moon whde the mass of humanity at home lives in a stew of exploding
population, poverty and pollution. But all that will be but as a
pinprick in our hide, should we senously decide to strike out for
the planets. They are more than a hundred times more remote than
the moon in distance, in time, in economic and human cost. The time
of decision is here, and the euphoria of the moment-however
understandable it may be-must not be allowed to obscure our
jud,gment.
The ABM Debauch Before much was said about the ABM in the
Senate,
the public debate was conducted on a fairly high level. It
involved technical questions, such as the workability of the
proposed system, and questions of foreign policy: would deployment
enhance or dimmish the chances of reaching an arms-limitation
agreement with the Sovlet Union? W'hen the issue reached the Senate
floor, the usua! thmg happened-the debate plunged from intellectual
re- spons~blllty into a political debauch, with the Nixon Ad-
ministration and the mllltary-industrial complex bidding for the
vo'tes of the uncommltted Senators, and some of the latter holding
out for the best price they could get in the way o tangible
benefits for important Interests in their respective states, and
the promotion of their own political Interests.
It 1s a natural and perhaps inevitable descent. The tech- nical
questions are intricate, and few members of Con- gress possess the
background necessary to differentiate between heuristic arguments
and those based on objective engineering analysis. Such matters are
alien to their tem- peraments and remote from their experience. Nor
are the majority of Senators and Representatives any more in-
clined to take a statesmanlike vlew of the great political
questions that the country faces at home and abroad. To a man, they
esteem themselves as patriots, but nothing is easier for a
politicmn than to identify his own interests with those of the
country-especially when the latter in- volve the dilemmas posed by
20th-century technology in the service of 19th-century traditions
and institutions.
What the ordinary Congressman does understand is power politics,
whether m the international arena or in the give-and-take of the
legislative process. Getting himself reelected, and increasing hls
influence among his col- leagues, are the objectives closest to his
heart Thus the story by John Finney in the July 16 New York Tunes,
"ABM Debate Is Becommg a Pol'ltlcal Struggle for the Votes of 3 or
4 Sen'ators," though it makes depressing readlng, does not come as
a surprise. Technical, military and diplomatic arguments may play
some part, but such issues as oil drilling m Alaska, a nuclear
rocket for New Memco, a supersonic transport for the state of
Washing- ton, a Naval shipyard in Maine, become the preoccupying
considerations. And so do promises and pressures known TfIB
NATION/JUIY 28, 1969
IN THIS ISSUE Iuly 28, 1969
EDITORIALS 66
ARTICLES 70 New Poliltics:
More Mood Than Movement Jack Newfield
73 Latin America: Challenge from the Intellectuals
Manuel Maldonado-Denis
76 The Disney Imperative Wesley Marx
78 Out To Get the Panthers L . F . Palmer, Jr.
82 Harry Golden
BOOKS Q THE ARTS 84 Kremllnology. Power and
Terror David Joravsky 86 The Poetry of Earth Armand Schwerner 87
Las Angeles' Golden Goose Anne Strick 88 Accldent (poem) Wdllarn
Pillin 89 Book Marks Sara Blackburn 90 Theatre Harold Clurman 92
Art Lawrence Alloway 92 The Poor Man Moves Through
Washmgton, D.C . Spring 1968 (poem) Eugene Ruggles
93 Music David Hamdton
JAMES J STORROW JR Publasher Assoclate Publisher
GIFFORD PHluIpS Editor Assoclate Editor
CAREY McWILLIAMS PmL KERBY Executive Editor Literary Editor
ROBERT HATCH BEVERLY GROSS Copy Editor, MARION HESS; Poetry
Edltor, ALLEN PLANZ; Theat re , HAROLD CLURMAN; Art, MAX KOZLOFF,
Music, BENJAMIN BORETZ. Science. CARL DREHER: Advertismn Manager,
MARY SIMON
- Editorial Associate, ERNEST GRUENMG
Washington, ROBERT G SHERRILL, London, RAYMOND WILLIAMS, Paris,
CLAUDE BOURDET: Bonn, C AMERY; Csnberra, C P FITZGERALD, UN, ANNE
TUCKERMAN. The Nation IS published each week (except for the
omlssion of tour Issues) by the Natlon Cornpaw and COpvrlght 1969
In the U.S.A. by the Natlon Associates, Inc , 333 Slxth Avenue, New
York. N Y. 10014. Tel CH 2-8400 West Coast offlce 825 South
Barrlngton Avenue, Los Anseles, Cahf 90049 Second class Postage
pald at New York, N Y. and at dddltlonal mallme offlce Address nll
manuscripts nnd odi- torial correspondence to the New York office.
Subscr~~tion Price: One Year, $10. two years. S18 Add $1 per Year
Postage for Canada and Mexico, 12 other forelon Change Of Address:
It IS ersentlal that subscrlbers oraerlna I chanoe of address slve
flve weeks' notice and PrOVlde thew old as well as thew new address
Please glve ZIP Code numbers for both addresser.
lnformatlon to Llbrrrles: The Nation 1s Indexed In Readers'
Gulde I the Publlc Affairs lnforrnatlon Ssrvlce. Perlodlcal
Llterature. Book Revlew Dlgest, Book Revlew Index and
67
-
~~
SUMMER SCHEDULE During the summer, The Nation will not appear (
~ 1
the following dates: July 21, August 4, August 18. 1 I
only to those concerned. Finney puts it as 0 common pre- mnption
that Sen. John G . Tower of Texas, the chair- man of ~e Senate
Republican Campaign Committee, was instrumental in shifting the
vote of Sen. Winston L. Prouty, Vermont Republican, mto the pro-ABM
column, when It had been widely expected that he would line up with
his senior colleague, Sen. George D. Alken, one of the ABMs
principal opponents.
Or bake the case of a New Englander 0n the other side sf the
aisle, Sen. Thomas J. McIntyre of New Hampshire, who at this
wrltlng is one of the uncommitted. He is the i@ha of a proposed
compromise plan under which radar and computers, but not missllcs,
would be Installed at l ~ e initial two Safeguard sites. This is a
one-sided com- prmise: one can be pretty sure that the missiles
would follow, but since the Administration is obdunate on pas- sage
of the complete system, the partlal installation satis- his no one
and the amendment IS expected to lose. Sena- tor McIntyres
inclinations are belleved to be against de- ployment, but he has h
~ s worries. One is the pro-ABM Manchester Union Leader, t,he
largest (and most venom- ous) newspaper @ New Hampshire. Then Mr.
McIntyre is understandably reluctant to lock horns with Sen. John
C. Stemis, who is chaimrman of the Armed Services Commit- tee, of
which Mr. McIntyre is a jmim member. Nor can he afford to
antagonize the Defense Department, which wants to close ,the
Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
~ Yet the vote on the ABM is expected to be close and, Mr. Aiken
pointed out, if the Administration prevails
it might be a Pyrrhic victory, since the opposition will have
shown formidable strength. As always, Sen. John Sheman Cooper has
been a leader on the side of reason. Suoh men are not invited to
the White House sand sub- jacted to the Presidential blandishments;
it would be a waste of time all around. Frank Church of Idaho is
an- other of this stalwart band. The ABM controversy elicited from
Church a brilliant speech on foreign policy which was released July
11 and seems to have produced hardly a ripple of interest in the
press. hk. Church points out that regardless of the outcome of
the ABM debate, our military budget will not shrink sig-
r6fioantly as long as our foreign commitments remain at the present
level and there is no determined opposition to
policy abroad that rests upon the premise that we must be ever
ready not only to repel an attack but to engage in as many as three
foreign wars simultaneously. If we can but liberate ourselves from
ideological obsession, Church B ~ S , from the automatic
association of social revolution with oom,mumsm and of communism
with Soviet or Chi- nese power, we may find it possible to
discriminate among disorders in the world and to evaluate them with
greater objectivity, which is to say, more on the basis of their
own
6p
mntent and less on the basis of our own fears. Such ob-
servations serve to remind us that the degradation of plt- tics is
by no means universal and that men of intellect and enlightened
judgment do manage to get into Congress- and sometimes to stay
there.
The Indicted Diplomat David Dellinger has organized numerous
demonstra-
tions against the Vietnamese War and is under lndlctment in
Chicago on charges arising out of the clashes during the Democratic
National Convention last August. More recently he has been
functioning as the American negotia- tor for the release of three
U.S. fliers, offered by the North Vietnamese (not without ulterior
motives) to assist in the celebration of the American Independence
Day. In these negotiations Mr. Dellinger is in effect representing
the State Department, which made it clear to the U.S. Attorney in
Chicago and the federal judge having jurisdic- tion thfat the
travel restrictions imposed by the indictment should be lifted to
enable Dellinger to fIy to Paris. On July 8 the State Depafiment
confirmed th.at Dellin-
ger had arrived in Paris to confer with North Vietnamese
officials abowt the release of the prisoners. Dellinger re- turned
to the United States on July 12 and told reporters at Kennedy
International Airpo,rt that a team of negotia- tors, of the same
persuasion as himself, would leave shortly for North Vietnam to
brmg the men back. He added that he had assurances thcat the U.S.
Army would not inter- cept the released prisloners atter they left
Hanoi (see The Petty Route Home by Howard Zinn, The Nation. April
1, 1968) and that the arrangements precluded their assignment to
further war activities against North Viet- nam.
Of cou,rse Mr. Dellinger did not act officially on behalf of the
U.S. Government. He went to Paris in his capacity as chaiqman of
the National Mobilization Commitkee to End the War in Vietnam. The
Nomh Vietnamese had re- quested that #a delegation representing the
Amerioan peace movement be sent to arrange for the repatriation of
the prisoners. The State Department had no choice but to comply or
leave itself open to the accusation &hat it had refused to
cooperate in the freeing of the men. Thus it came labout that an
arch-peacenik was empowered to o n - duct the talks instead of
Ambassador Henry C a h t Lodge, who is not having conspicuous
success in the broader task of negotiating an end to the war.
These odd, though nat unprecedented, negotilations throw still
another revealing light on the politioal schizo- phrenia of @he
Nixon Administr,ation. A few days before Mr. Dellinger flew ,to
Paris, our fatuous Vice Resident rebuked U.S. critics of the
Vietnamese War for allegedly undermining our negotiations for peace
and p longing the war. It is not enough that those who warned SUC-
cessive administrations against the course that led us into Ohe
qwagmire shoulld be ignored-now it is they who are prolonging the
war! Yet m the DelQnger matter it is most unlikely that the State
Department acted without Presiden-
w m NATION/JU~V 28, 1%9
-
tial approval. If so, one of the principal peace activists was
assignd by the Nixon Administration to a mission that could not be
handled effectively m any other way. Evidently these people have
their uses. And where does that leave Mr. Agnew?
Security in HEW The Department of Health, Education and
Welfare
clings to a security system so redolent of the Joe McCarthy .
era that it sometimes bars from its consultative commit-
tees scientists who are serving the Department of Defense in the
same capacity. An investigation conducted under the direction of
Bryce Nelson and reported in the June 27 issue of Science implies
that HEW is perhaps the most hagridden of the Executive
depa~ments-and with the least excuse. The magazine found that
several professors who were serving on high-level Defense
Department or
- National Science Foundation advisory panels were not clearable
by HEW.
That such HEW organizations as the National Insti- tutes of
Health or the National Institute of Mental Health should be so
afflicted, and should continue to spread their contagions among the
countqs physicians, psyohologists and life scientists, is surely a
matter warranting the early attention of Secretary Robert Finch
himself. What he says-and more, what he does-will go far toward en-
abling the scienti,fic community to gauge his ultimate stand in the
political conflicts raging within the Nixon Adminis- tration, and
to make thei,r organizational Nand personal decisions
accordingly.
While HEW has some 100,000 staff employees, Science was
not,concerned with fihese. lts investigation was limited to the
advisory groups, which draw on outside scientists for counsel.
These groups are largely composed of scien- tists not emploved by
bhe government. They are custom- arily recruited for a few days a
year at a fee of, usually, $50 a day plus expenses, practically
always on nonsensi-
- tive, nonsmrity mattens. Why such people should be so rigidly
screened is understandable only on the hypothesis that since it is
not a defense agency, HEW is so harried by fear of Congressional
budget cuts, in reprisal for re- fusal to continue zealous
engagement in the witch hunt, that it will do almost anything to
avoid suspicion.
But this defensive posture entails two consequences which should
concern Secretary Finch and his top sub- ordinates. One is that
debarments on security or suit- ability grounds may deprive the
department of assistance from the men best qualified. The other
effect concerns the scientists themselves. If you havent been
)asked to be on one of these groups, one sctentist noted, It looks
as if you havent made it in your field.
When questioned by Science, Secretary Finch said that he was
looking into the matter of security and suitability checks for HEW
advisory groups. But he must do more than look; if he does not act,
inertia will continue to rule in the lower reaches of the
bureaucpacy. One HEW of- ficial remarked: Most officials take the
course of least resistance; we dont have enough people with guts in
gov-
THE NATION/JUIY 28, 1969
ernnent. A former head of the National Institute dl Mental
Health feels that many people In government m scared all the time.
They are afraid that if they protcst the security system, the
secu,riity people may stam to won- der about them.
Of course, Science concludes, with some display of interest from
Secretary Finch or from the White House, the whole system of swwity
checks for partltime advisers in nonsensitive areas could be
thoroughly reviewed and revised. If this were done at the
initiative of the present occupant of the White House, it would be
something of a miracle, bat perhaps Mr. Finch can steer one of Mr.
Nixons ztgzags in ,the right direction.
The Loss of Mboya A few weeks after the murder of Tom Mboya on
a
street in Nambi, world opinion seems it0 be gravitating to the
opinion that the deed was a poht~cal assassination brought about by
strains within Kenya. It is know^ that Mboya himself, who two years
ago was fired upon by a sentry (officially declared deranged)
stationed to guaia his house, believed that developments in Kenya
inoreakd his personal danger. According to The New York Tim8, on
his last trip to Amerioa he told friends here that the general
elections planned by President Kenyatta for lator in the year would
inevitably call upon hi,m, 0s secretary general of the Presidents
party, io play a leading role, and thsat his enemies would be
spurred to silence him. And on a plrane ret,wning to Africa, he
wrote to one d these friends, saying that he had determimd to hire
the body- guard his American wellwishers had been urgimg on
him.
One thing that hlis foes held against him was that Mboya liked
and was table to communicate wilth Ameri- cans. And another thing
was that he had moved out of the tribal context that stdl thwarts
African development tn all the new states south of the Sahara, and
stood as a leader of his natlon. As the New Statesman remarked
recently, the fact that he had no tribal base was at once his
greatest polltical weakness and his greatwt potential contribution
to Kenya. Mboya rose to prominence in a highly contemporary
m,anner: hmis support from the skmt came from the detribalized
workers and unemployed of the cities, Nairobi and Mombasa, and he
acted for them as a modem trade union politxian, educating thein,
the New Statesman continues, in nationalist politics,
Tribalism is a sentiment of great emotional power- indeed
emotion is the essence of its power-and bow may well have spumed it
at the cost of hu life. Whether or not *hat was the reason, and
whether or not we eves know the reason, it is clear that Kenpa, as
well as the rest of Africa and indeed the international community,
has suf- fered a loss it cannot easlly overcome. Mboya was prob-
ably admired more widely than he was beloved-he never minced words
mover whlat he saw as the problems ahead,
-and he never tailored his words to the expectations of his
audience. He wrote recently in The New York Times Magazine that
whereas there were many similarities be- tween the African and
black Amerlcan struggles f o r polit-
ap
-
icd and euonom,ic freedom, black Amerioam sihould not hope to
flnd an escape for the problems stdl confrontlng them in any back
to ABlca movement, m fact or m spirit. He was a very modern man, of
whom Mrioa has too bw; and he was a very stnaightforward political
lead- er, of whom the world has too few.
More Fat for the Germans In ( a n innocuous story (buried on the
back pages of
most local newspapers), the Associated Press recently in-
dioated that West Germany would cover about 80 per cent of #&he
cost of matntainmg U S . forces in Germany for the next two years,
leaving but a mmimal dram on the U.S. balance of payments. As rts
part of the bargain, West Germany will buy a b u t $295 mdlion m
U.S. goods &d smv~ces (presumlably instruments of war). The
agree- ment hather provldes that Bsonn will lend the United States
an additional $760 milllon per year.
And is thk supposed to reimburse the American Bax- payers for
money spent on military forces in Ger,many? We spend bd1,nons m
Germany on mllltary installations, and the Germans kindly agree to
lend us funds! Mean- Whil,e the German economy becomes stronger,
and the German mark among the strongest cjull;rencles in the
world.
By continuing this wasteful policy, the American Gov- m e n t
adds to the German cotfers while mismg taxes at home. WorGt d all,
borrowing abroad in order to spend abroad stimulates idlation, land
Amencans wlll pay dwbly for this govement folly.
NEW POLITICS
The Resistance For a long time, almost the only effectlve
COngreSSiOnd
opposition to the Uetnamese War was furnished by Sena- tors
Gruening and Morse, who simply refused to approve the money. Deaf
to the argument that they were letting the boys down, they voted no
on the apprOpriatlOn bills. They knew how fraudulent ahat argument
was. There is always enoqgh miaterial in the pipe line to sup- port
combat aotivltles, whether defensive or offenswe, for an indefinite
period.
Now that Gruenmg land Morse, to the countrys loss, are no longer
in the Senate, others have adopted Oheir courageous tactx, and in
far greater numbers. On July 9, forty-nme Representatives voted
against the Supplemental Approprlatlon bdl, which not only
contatned funds for Vietnam but increased the amount. These
forty-nine oast negative votes, despite the fact h t the b,dl
provided funds for domestic purposes to which they had no ob-
jection.
The overrldmg objective was to show disapproval of the war in
the most emphattc terms .available t o a member of Congress. The
best people in the Holuse are on that roll of honor Brown, Burton
land Edwards of California, Mrs. Ghlsholm, Conyers, Dlggs,
Farbstem, Kastenmeler, Ottinger, Podell, Rosenthal, Ryan, Saylor,
Scheuer among them. One may hope they wdl be joined by a still
greater number who will vote against any appropr