Volume 6 - Issue 1

Volume six. number one/October 30. 1972

U.S. Postage Non Profit Org.

Paid New Haven, Conn.

Permit No. 1S4

A CLEAR GUIDE TO A MESSY AFFAIR

Volume six, number one October 30, 1972

In Com ment

2/The New Journal/October 30, 1972

CALL THEM ALL ISHMAEL Contents In Comment: Call Them All Ishmael 3 A Clear Guide to a Messy Affair

Dr. Bruno Bettelheim may be the most controversial psychiatrist in America today. His radical on treating autistic children, ideas 6 "Who here has enough trust in which he has implemented for Lucky Pierre to give ten cents almost thirty years as Director of for a paper bag?" the Sonia Shankman Orthogenic School in Chicago, have earned 9 The Dahl Report Was Not the First him lavish praise as well as prompted critics to nickname him 10 Fulbright's Circle "Dr. No," "Counterspock," and "Dr. Brutalheim." Moreover, 14 Spring Bombs, Spring Thunder while some liberal professional In Comment (Continued) colleagues cringe at his belief that extreme student activists are menEditors: tally ill, many conservative leaders Ronald Roel have been rushing him to the Joel Krieger platform.

In that tradition late last ,Publisher: month, Yale's Lux et Veritas James A. Lawrence invited Bettelheim to speak in New Haven. During'.dinner befor~ the Associate Editors: address, he applied his "common Gary Friedman sense" approach in psychology to Thomas Milch the controversy over Mory's membership policies. After the aspiring Photography Editor: lawyers present had analyzed the James Karageorge legal points at issue, Bettelheim concluded the discussion with the Design: offhand remark, "Well, it's nice Deena Nelson for the men to have a place to get David Weingarten together."

Greg Harris, Director of Lux Business Manager: et Veritas, introduced Bettelheim Brian Raub to an audience that filled 263 Street Hall. The 69-year-old Contributing Editors: psychiatrist was born in Vienna, George Kannar imprisoned by the Nazis in Jonathan Marks Buchenwald and Dachau, and Steven Weismar came to the United States in 1939.

Daniel Yergin The speech received sustained applause. Excerpts follow.

believes to struggle actively and vigorously for their autonomy, they destroy it in fact as radically as their counterparts who withdraw into solipsistic isolation. ·How much they are brothers under the skin could be seen, for example, in how easily they made common cause, for example, in Chicago during the democratic convention, as on so many other occasions.

In my own work with a small number of extreme student activists-as long as they find easy discharge for their inner pressures through their acting out, and can fool themselves that they have escaped their desperate loneliness through the admiration of their own crowd, they are not likely to subject themselves to the rigorous examination of their inner motives which is implied in psychoanalytic work--as soon as they began to take stock of themselves, instead of acting out, they sunk into deep depression.

Revolt had indeed berm their substitute for pistol and bail, and seeing them in this dE"ep depression, in their feeling of hopeless isolation, feeling of utter worthlessness and despair, one cannot help feeling that, at the time, they may have been better off revolting, though society certainly was not.

So why do I not let them go on with their revolt? Because of their own choice. Once they have taken a first good look at themselves and their ~otives, not a single one in my ~xpenence wanted to get back to their revolt, because they by then knew that it did not offer them a way "Call me Ishmael," that is how THIRD CLASS PERMIT: to the other, and this is what they Mo by Dick begins.

This makes clear Third Class postage PAID in New despe~ately lo_nged for. The immensity that Ishmael was not his true name· Haven, Conn. The New Journal of therr desparr of ever reaching the that his true name was of no mean-' is published by The New Journal other is symbolized by their feeling ing ~cause he had no true identity, at Yale, Inc., 3432 Yale Station, and 1t sets the stage for a novel which that they can reach him only by imt NewHaven,Conn.06520,and having to destroy the entire world. is the story of the struggle for is printed at Trumbull Printing Only wh~n the establishment is brought gaining an identity. · But "Call me Co. in Trumbull, Conn. Published down, Wlll they be able, so they believe Ishmael" told much more at a time tri-weekly during the academic to gain access to the other. Only if ' when everybody was familiar with year, and distributed free to the they realize that through their revolt the Bible and its stories.

About Yale community. For all others, they cannot reach the other do they Ishmael, the Bible tells "his hand subscriptions are $5.00 per year. become accessible to ~atment. will be against every man and every On~ student activist participated in man's hand against him." He is The New Journal copyright 1972 all demonstrations he could, because the outsider par excellence. by the New Journal at Yale, Inc., while they lasted it gave him a a non-profit corporation.

I cannot offer you any deeper temporary feeling of being together insight in the origin of student with others, thus escaping his desperate Opinions expressed in articles revolt than that contained in loneliness and isolation. That is why are those of the author.

Melville's description of Ishmael's h~ pressed for as many and as prostate of mind. As you know from tracted demonstrations and sit-ins as During the past few years Yale your own experience, all too many he could. All he knew was that these seems to haue misplaced its penchant of our late adol~cents select to use activities were extremely important for critical reflection. Part of the ~e way out of plStol and ball, that and rewarding to him and because of 15 try to evade and escape what to problem lies with what is written. this he was convinced that the causes We notice the Lit has folded. The them is an unbearable inner conthey were about were of greatest merit News remains the oldest college flict by dropping out, today ever more Then one day, on one of these marche; daily. Things once again seem of~n through the slow suicide of they were told each one should hold ' slow around here. The New JDurnal usmg LSD or .s~. And even if somebody's hand. It so happened that will work to draw attention back they escape kilhng themselves, they he found himself without anybody to those matters whose consideradestroy th.emselves as aut:onomous holding his. Recalling it in therapy, tion was once commonplace: hum~ bem.gs by embra~mg a with tears he said, "No one held mind." education at Yale, the role of the delusional life of non-existence.

He continued to participate in militant University, the relationship of activities simply because he did not Yale to New Haven, life in the Others turn their inner violence community. The Journal returns against the outside world, "step out in an attempt to counter the into the street" in Melville's words, monotony of the mainstream and as if he had foreseen our street to challenge facile analysis and demonstrations; and provoke adult creative non-reporting. Join us father figures who mean nothing to every three weeks, and debate us on them as persons, again as if he had and off the page. foreseen the adolescent propensity for confrontations for confrontation's sake. While this. second group Joel Krieger

~ ~ls­ +\'\4 4 l<t ')~ -l~·,f

know of any other way to satisfy his longing for being close to somebody, for somebody holding him by the hand. Still, after this experience hE' also began to take drugs to escape his misery. A relative who had similar experiences ~d had been helped by psychoanalysiS encouraged him to do likewise and he decided to give it a try ....

The political activities of such persons permit them to escape a complete paranoid break with reality. By interpreting reality in line with their paranoid delusions, they are able to remain in touch with at least some isolated part of the aspects of reality, while the support and admiration they find for their daring attack on authority symbols among their followers is another, though most tenuous, contact with reality. This is why the first mentioned student could seek treatment when he lost this contact when nobody was taking hold of his hand.

Thus embracing extreme positions is actually an ego defensive operation,

which succeeds because the rage and violence drains off aggression, which otherwise would destroy whatever paranoid defenses remained working.

The quasi or outright delusional quality of th~ir beliefs, the inaccessibility to debate while loudly complaining that nobody listens to them, the oversimplification of issues, and the preoccupation with violence and destruction (the feared destruction of themselves, and the readiness to embrace ideas of the destruction of their enemies) combined with an absence or emotional paucity and flatness of human relations are typical for these persons. Thus the revolt is a defense against full fledged paranoia, or against being uncontrollably swept into anonymous homicide, or into suicide. It is usually the result of the depressive and compulsive obsessive defenses having failed, which permitted these students to maintain themselves through most of their high school or college years. Therefore in treatment these defenses have to be reestablished before, in further treatment, they can be replaced by more ego correct defenses.

Thus for them, too, the only constructive solution is Melville's: that only through a struggle that tests our existence to the very core can such :· person find his identity.

The moral struggle, the struggle against the elements, the struggle with good and evil that stand in the center of Melville's novel, is in our work replaced by the struggle for that self-discovery which goes on in psychoanalytic treatment. But, as we all know, if the avenues for such struggle to find oneself are closed, then the alternatives of dropping out or of violent revolt become very tempting. •

.

•

3/The New Journal/October 30, 1972

A CLEAR GU ID E TO A MESSY AFFAIR

by Gary Friedman and Stuart Rohrer In a year when Yale was sweating out its worst financial crisis in memory, the University community was staggered in early September by the revelation that the predicted operating deficit of $5.75 million for 1971-72 had missed the mark by more than four and a half million dollars. The discrepancy between the predicted deficit and the actual $1.2 million figure made news across the nation, disturbed and infuriated many faculty and administrators, and upset the operations of several key planning committees charged with producing remedies for Yale's financial ills.

The deficit issue, with prodding from news reports, exploded into a lively controversy, apparently fraught with internal politics, laced with bitter feelings, and confused with reckless accusations.

The controversy seemed to threaten the credibility of the Brewster Administration and cast suspicion on the competence of University Treasurer John Ecklund. It even raised eyebrows among the Fellows of ~he Yale Corporation.

The initial fires of the controversy have calmed enough to permit a more clear-headed assessment of the deficit situation. The report of the Provost on the reasons for the miscalculation has found no single cause for the miscalculated deficit, but rather a string of small causes that added up to produce the discrepancy. Yet the deficit error has had a profound effect on the short term planning of the University, and additional results that may not be known for some time.

1 The recent history of Yale 's financiaJ picture begins in 1965, when computer technology entered the process. At about the same time, a new administration and financial team was assembling--Kingman Brewster had assumed the Presidency a year earl ier; John Ecklund, the University Treasurer, and Robert O'Connor, the Budget Director, moved in a few years later. At this time, unfortunately, money became a problem. And so began a new era in the University's history. Yale, the proud University that had recently provided waiters and maids for its students, now found itself with a budget deficit. Between 1967 and 1970 the annual deficit climbed from $300,000 to an imposing $1.8 million.

Gary Friedman is an Associate Editor of The New Journal.

Stuart Rohrer is a junior in Calhoun College. He has contributed to the Alumni Magazine and worked as a summer intern for Scientific American.

At first, the financial crisis in higher education was less threatening at Yale than at many other Universities, but the ultimate impact of growing budget deficit would prove equally fatal. Neither new computers nor skilled budget officials could alter the stark fact that a budget deficit must be made up out of the .University's endowment, t he source which provides yale with 25 per cer\t ot her annuaJ mcome ana holds the key to her future growth and financial stability. Depleting the endowment necessarily results in irrevocable loss of future income.

In December, 1970, John Ecklund cast an understandably gloomy eye to the future, and predicted that Yale's deficit would be $8 million in 1971-2 if current practices continues unaltered. Ecklund's forecast was not a warning estimated off the top of his head. Although they had just wrapped up the '69-'70 fiscal year, and were in the midst of '70-'71, University officials were mired in the long process of constructing the '71-'72 budget.

Their deadline was May, 1971, at which time the Yale Corporation would approve their proposed budget.

By late summer 1970, O'Connor and his staff of seven were already making income and.expenditure estimates for the 1971-72 budget.

The Treasurer makes the official pronouncements and gets wqat little publicity there generally is in that department, but the official at the heart of the budgetary process is O'Connor. He spoke to Alumni Fund officers and fund-raisers, examined the Endowment and possible government funds , and made reasonable projections based on his research and experience. He also examined the University's current cos~ set-up, spoke to personnel officials about their needs, and thus began formulating a notion of possible expenses.

Estimating endowment income is impossible , for that would require predicting the performance of the stock market in the year ahead. How then does the University arrive at a budget figure?

As Ecklund observes, "This turns out to be the simplest thing

of all," and what makes it simple is the "University Equation." In esst:nce, the University decides before the year begins how much it will spend from endowment income, and any errors in estimation are taken into account in the following year's allowance.

With the preliminary work completed, a slew of officials entered the process in the form of the University Budget Committee.

Its members included the Provost, the Associate Provost, the

,,, nl

H

t

41f I

tl" I " ,..,, .. ,~,

-

h4."' J 1\.',h\tt\. I

-

4/The New Journal/October 30, 1972 Treasurer, the Comptroller, sometimes President Brewster, and O'Connor, who is the ¡Committee's chief staff officer.

'They reviewed the initial findings and made their own criticisms and emendations. In November, 1970, they approved the broad outlines of the proposed University budget, at which time the various deans and operating officers were given guidelines for preparing their specific budgets.

legally restricted in one way or another to certain specific usesand paying for a budget deficit is not among them. In the last six years, $8 million of the Expendible Endowment has gone toward meeting annual deficits. It becomes clear that rising budget deficits will not only lessen Yale's future income, but soon deplete this Endowment, and leave Yale in an awkward and unfortunate financial position.

Throughout the winter of 1970 O'Connor held meetings on each one of Yale's 400 budgets, reviewing with each official the estimates for his particular budget. Some sessions lasted only ten or fifteen minutes, but some of the more complicated budgets--

The $5.7 million figure included some $1.8 million in contingency funds, the largest of which was $750,000 for "uncontrollable variances." What were the contingency funds for? No one knew, but everyone felt sure that, given the dismal financial conditions, the money would be needed to cover expenses they had not foreseen. The contingency funds thus reflected the pessimism engendered by the recent deficit years, as well as the necessarily uncertain nature of budget predictions.

University Treasurer John Ecklund: who said he was to blame ?

like that for the History Department-required a .day of examination.

O'Connor's role was far more than that of collating budgets from the numerous operating departments.

Often he did not accept the estimates that he scrutinized and became responsible for making reasonable corrections.

In January 1971 , an interim report was presented to the Corporation, and the deficit was estimated at $6.5 million. A final report was made in May , and as a result of various favorable budget decisions, the estimated deficit was reduced to $5.7 million, the figure approved by the Yale Corporation. The deficit is simply the arithmetic difference between projected income and projected expenses. The Corporation was willing to countenance a deficit for the next sever.a1 years, in the expectation that implementation of certain policy decisions would create a balanced budget by '75-'76.

But Yale can not absorb yearly deficits for very long. Although a $650 million endowment cushion seems ample, in fact only $37 million--the University Unrestricted Expendable Endowment (UUEE)can be used to make up a deficit.

The remaining millions are

Essentially, the budget is a dynamic document. Ecklund revised his estimate twice, first in January, 1972, when he announced to the Corporation a new deficit estimate of $5.1 million, with a $1.4 million figure for unspent contingency funds. This more optimistic prediction was based on the occurrence of events that could not have been foreseen earlier and on positive actions taken during the year to alleviate the crisis. In May, 1972, Ecklund made a second estimate of $4.6 million, with $1 million in contingency funds still unspent.

So at this point the estimated absolute deficit was $3.6 million.

2 Sometime in late August 1972, the Budget Office calculated the actual University operating deficit .. at $1.2 million. The figure was reported to President Brewster shortly afterward. In his letter to

Prouost Richard Cooper: he explained it all.

the Fellows of the Yale Cor{1oration September 8, Brewster wrote: With mixed emotions I recently received surprising news from the Treasurer's Office. Instead of the five million seven hundred thousand dollar deficit for.: 1971-72 which was approved a year ago last June by the Corporation, the actual figure is approximately 011e million dollars.

Brewster's letter went on to praise Yale administrators for their work in implementing budget cuts around the University. But he also expressed displeasure at the discrepancy between the predicted and actual budgets: "The surprising divergence of estimates and performance does pose a danger that no future forecasts will be believed; and that there will be continued skepbcism about the adequacy ot the information about where we stand financially at any given time."

In response to that " danger" and possible "skepticism " Brewster appointed Provost Richard N. Cooper to undertake an investigation of the deficit discrepancy. He also reported the deficit surprise to the Summer Study Committee chaired by Professors Blum and Pelikan. The Study Committee had been considering possible ways to balance the University budget through calendar reform and cuts in the academic and non-academic sides of the University. Now they had to revise their suggestions to meet the implications of the deficit revelation.

Even if the Treasurer's Office revised its estimate in May 1972 to $4.6 million with an extra million in unused contingencies, the question remains: what caused the discrepancy between the May figures and the actual deficit? This is one of the matters Provost Cooper discussed in a report to the President dated October 9. His report suggested that "the discrepancy between budgeted and actual results for 1971-72 was ¡due to a wide variety of factors, each of which requires its own t!Xplanation, rather than to any single factor."

Budget Director U '()onrtor: "We could be more on top of things."

'

5/The New Journal /October 30, 1972 In this way the Provost's Report attributed the discrepancy both to unforeseen changes in the operating budget, and to a pessimistic bias in projection due to past economic conditions. But what caused these unforeseen changes? Why weren't they caught and reported earlier?

t-

One reason is the University's cash-accounting system, an accounting method used by most universities because most · universities have tended to use it.

According to Comptroller Albert Buesking, the man second-incommand to Ecklund, that is the only reason Yale uses the cashaccounting rather than the accrual accounting system, favored by most large businesses.

In cash-accounting, a debt becomes fiscally real only when there is a cash outlay to pay it, not when the debt is incurred.

Until a bill is paid , Yale's central budgeting department does not even know it exists. Thus the University's books may present a deceptive picture of financial health only because a backlog of paperwor k in various departments has prevented certain bills from being paid.

In the accrual system, a debt is recor ded as soon as it is

Later, however, Blum said that the committee did not use the $5.7 million figure as a "hard" figure, but rather as an estimate of the magnitude of the problem.

On September 6, as the committee In one respect the smaller-thancalendar proposal became the main was putting the final touches on its expected deficit of $1.2 million is thrust of the committee's work as report, hoping to release it the next cause for guarded optimism about they labored to come up with a plan week, Brewster reported the actual the present state of the University's ·to balance the University budget by qeficit figure to them. Blum, seeing finances. The magnitude of the the 1975-76 academic year. that his summer's work would need current financial emergency, thought The Summer Study Committee was extensive revisions in light of the to be in the $6 million deficit range, created in May 1972 in the course of actual deficit, adjourned the committee actually falls into the $1 million faculty deliberations on th e extended until the Provost's report was range and, as Brewster wrote in his semester calendar proposal included released, and prepared to rewrite his letter to the Fellows of the Yale as an appen~ix to the report of the proposals using the more accurate Corporation, "this is a welcome Study Group on Yale College, the figures. relief from the mounting deficits so-called Dahl report. According to The most important suggestion which exceeded budget estimates Robert Dahl, Sterling Professor of to be made in the Blum report was the for the past three years. It also Political Science, the faculty objected recommendation for acchange in the speaks well for the austerity which University calendar that would allow has been accepted by academic and not only to the calendar proposal, but to "the speed with :which the more extensive use of Yale's management administrators." ~ahl ~~port had. been pushed upon facilities, therefore increasing income . em. Accordmgly, after the from tuition without drastically As Cooper reported to the faculty had debated !he extended increasing undergraduate enrollment.

President in his explanation of the semester plan exte~stvely and nearly The committee reportedly prefers deficit discrepancy, there is the exhausted the P~hamentary system, a trimester system that would require possibility that the same conservthe Blum c~mrmttee was commissioned each student to take one summer and ative estimations included in the ~m M~y 4 w1th a purpose. nearly seven fall or spnn~ terms during a 1971-72 budget projection may 1dent1cal to that of the d1sputed four-year period . cause some relief for the 1972-73 Dahl report. budget as well, despite the fact The calendar issue has been a longthat the fortuitous events which Officially, the Blum committee debated and long-delayed issue with in large part lowered the 1971-72 based its consid erations on the $5.~/ the facu lty, and the surprising deficit deficit may not recur. Still, the million deficit projection given by miscalculation will only increase Provost emphasized that the University officials. this delay. Blum still hopes to have University is by no means free of (continued on page 17) financial difficulties. The magnitude of the financial crisis is perhaps less than expected, but the fact remains that Yale must balance its budget if it is to survive in the years ahead.

3

incurred. The organization has an accurate picture of its true financial condition all the time. According to Buesking, discussions have been under way for several years about how to change Yale's accounting to the accrual system, and that ultimately the University will make the switch. At the October 14 Corporation meeting, the Trustees urged the University to institute those changes. This Apart from the significance of reform will help University officials the actual deficit figure on Yale's keep better track of the actual finances, however, the error in the course of expenditures and income estimation of the deficit has caused throughout the year. delays in the crucial process of In any case, how accurate can planning for Yale's future. The most University budget estimates be? immediate effect of the error "No one expects on-target foreregistered on the Blum-Pelikan casting" a year in advance of a Summer Study Committee, wh\ch was $130 million budget, admits created by the facufty to "consider Kingman Brewster, but hardly any om the future of Yale University as a understood just how tentative the whole ... (and) to report to the $5.7 million figure actually could Faculty on possible ways in which be. The financial officials knew Yale may achieve and maintain that the figure was, in effect, only financial stability and excellence a best first guess, even though it in scholarship and undergraduate was the approved "official figure," and graduate teaching over the next rendered imprecise by a host of genera.tion." In other words, the Blum factors. comrmttee was to suggest possible The Cooper Report was necessary ways of balancing the University to detail such factors, because they budget. had not been explained at the appropriate time--when the figure was announced. Ecklund later On that same day President. pointed out that government met with several members of Brewster budgets consider a five per cent what was then called the University margin of error acceptable, and that Committee, to tell them he Calendar the Yale estimate was only off by wanted a calendar proposal ready for $4.5 million out of $130 million. faculty consideration by the fall of But the more relevant question is 1972. Brewster reasoned that a whether ?I n?t the ,University new calendar system was one ljl.Ige commumty-~cludmg Brewster--under- step toward generat.ing increased stood the estimate was so tentatuition revenues to meet Yale's tive. Their reaction indicates rmancial needs. The University Calendar Committee soon merged that. they did not, and that implies a pnor lack of communication with the Blum committee, and the between Yale's budgetary officials enlarged group proceeded with its and the rest of the community. study over the summer. The

TRAVELERS OVERSEAS FREIGHT FORWARDERS

WE SPECIALIZE IN WORLDWIDE MOVIN TRUNKS, BAGGAGE, SUITCASES, PERSONAL & HOUSEHOLD EFFE<:n WE WILL GLADlY GIVE YOU A COMPLfTE QUOTE • Daily Service To And From New York • Containerization • Door To Door Service • Agents To Every Port In The World • FMC license No. 125 1

• • • •

Preliminary Puking Crating Marine Insurance Custom Clearance

For Your Shipping Problems WL NEW HAVEN

776-3534

We Will Be Happy to Assist You FREE BROCHURES MAILED ON REQUEST

235 WOOSTER ST., NEW HAVEN, CONNECTICUT

6/The New Journal/ October 30, 1972

'WHOHEREHASENOUGH TRUST IN LUCKY PIERRE TO GIVE TEN CENTS FOR A PAPER BAG?"

Story by Ronald Roel Photos by Jim Karageorge

Sunday morning, when the stars are still clear above Boulevard St., ¡Lucky Pierre-the king of the flea market--begins to bring all the week's work together. About 6:45, he parks his van in the dirt lot behind the Big Buy Food Center and walks over to the Riverside Cafe to pick up three coffees, regular. Back at booth 505, Lucky Pierre's underlings, John and Eddie, pile his merchandise on a counter assembled from ping-pong tables and saw horses.

Wigs, pantihose, magnetic hair nets, foam cushion rollers, lipsticks, colored yarns, and pony tail holders. John is a little young so Pierre will have to explain that the bags for the merchandise must be an arm's length from the counter where he can grab them without looking or breaking the stride of his sales pitch. Everything must be at Pierre's fingertips; and today, when Lucky Pierre is pushing Pro tufted toothbrushes for a quarter a piece, he will always have a ready sample in his back pocket.

Sometimes the family gets into food fights with the boys selling tomatoes--five pounds for a dollar; but most of these fights are provoked by one of Benny's boys who buys a pound of tomatoes and takes the first shots. Benny's boys are rarely suspected of provocation because they are usually selling bushels of Maggio Bell peppers and because Benny runs a respectable business. In fact, Benny ("Hey, what are you Two hours before Lucky Pierre saying back there") Rabinowitz opens up booth 505, the produce has been working the wholesale people--Benny's fruit and vegetable fruit and vegetable line for 40 boys, the Mascari Bros. wholesale years. He likes to work in a bananas, Charlie the chicken man, maroon sweater, white shirt and the melon, pumpkin and cantelope tie, and talk about the fLISt game gang--begin their five-to-five in the Bowl 58 years ago, when selling day. The Italians across from Harvard whalloped Yale.

While Benny is hawking twenty Benny always set up first: they oranges for a dollar, and Charlie like to gossip and joke while the chicken man is getting rid of waiting for dawn, sitting around a his weak, unsaleable chickens by barrel filled with burning crates flinging them in the lagoon for the and fruit boxes. As the Ill'St seagulls, the market swells with customers filter through the customers. By nine o'clock, the market, the young Italian son (who New Haven Plaza is crammed with probably is in line to inherit the several hundred cars. The morning family business) takes his station prices begin to stabilize: Benny, in front by the fancy peppers, who's got the best deals on peppers sweet com, and escarole. He and citruS. ttuits, forces the prices plants a cigaret behind his ear, down; the Italians keep the com puts on a red hat (a woolen at fifteen ears for a dollar. hat when it gets cooler) and begms his endless chatter-"Oh boy oh boy oh boy oh boy oh boy, we gaaaht em"--while the father in a blue sun hat barks "Beauuutiful!" and a relative finishes the conversation--"haaa! ta la Ia Ia Ia chaaa!"

7/The New Journal/October 30, 1972

On the far side of the market, Carmen is setting up across from the fat-faced boy who is selling his mother-in~law's bastmg !llaten als for a quarter of a "yaahd--it's a dollah-nineteen at Calgon's, I â&#x20AC;˘checked it last night." Carmen is a flea market professional, a ¡ grizzled man with small watery eyes and Tony and Lucille's pizza stains on his shirt. He sits at the center of his long booth, King Carmen, with his wife and two granddaughters selling sweaters and china on his left, a group of friends and relatives pushing furniture and plumbing equipment on his right.

"I'll give you fifty cents for this."

An old man points to a threaded steel pipe.

Two booths down fro m Lucky Pierre, h is ch ief u nderstudy, Eddie, is selling rings, earrings, bracelets, and h airpms. "Buy one, I give you one. Hurry up before my boss gets back." Lucky Pierre is not listening to Eddie, but watching a man named "Tiger." Pierre pulls a crumpled cigaret from his mouth, and waits a moment. Tiger is deciding whether to buy a watchband; Lucky Pierre has already decided.

"You see the label on the back?"

Pierre flips a leather watchband and shows the gold lettering: Speidel's.

"You recognize the name? It's the best."

"Well, what.do you want for it?"

"Three dollars."

Carmen blinks. "It cosl me more than that. That's my life on the table, you know." Monkey wrenches, pipe fittings, washers, files, saws.

Carmen claims he is an ex-plumber who is t oo old to climb, and is stuck with fifteen years of tools in his garage.

"It ain't worth more than fifty cents."

"Christ, I can get it in the store for that much. "

..

" Just a minute, young man. This must be your first time here." He presses a hand on Tiger's shoulder that keeps him from leaving. Pierre is good with his hands; he knows how to control a man's arm, how to direct a woman's hand to the bracelet she wants. Lucky Pierre looks around, moves closer. "Give me a dollar for it," he mutters and shoves the watchband in Tiger's pocket. Tiger pulls it out, Pierre shoves it in, in and out it goes, Pierre saying, "Here, I want you to have it, I want you to be happy, am I allowed to make you happy?"

By the time he gets his change, Tiger is clutching the Speidel watchband like a little boy who is so pleased With his new toy that he is almost embarrassed.

Lucky Pierre slowly sips his coffee .

He chats with the woman selling clean junk, quality junk, lots of good junk, cheap. It's going to be a good day.

Ten o'clock is the time Lucky Pierre begins to click.

"All right, take it pop. Joey, get the man's money." Life is hard, explains Carmen .. He's been losing money in this business, people stealing left and right. This is the last year, he says, before he goes on social security. There are rumors around the flea market that Carmen sometimes finishes the day with four or five hundred dollars in his pocket. " Thank y ou sir," Joey says.

"Now, what else can I do you out of?"

" Here we go, here we go," Pierre starts off, "this is what I'm really going to do. Let me give something away." Pierre jumps on the counter and flings combs, scotch tape, key rings into the crowd.

"I don't care where I throw it; I am entitled to do what I want.

As I said before, my boss is in Florida and I'm here catching _a cold. He says, Pierre, advertise for. me, give it away, throw it away, go crazy." A crowd moves in.

"Now. Who here has enough trust in Lucky Pierre to give ten cents for a paper bag? It's absolutely empty, nothing but air."

He rips t h e bag in four p ieces and throws it in the air.

.. ' 8/The New Joll11lal/October 30, 1972

,.

"But, I promise you that before you leave, that bag will be full of cookies." Lucky Pierre stops, assesses the crowd. "Okay folks, close in now, I need ten bags to be¡ legal." Pierre begins to fill the cookie bags with his piles of cheap merchandise, hitting all the ~s with a few items.

"Okay, ladies and gentleman, how many here have the confidence to say, Pierre, I will give you a dollar and a half for this box?" The crowd watches the green and red box; no one raises his hand. Pierre stops and takes a breath. "Give me a will to go on, my friends, a teeny will to go on."

One man takes the chance. Pierre puts his hand on the man's shoulder: "Open it, young man and tell me if you're satisfied. Here it is, ladies and gentlemen, a $6.50 boy's shirt.

And I'll tell you what, here is your fifty cents back, I only want a dollar. That's for having confidence in Lucky Pierre. As I said, I go crazy giving things away. Here, open your bags, I'm going to full your cookie bags.

Here we go, here we go, here we absolutely go." â&#x20AC;˘

9 /The New Journal/October 30, 1972

THE DAHL REPORT WAS NOT THE FIRST

by Vicki C. Jackson

..,

Of the ten und~rgraduates present at a recent meeting of a residential college education committee, five were freshmen coerced into attending by their counselors. Discussion was strained. When the college Master asked, '¡'What would you like to learn that you cannot learn at Yale right now?" the freshmen as well as most of the upperclassmen had nothing to say. They were surprisingly incapable of dealing with a faculty member's suggestion that the broad politic.a l and educational implications of the college seminar program be considered.

Four years ago, at the inception of the Hall seminar program, such a display of disinterest would have been inconceivable. Student impatience with the subjects, methods, and processes of education at Yale complemented and drew strength from their anger and involvement with national political events.

But, earlier in the sixties, the world had been less turbulent, and Yale students had been less critical of their university. Educational decision-making was the domain of faculty committees which at most informally consulted student leaders. Curricular and programmatic changes added to the standard Yale program numerous "options," open to a select few, but genuine alternatives--courses of learning significantly diverse yet equally accessible and legitimate-were practically nonexistent.

Student desires for new learning situations, and doubts as to the concept of degree requirements, gave the word "alternative" an increasingly positive connotation.

Enthusiasm and critical thinking ran high; clarity of meaning suffered. For some, the cry for alternative meant that present educational, political, and social situations were so awful that any change represented a positive alternative. For others, the new alternative meant a new system of education based on different assumptions. And for some, "alternative" was in itself a system: education at Yale should consist of several equally legitimate and unique courses of learning available on a non-preferential basis to all students.

Student participation in University: governance became linked, emotionally if not logically, to the rising theme of the new alternative. The exclusion of Vicki Jackson, 1972, is a first year

law student and former member of the Yale College Teaching and Learning Committee.

affected parties from the formal decision-making proces~, students argued, led to failures and inadequacies in Yale 's education. The addition of the term "participation" completed the paradigm of reform, and participation, like alternative, lost its neutral meaning.

The emphasis placed on the positive nature and impact of alternatives and participation created an atmosphere which lasted from the mid-60's to 1970 and in which numerous, substantive changes occurred in Yale education.

Historically, two circumstances set the tone and parameters of educational reform at Yale. First, there has always been and still remains a distinctive Yale education whose very boundaries are suggested by the optional and exclusive nature of the special programs available.

Second, for most of Yale's history, the faculty has both formulated and initiated educational philosophy and change. Between 1884 and 1945, with much tinkering and swinging to extremes, the faculty evolved the three-part concept of a liberal arts education that prevailed unchanged until the 1960's and that even today is the basis of the standard Yale education.

Professor William Graham Sumner led the battle which resulted in Yale's reluctant surrender of a system of totally required course selection.

Beginning in 1884, Yalies could elect some of their courses, although group requirements were retained to prevent "utter chaos." Creation of the separate departments of study in the Reorganization fo 1919 lay the ground for the requirement of the t:iK<lergraduate major, formalized by the faculty in the early 1930's. By the end of the following decade the Course of Study Committee spoke for the faculty in describing the liberal arts education as a balance between breadth, concentration, and election.

In 1952 the national media hailed the Yale College faculty Report on General Education for its "revolutionary" British approach to American higher education. In seeking to increase the intellectual content of education and foster greater student independence, the report recommended a two-year period of guided independent work with neither classes exams nor grades. This proposal thre~tened ' to undermine the departmental authority and vitiate the power and control that the faculty exercised in specific courses. The proposal died in committee.

Ten years later, a faculty committee, appointed by the President to reevaluate the Common Freshman year program then in effect envisioned an innovative but less fundamental remaking of Yale. Nearly all their

proposals were adopted and the freshmen, physically isolated by their residence on the Old Campus had also previously been treated as a ' separate administrative unit within the University. Now, the separate freshman course book was discontinued and the position of Dean of Freshman ' was abolished. At the same time the position of college dean was established.

Beginning in the spring of 1965, a combination of rlsing studen"t -interest in educational issues and several sweeping policy changes made by the faculty generated a momentum that made it possible for radical change to take place. The Senior Advisory Board. an elected body of popular but apathetic and inefficient seniors, decided that a Board appointed by Administration and college officials and former S AB members would be more committed and hence more effective. The newly appointed Board soon had a hot issue on their hands when Yale refused to grant tenure to Richard Bernstein, a popular member of the philosophy department. Two weeks of student protest followed, including a 72-hour vigil in front of Woodbridge Hall.

Bernstein was not reappointed, but a committee, chaired by Professor Robert Dahl, was established to investigate teachiug and tenure at Yale.

As a result of the first Dahl report, which affirmed present standards of scholarship but suggested the setting of minimum standards of teaching competence for permanent appointments, parallel student and faculty committees on teaching were created. In addition, the faculty approved a proposal suggested by the SAB, providing for undergraduate advisory committees on curriculum within the departments.

Also in 1965, before the SAB had prepared a formal report on the subject, the Yale faculty assumed the initiative and overturned the system of group distributional requirements in effect since the first decade of the century. Distressed by undue emphasis on distribution at the expense of specialization, and disturbed by the poor quality of science courses offered to non-s<'¡;mtists, Dean Georges May requested that the Co~ of Study Committee and an informal group of science professors reevaluate distributional requirements. After consulting with the SAB, the Course of Study Committee-recommended the abandonment of all subject matter requirements and thPir replacement with the guidelines still in use. The support of prestigious faculty for the proposal guaranteed its adoption.

During the following year, the Course of Study Committee under some pressure from students and the SAB, reevaluated grades at Yale. (continued on page 16)

..

,.

10/The New Journal/October 30, 197.2

FULBRIGHT'S CIRCLE

11/The New Journal/October 30, 1972

by Daniel Y ergin "Bill Fulbright has suffered for some time from a Cassandra complex," said a Senatorial colleague of the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. With reason enough, for Fulbright has spent more than a decade warning of the dangers that come from the arrogance of power.

In 1961 he advised John Kennedy against the Bay of Pigs invasion.

Throughout 1965 and 1966 he warned Lyndon Johnson not to escalate the Vietnam War--and was rewarded with whispered rumors about his mental balance.

But on one occasion, while Fulbright's advice was good, his prophecy was wrong. One pleasant spring afternoon in 1969, he went to the White House for an amiable two-hour discussion with Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger. He respectfully suggested to the President that the 1968 election had given him a mandate to seek a compromise in Vietnam, withdraw American troops, and leave Vietnam's internal problems to the Vietnamese.

He cautioned against confusing US interests with those of the Saigon regime, and warned against ~e "siren song" of those Amencan strategists who wanted to tum the last corner--only "to lure the United States into a deeper and more devastating war." And he advised, urged, even pleaded, that the President act before he became a prisoner of events.

Then came the pleasant prophecy.

"U you stop the war," he said, "which is what people expect, you can do almost anything else and be re-elected.

The people will be that grateful to you."

The President smiled. A Nixon smile. "That's what I'm going to do."

Nixon did not follow Fulbright's advice. He did not end the war; indeed, he has made it even more terrible. Yet, like a matinee magician, he has given the appearance of peace, and that has been enough to win the people's gratitude in this quirky political year.

Meanwhile, President-Chairman relations have fallen to just about where they were under Johnson, below freezing.

"Except in the line of official duty," said Fulbright with some acidity, "he doesn't see me now."

"America may be coming to the close of a circle," Fulbright recently wrote. Certainly Fulbright has closed his quarter-century circle--from the powerless critic to powerful insider to powerless critic. As chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee he in fact wields

Daniel Yergin, Class of 1968, was a founding-editor of The New Journal. He is currently writing a Ph. D. thesis for Cambridge University on the early years of the Cold War. He has contributed to the New York Times Magazine, New York Magazine, and

the Yale Review.

only influence, not power; yet despite an almost sure rank among history's greatest Senators, his influence is at its lowest ebb. It is evident in his manner. He tires more easily, shows boredom, and is more openly irritated.

Indeed, Fulbright is a lonely, isolated figure, respected but not popular in his chamber. Intellectually, he is a Woodrow Wilson, alive and well in a world of Cold Warriors and would-be Metternichs. Yet--and this is his paradox--long-time observers think that he has never been more creative, that never has he spoken with greater urgency.

Though today Fulbright may sound like a Cassandra, there is also something of the converted sinner about him. The label 'dove' is out-of-date. He has gone through a transformation so thorough that he rejects the entire course of postwar US foreign policy, and thus rejects much of his own past. Men do not normally change their ideas in their 60's, but Fulbright now operates on a new set of assumptions, fundamentally different from those which guided him ten years ago.

To fathom the Senator from Arkansas, however, is no easy thing.

He is a complicated man, marked by contradictions on every level--a searing sarcasm and a courtly manner; long digressions on points that interest him in hearings, and yet impatience and even condescension toward those whom he considers dim; intense curiosity and a low boredom threshold; becoming modesty and a peacock's pride; a deep and wide-ranging intellect and yet a peevish tum; humanitarianism on a global scale and a slim civil rights record; fierce bursts of energy and periods of moodiness, bordering on depression; a sometimes wry, sometimes mocking cynicism and yet high-flying idealism; conservatism about the limits of human capabilities yet utopianism about international organization. And finally, arrogance and self doubt.

He evokes wildly contradictory responses in people. One of Johnson's State Department people: "Fulbright is an embittered, almost wild man, without a rudder." Stuart Symington: "Courage is part of the man's character." A former National Security Council member: "You can fault him for a number of things-tactical judgment, ego, absorption in trivia--but I doubt you could tmd a more gifted man to run any institution in our government!' A fellow Senator: "Fulbright is sometimes his own worst enemy."

Yet one finds a consistent evolution in his thought, begirming with the sober critiques in Old Myths and New Realities in 1964 and The Arrogance of Power in 1966, and culminating in a startling new book called The Crippled Giant. It is startling because it amounts to an obituaiy for the Cold War, a complef.e rejection of the conventional wisdom. Fulbright declares that the United States must share with the Soviet Union some apportionment of blame for the Cold War.

"Change," he writes, "has come not from wisdom but from disaster." He suggests that the American public and its leaders, including one J. William .Fulbright, have gotten it wrong, not completely perhaps, but wrong enough to make way for Vietnam and other potential disasters. We misunderstood the men--and the minds of the men--in Moscow, Peking and Indochina.

We decided without real evidence that they were part of a giant international revolutionary conspiracy, and failed to observe that they were also nationalists. We set off on a universal crusade, all too often military in form, called "containment."

"I suspect too,, the Senator writes, "if Khrushchev and Mao and Ho had not had the name of 'Communist,' we might have recognized them as men we could respect: tough and sometimes ruthless, but patriots nonetheless, committed to the well-being of their own people." Certainly, we have accepted lesser lights like Franco, Salazar, Yayha Khan, the Greek Colonels and numerous dim Latin American luminaries into the firmament of the Free World.

To reach the Senator, you pass through an outer office decorated with photographs of Fulbright and Johnson in earnest conversation, with inked captions by LBJ in chronological order: "To J. William Fulbright, than whom there is no better"; "To Bill Fulbright, who listens--maybeperhaps"; "To Bill. I can see I haven't been very persuasive." An aide later explained that Fulbright has probably forgotten the photos are there.

Then down a corridor lined with cartoon originals until, at last, into his office-the Senator, occasionally sipping ice water and smoking cigarettes, began talking about the evolution of his ideas. The blinds were drawn in such a way that the shadows fell across Fulbright, reminding you of a country lawyer's office on Main Street on a warm, lazy afternoon. Fulbright was tense, upset and exasperated by the further escalation of the air war. His face tends toward gauntness, so that his ears seem to droop away from his head. His clothes in this warm weather were those that only a banker or a statesman would feel constrained to wear--black, sober, responsible, with a vest and watchchain.

But it is the voice that catches you, an instrument he plays for effect-resonant in tone, varying in speed, courtly in marmer, all wrapped for delivery in a rich Arkansas accent.

"Well, it would be a very odd thing if I didn't change my views in the light of new knowledge," he said, responding to a question about the frequent charge that he is inconsistent. "It isn't so much that you change your views relative to certain facts-it's that new facts, new elements appear."

Fulbright has discovered these new elements in hearings, formerly classified papers, memoirs, and in the works of revisionist historians.

â&#x20AC;˘.

12/The New Journal/October 30, 1972 · Yet as he talked, Fulbright was careful to qualify and requalify his judgments. On the one hand, Stalin was a "very ominous character"; on the other, Russia's "very traumatic experience in World War II gave some justification for fearing a resurgent Germany."

91-year-old, somewhat deaf and often sleepy chairman of the foreign relations committee, to step aside. Fulbright became the committee's new chairman.

He and Johnson had a mutual admiration society going. Fulbright remarked of Presidentelect Kennedy: "He'll be as Fulbright's own involvement in good a President as he makes use foreign affairs goes back to the middle of Lyndon Johnson's political of World War II when, as a freshman representative, he wrote a one-sentence-· genius." Johnson in turn looked on him, perhaps a bit enviously, long resolution, bearing his name, in as a Southern·style intellectual which the House put itself on record and respected his independence. in favor of US membership in a postwar UN. With this resolution safely Kennedy, at Johnson's fervent tucked in his hip pocket, Secretary urging, had considered Fulbright-of State Cordell Hull finally felt who was not sure he really confident enough, at age 72, to take wanted the job--as his first his first airplane trip to Moscow to choice for Secretary of State; begin talking about founding the UN but Robert Kennedy, fearing with the British and Russians. After that Fulbright's backbench the war, Fulbright authored the support of the Southern antilegislation setting up the international civil rights bloc in Congress scholarship p~:ogram bearing his name. would alienate new African nations, talked his brother out of Also in late 1945 Fulbright spoke it. out in one of the most thoughtful critiques of Truman's foreign policy.

Civil rights has been Ful"We have already fallen to quarreling bright's famous flaw. During the with Russia, like two big dogs chewing late 1950's and early 1960's, he on a bone ... To be tough or to never supported civil rights legbe soft, toward a nation is not a islation.

The reply has always policy. Our objectives...should be to been that, to be a statesman, you obtain their assistance in the creation must get re-elected, and you don't of a bona {ide organization based get re-elected--or at least didn't-upon law." in Arkansas by championing By the spring of 1946, subject to the civil rights. same pressures that quieted other critics, Today Fulbright feels that the Fulbright had subscribed to the Cold Kennedy policies, as much as War consensus that guided US policy-those of Eisenhower, aggravated and stilled dissent-until the late the Cold War, for he thinks the 1960's. In May 1946, he asked in a Russians were more intent on speech: "Is it the purpose of Russia "businesslike relations" than we to dominate the world through a ever believed. He has a special subtle combination of infiltration and nostalgia for Khrushchev, who he force?" Along with the rest of the foreign policy caste, he answered 'yes.' says built a golf course in the Crimea in preparation for the visit Eisenhower did not make in 1960. "In looking back on Now sitting in his office and as him," Fulbright recalled, "from though recalling that very speech, he various things he said, from when said, "After World War II, we were sold he was over here, it seems to me on the idea that Stalin was out to that he was hoping in his rather dominate the world. I didn't have the blunt way to do constructive knowledge or foresight to make a business with us--to normalize judgment at the time. I didn't know relations." about Ho 's letters to Washington--or that they were ignored. Very few people The Senator now believes that did make the right judgment. Henry Khrushchev's "We will bury you" Wallace sensed it, he had a feeling did refer to economic competiabout it, but he was ridiculed for tion; that the "wars of national being a visionary, an appeaser, liberation," which did so much to unrealistic. gear up the Kennedy action-intellectuals for Vietnam, may have "The crux of the problem was been a verbal device, targeted for the generalization of the Truman Peking; that the missiles in Cuba Doctrine. It changed from a may have had more to do with rescue operation for Greece in Khrushchev's troubles with the 1947 into an ideological crusade.

Soviet military than with a It created the attitude, the state c;iesire to immolate the US. of mind, that later led to Viet Nam." Again the qualification.

Change Has Come From Wisdom "That was most unfortunate.

Not From Disaster But I'm not trying to say that Mr. Truman or Mr. Acheson is The change began to come for to blame. Judging it at the time, Fulbright in 1964 and 1965, when I'm not saying that I or anybody he started to lose confidence in else would have been much the men, institutions and policies better. " with which he had identified. His expectations for the Johnson In 1959, Majority Leader Presidency had been great--indeed, Lyndon Johnson finally perhe later said he looked forward to suaded Theodore Green, the

it as the beginning of "our golden age." He enjoyed being summoned to the White House, and was pleased to do his part.

"During the Kennedy and early Johnson years," recalled a Senate staffer, "Fulbright ran the Committee as though foreign policy was too complicated a matter to be left to mere amateurs in the Senate. He saw his job as assisting the professionals in the White House and State Department in carrying out foreign policy."

He differed from the prevailing wisdom in details only; he was "more Atlantic than the Atlanticists." DeGaulle was his bete noir.

The change began in the aftermath of the Tonkin Gulf affair.

At the request of President .Johnson in August 1964, Fulbright--convinced that the Administration was telling the truth . about the purported attacks on US ships in the Tonkin Gulf, and angered by what seemed to be North Vietnamese arrogance-skillfully skippered the Tonkin Gulf Resolution to an 88 to 2 victory.

The administration used that resolution as its mandate to begin the air war over the North; it was, as the Pentagon Papers concluded, "an important threshold in the War."

As he saw the resolution become the permanent justification for an expanding war, and as increasing inf?rmation pointed to ·us provocation and fabrication, Fulbright came to regret his role. It became a trauma; his friend Johnson had deceived him, he had been humiliated; he had helped perpetrate a fraud. "For a time," said one Senatorial staff member, "he seemed to be confessing every day."

But Fulbright's break with Johnson did not come over Vietnam. Though the 1965 escalation disturbed him, he tried ·to. influence the President through pnvate memoranda and talks. His arguments stand up well. In the spring of 1965 he privately warned Johnson not to escalate the war because "an independent Communist regime" would not be incompatible with American interests, because "the commitment of a large American land army would involve us in bloody and interminable conflict in which the advantage would lie with the enemy," and because a "full scale air war" would not defeat the Viet Cong in the South and might lead to intervention by the North Vietnamese army or even by China. The only questionable part of the memo

FOR EVERY VOLKSWAGEN SOLD IN ITALY,& FIATS ARE SOLD IN GERMANY.

"';f-:LKE .\\OTOR CO. 1635 Di,wcll Avenue 288-6~12

Hamden , Connecticut

was Fulbright's acceptance, along with most everybody else, that Olina was an imperialist power, intent on expansion.

"He used to listen," said Fulbright of Johnson, " but in evaluating my advice against that of his chief advisers, McNamara and Rusk, he decided that they knew the facts."

1

The open break carne over the Dominican Republic in 1965.

The Administration claimed that American nationals were endangered, that a Communist uprising was at the core of the civil strife.

A careful Foreign Relations Committee study, however, convinced Fulbright that the Administration had used a phony Red Scare to justify both to itself and to the country an unjl~stifiable intervention. On September 15, 1965, he rose in the Senate: "The Administration acted on the premise that the revolution was controlled by communists--a premise which it failed to establish at the time and has not established since."

13/The New Journal/October 30, 1972

rass him. But the September speech was the breaking point."

This event solidified his growing doubts about the whole course of US policy. By the time of the 1966 Vietnam hearings, he Wil& already a dove. Johnson clearly put Fulbright at the top among "Nervous Nellies." In private, the President accused Fulbright of everything . from disloyalty, to being "unable to park his bicycle straight," to outright racism. "The President used to say that Fulbright had a little old racial problem--he didn't think little yellow people cared as much for Freedom as white folks " recalled a former high State ' Department official.

Fulbright, who never savored the role of Congressional crank, was upset by innuendoes in Johnson's Washington that his dissent was a gymptom of abnormal psychology-so upset in fact that he twice arranged hearings on the interaction of psychology and international politics. "People ridiculed the whole idea," he said, "but they proved to be two of the most interesting series we've ever had. I was very interested " Mr. Johnson never forgave me " myself, be<;ause I've often said Fulbright. "After that, we ' wondered why I take a different view from others." never had a private meeting.

Never again was I consulted." A " It's not for me to be a Freud" pained little smile crossed his fa<;e. he added, but he did trace his ' "Of course, when I look back on it, I wasn't ever really consulted in current role back to his family and the sense tl1at he was ever interested childhood. "There was nothing in my background to give me the in what I had to say. He had made same kind of egotism--I'm not sure up his mind already. He was that's the right word, it may be trying to keep me within bounds, so I wouldn't take issue and em bar- offensive--as Lyndon Johnson." He

emphasized the importance of his father's death when he was 18.

"He left six children and my poor mother. We thought we were going to the poorhouse. I was young, and we were distracted, and I ~earned humility--if you want to call it that. I wasn't prepared to be pushing people around. I was trying to survive." . This

back~ounc}

has made Fulbright financially , emot10nally--all his life. "The combination of all these types of things," he said, " gives you a different attitude, a different approach under certain circumstances. I would react differently from Johnson-and Nixon. It was much more difficult for Mr. Johnson to accept what he would interpret as a defeat than for me. It's the background against which you make judgments, without being conscious of it." mde~ndent--:ntellectually,

He reflected for a moment. "I remember a curious experience." He described a White House meeting in February, 1965, when the decision to escalate the bombing was taken. Only Senator Mike Mansfield and he took issue. "I didn't have any particular reason for dissenting, for disagreeing.

I had no intelligence reports." He said that wiijl a certain disdain. "It just seemed the wrong thing to do. It was purely instinctive. " " There's still the underlying feeling that it is our responsibility to build up what they call a "structur~ for ~ace"--not unlike

what Rusk used to talk about.

There's .a considerable continuity between administrations, but they're still not willing to face up to the fact that it is beyond our capacity to do this unilaterally.

They're not even willing to discuss a role for the UN." What alternative does the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee propose? " If you were George McGovern's Secretary of State," he was asked, " or, perhaps better, National Security Adviser, how different would your foreign policy look?" " President," he replied sternly, as though correcting an elementary mistake in a junior seminar. " It's the President's doing." " President, then."

"To begin with, this ass1.1mption that our country play the role it has assumed is impractical. It's beyond our physical and political capabilities. We're not up to that sort of thing. No country is." . He now talks of Lyndon Johnson wtth the nostalgia one reserves for a hopelessly waywanJ friend. He thinks Johnson might well have stopped the war with a conference. "He probably ~ould have been much more generous if only they had saved his face and not made it appear he had bee~ defeate~ .. I. don't think he had quite the senstbvtty that this present (continued on page 18)

OGJ~~~U'll W~fll~ $[1@GJ A Yale Tradition

FINE WINES & SPIRITS- FOR THREE GENERATIONS

35 Broadway

WELCOME 18 YEAR OLDS

New Haven

562-1765 (Next to Cutlers Record Shop)

ALWAYS PLENTY OF COLD BEER , WINE, AND SODA

MASTERCHARGE ! (we deliver)

Open Monday - Saturday 9 AM

to~

PM

~--~---------------------------------- ----------------------------------------~

..

14/The New Journal/ Oc tober 30, 1972

In Comment(Continued) SPR ING BOMBS, SP R ING THUNDER

by Lawrence Lifschultz

The conflict at the News office sharpened whe n Collective members de manded that editors Coles, Cuneo, Little h as been said and even less Geesman, and Spencer publish an written about th e duet o f t h e Yale extra edition prior to R ogers' Daily News and Kingman Brewster anticipated arrival Monday evening. last May. Yet, five months later its Due to t heir en d-of-the-year impor tance for study and d iscussion schedule, t h e News h ad no plans remains undiminish ed. Each of us to r un a n edition u nt il after Rogers' involved in actions of struggle against visit. T he Collective main tained the war last spring must examine wh at that t he News had a responsieffect our ow n behavior h as had on bility to the community, parthe magnitud e of A merican aggression during the past summer and the present ticularly to the several h u ndred people w h o would be putting fall. their academic careers on the line come Monday. By publishing BrewOn Friday, May 12, 1972, the Yale ster's edict alone the paper had Daily News published a carefully played a crucial political function worded statement in which Kingman in creating the mood of intimidaBrewster pledged to suspen d and tion. T he people who faced possibly expel any student involved expulsion wanted t h eir positio n to in militant demonstration s against be k nown and fully understood William Rogers, Nixon's Secretary by all the students and faculty-of State, during a visit p lanned for the for it is from such understanding following Monday n ight. That that defense and support would arise. afternoon a t urbulent confrontation developed at the News offices At that point, the News editors between twenty members of the New refused to publish an e1>."tra edition.

Haven Air War Collective and four Their reasons and their subsequent editors representing the .Vews -retreat raise profound questions ~latthew Coles, Charles Cuneo. concerning the idea of a "free press·· John Geesman, and l\Iichael Spencer. in a capitalist society. The editors Members of the Collective accused raised two issues to explain their the News editors of abetting unwillingness to run an extra Brewster's move to establish an edition: first , it was technically atmosphere of threat and intimidation impossible sin ce their s pecial typist over the University community, in would be unavailable over th e particular against anti-war forces. weekend; and second, the News They were specifically angered by the would be financially incapable of News' ·failure to prin t in th eir covering the costs of an "extra. ·• Friday edition a statement entitled "The People Want Rogers."' The One of th e Collective members with the necessary "electronic tape" om1tted statement described the typing skill offered his service. The unprecedented action of the Yale News refused. The Collective Political Union, Rogers· host offered to purchase an ad to cover orgamzation , to close its membership the cost of the edition. The News lists a month and a half before the refused once again. planned visit of Rogers. The denial of access to the orgamzation had The Collecttve demanded a better begun pnor to the Westmoreland explanation for the News' continued mcident and despite objections that continued throughout the spring. refusal. Coles, Cuneo, Geesman, Collective members mamtained that and Spencer asked to caucus in the Political Union was using a Yale private. They withdrew and after building without payment of rent fifteen minutes announced that they to hold a closed meetmg of a closed would publish the "extra" prior to Rogers' visit contingent on for mal society. The closing of memberconsultation with their business ship lists cannot easily be reconciled manager and a few staff mem bers. with Brewster's reference to the The News agreed to include the mt-eting as "an authorized "People Want Rogers" statement and University activity." In the unpubother critiques of Brewster 's lished statement the Collective •·principled'' position. Moreover, they quest10ned the policy of the University administration to allow said to the group that technical the use of Yale buildings by problems would be overcome by the exclusive organizations for exclusive News itself. meetmgs.

One Collective member interviewed According to one Collective this fall recalled, smiling, ·'You know, member. who had been denied it's like the Chinese say. Liu Shao ac<:ess to the Political Union.

Chi always said that 'technical and .. Brewster·s position on ·free speech· economic" matters are t h e determin ing was transformed into a defense of factor, while Mao maintained that in reality 'politics· is always in command. the Political Union ·s denial of Well, we saw through the technical access into its organizatiOn. There obstacles raised by the News editors is no •free speech· if people are to the essence of the problem-the not free to hear or are not given refusal to prin t in reality was a the right of access.·· political p osition . F or a moment it Lawren ce Lifschultz is a m em ber was like in Shanghai in 1967 when the of the Yale Committee of Concerned Red Guards seized control of Asian Scholars and participated in People's Daily. The di(ference, of the even ts of last sp ring as a member course, is t h at t he Yale Daily News o f the New Haven A ir War Collective. has n ever been a people 's daily ."

Leaving the matter of Sh anghai aside, there still remain a host of wider political questions to be asked.

Why was it that on Friday May 12th the News published Brewster 's posit ion alone and failed to publish .1 cr itical resp o nse? The News no t only h ad a copy of the statemen t in questio n but had already given verbal assurance t h at th ey would publish it in t h e Frid ay paper .

Perhap s it d id not appear because it questio ned Brewster 's statement on too basic a level. And why did t he News so f irmly resist th e appeal by those willing to stand up to th e expulsion threat who only wished to cr itique the theory of the hammer before it was lowered?

Politics is t h e only plausible answer.

The News editors consistently argued that "technical" considerations held them back , all the time denying their political preju dices. They were "objective j o urnalists." Actually, there is no more o bjectivity in the political position of the News than there is in the New York Times which daily refers to the "communist enemy,., "enemy forces, .. "Vietcong,"' and "North Vietnam." The News played the Brewster statement and the Rogers appearance the way it did because it was predisposed to do so.

As is well k n own by now, Rogers cancelled his appearance in New Haven and instead the Political Union presented the A. Whitney Griswold

for people who walk on this earth ...

If you 've w al ked barefoot o n sand o r soil you know how great it is. Your heels sink low and your feet embrace the earth . Then you put o n your shoes, return to the c ity, and b ecome another concrete fighter .. . but the concrete always wins. You

Walking Shoes: S34 t o $40.

U .S. Paten t No. 3305947

award for s tatesmanship to him in Washington this past summer. Whether or not Brews ter actually knew o f Rogers' pending cancellation prior to the public announcemen t , remains unclear. If, on the 12t h , Brewster did n ot know t h at Rogers had cancelled, h e is a lu cky man th e Secretary of State did not come.

Still, it is not implausible that Brewster m ay have known th at Rogers would not sh ow, but went ahead anyway and issues h is May 12th "suspension and expulsion" statement . In so doing he would have neatly taken care o f the criticism coming from his righ t which, person ified by Eugene V. Deb bs Rostow, had poured forth fire since the Westmoreland incident.

Now Brewster had taken the ultimate stand of fir mness against the insurrectionists.

Yet, if Brewster knew that Rogers would not come, he also k new he would not have to carry o u t his threat. He would not have to face the "left" at Yale which had grown to substantial proportions following )lixon 's carpet bombing of Haiphong on April 16th and his later mining of Vietnamese harbors. It would have been an ugly scene for Kingman Brewster on May 15th in the streets outside Sprague Hall. Then the beneficent Kingman Brewster would have had an untold number of ·'idealistic" but suspended students on his hands. U Brewster was aware

yearn for the earth that lies buried beneath the city.

The Earth Shoe is the first shoe i n history with the heel lower than the sole .. . t his helps return you to nature tho ugh you are forced t o live in a cement-coated world. The Earth Shoe's patented design gently guides you to a more erect and graceful walk, and reduces fatigue and the aches and

pains caused by our hard-su rfaced city.

For m en and wom e n i n s hoes, sandals and sa bots.

Fr o m $23.50 t o $40.

B roc h ure ava ilable.

&l&artti ~shoe

59 Broadway (above Y ork Square Cinema) New Haven

ns-3592

that Rogers would not show and still went ahead with issuing his statement, then his political acumen for dealing with his right wing must be recognized.

•

The final irony to the story still hasn't been told. When it became known that Rogers would not come, the New Haven Air War Collective, in recognition of the "impossible" obstaCles faced by the News editors, withdrew its request for the "extra" edition. To the Collective's surprise, an "extra" of the Yale Daily News appeared on Monday morning anyway. It did not carry "The People Want Rogers" statement--or any mention of the Friday conflict at the News office. Even in retrospect, the oldest college daily had not found this news fit to print. The lead article was about none other than Kingman Brewster. Saturday he had gone on television and asked the people of New Haven to go to Washington and "lobby" against the war. "Objectively speaking," noted one Collective member, "Kingman Brewst~r didn't even offer to buy an ad in the News to pay for the cost of the extra edition."

---

In the last decade various forms of opposition to the Vietnam war have developed. In this respect, it should be clearly understood that the editors of the News--Coles, Geesman, Cuneo, and Spencer--are all opposed to American involvement in Vietnam. So is Kingman Brewster. Then what was all the ·trouble about last April and May? Why were opponents of the war poised against each other?

In the tenth year of our direct involvement in Vietnam, in the twentieth year since our support for France's reoccupation, and in the thirtieth year of the Vietnamese struggle for independence, it is time to critically discuss the matters that divide those united against the war in Vietnam.

There are two issues involved: strategy, and what Ken Mills used to call " a fundamental difference in world outlook."

There is no denying that the Collective had hoped for a major social upheaval in this city and in the country. It was hoped that the aroused anger of the American people and the social disruptions causE!d by massive protest would be sufficiently forceful to throw a real scare into the Nixon administration and other attendant centers of ruling power in America. It was just such an upsurge in May 1970 that forced Nixon to beat a hasty retreat from his invasion of Cambodia.

Kingman Brewster and the

~itors of the News opposed such

an upheaval. Their position was one of moderation. Opposition

15/The New Journal/October 30, 1972.

111eant fasting, wearing black armbands, holding one-day moratoria, or lobbying in Washington.

That done, all were to return to 'Classes and take exams. Nixon's magnification of "automated massacre" did not prevent Yale authorities from announcing time ·and again, "the leniency of 1970 will not be repeated."

The division over strategic practice among opponents of the war is at bottom a very fundamental ideological question.

The Air War Collective maintained that only through a sharp upsurge of protest from the American people and from American students in particular would the Dictatorship of the American Executive effect a retreat. The Collective had hoped that this University, along with others, would have shut down in a national student strike until Nixon had pulled back on his build-up of the air war. Of course, neither the strike nor a reduction in American bombing occurred.

Brewster and the News opposed the strike. To relieve the pressure on the University they both maintained that at Yale "there is no enemy" and thus a strike against the University had no purpose. The enemy, of course, is always elsewhere--never before you. This position, however, belies the fact that in May 1970 a forceful national student strike had real impact in checking further .American aggression against the Cam bodian people.

At issue last spring was the question of whether the revolt emerging in the country would be contained or would develop further. It was crucial to various political groups, among which the News and Brewster must both be included, to achieve containment in the form of a "manageable protest". A major upheaval, it was said, would only play into the hands of the Administration.

Yet, five months later--following a spring, summer and fall of the most intense bombing in the history of mankind--it must be asked who really played into whose hands.

Brewster and the News supported a one-day lobby effort in Washington. The tactic was a classic one. If it is your institution the people are threatening to strike or disturb, then you must deflect them from their object. They must be led in a different direction; that is, away from New Haven and down to Washington.

It would have been different if the trip to Washington had been part of a national call to go to the capital. Neither Brewster nor the News were prepared to make such a call.

To do so might have created a mushrooming effect. This clearly had to be avoided. Instead, a few buses just for New Haveners rolled down to D.C. and rolled back. Tt son h~rl hP.P.n nice and manageable. And very soon all returned to normal except for the Vietnamese.

These differences in strategic . practice are at bottom important ideological issues. There is a clear difference between being anti-the-Vietnam war and being anti-imperialist. While both ·Brewster and the News may be the former, they are certainly not the latter.

Brewster in particular has not broken with the ideology of America's World Empire. Last spring he stood out as a seemingly tortured enigma who privately considered the possibility of following the president of Amherst College in civil disobedience, while publicly threatening to expel any student who might break the "law." He stands in the eye of such a contradiction because he has not broken fundame~tally with the premises underlying this country's international empire. Nor is there any reason given his position, past practice, and class to expect that he ever will make such a break.

It is clear that Brewster has not even approached such transformation. He continues to perpetuate the very mystification about America's 'role in the world', that has led to so much sadness for our own country and for the Indochinese. Last April, in the same month B-52's bombed Haiphong for the first time, Brewster wrote the following in Foreign Affairs: The United States does occupy a position of indispensability to the security and economy of the . rest of the world .. .Any potential aggression should be kept on notice of what might be called our 'exasperation points.' The American electorate would react explosively to the outrage of unambiguous aggression in areas where we feel visceral commitment by affinity, a territorial commitment by proximity or moral commitment by promise.

It was enough to have heard at the start of the sixties John Kennedy say, "To those 'peoples in the huts and villages of half the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves."

It was enough to have heard that and then to have watched Kennedy set up strategic hamlets, schools of counter-insurgency, and an Alliance For ·Progress which was no more than an alliance for counterrevolution.

But it is more than eno-qgh--it is too much--in 1972 to hear Kingman Brewster speak about informing potential aggressors of America's "exasperation points." :Brewster's position that America must stand ready to defend the world from aggression is no more than an obfuscation for his real defense of American hegemony in the world. Lastly, Brewster writes that the American people "would react explosively to the .outrage of unambiguous aggression." We must presume of course, that Brewster did not ·"react explosively" last spring, .but instead worked hard to insure that no "explosion" would occur, because the "unambiguous aggression" was that of his own country.

The duet of the Yale Daily News News and Kingman Brewster in the period of heightened slaughter last spring must be studied and discussed. It is important for all who oppose the war--indeed, who oppose the Empire. A deeper understanding of questions concerning ideology and strategic practice is essential if our coming struggle against this war and yet unenacted American tragedies is to be more effective. In The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, referring to Hegel's comment that all facts and personages of great importance in wprld history occur, as it were, twice. Marx wrote, "He forgot to add; the first time as tragedy, the second as farce." Our actions in Spring '72 were inadequate to stem the new level of aggression against the Vietnamese. That is the tragedy. We must better inform our practice, to avoid the farce that would be a greater tragedy. •

I ..

16/The New Journal/October 30, 1972 opportunities for coherent personal According to the program,.s~udeBts development in undergraduate educa- will participate in freshman seminars tion. Unfortunately, consideration in their major area of inter..est The Dahl Report was not the first ... and confront questions of of these rna tters has been sideeducational as well as personal detracked in the last few years. velopment. More impo~t, each The advent of coeducation disstudent will design his own program (continued from page 9) tracted attention and absorbed of study, without externally en~rgy away from the broader imposed degree requirements, At that time Yale students were the original proposal, instructors movement for change. The presbut with the advice a1id approval of graded on a 60-100 scale, and Dean's needed only the approval of a small ence of "sufficient" women a Board of Mentors, or faculty faculty Committee on Teaching in List, percentile ranking, and sundry somehow came to represent the advisors, within each college. one of the residential colleges, but honors were conferred on the basis problem of wholeness and communthis procedure met with substantial of grade-point average. Several ity at Yale. In addition, the Yet it is unclear exactly what the faculty opposition. The faculty incidents finally crystallized lengthy and cumbersome delibermentorship program is designed to amended the program to require all the almost universal student ations of the Governance Commisaccomplish. If its purpose is to seminar instructors to have or obtain opposition to what was seen as an sion successfully killed most provide a more rigorous and unjustified and pretentiously precise at least temporary departmental student desire and entp_U$iasm for individualized program of purely appointment, and ruled that college system. A 600-person lecture participation in the tedious, academic instruction, it is difficult seminars had to be approved not course taught by Margaret Mead bureaucratic process of governance to see in what way it is an improveonly by the special Committee but had a class average of 88, ten points at Yale. The Governance menton the present relatively higher than the Yale 'college average, also by the Course of Study Commission itself proved a crowning ineffective program. If, on the other Committee. Now, many college a circumstance which occasioned irony tO the high hopes of the Coalition hand, its purpose is to provide a much self-righteous envy among seminars function merely as addiCoalition: rather than creating a structure within which students can those not enrolled. When a tional course options to regular demechanism for decision-making, establish the kind of relationship sociology seminar voted to turn partmental programs. the CNU had created a commission with an older " guide" that will in grades of Satisfactory and that took two yean: to study the give direction to the sear-ch for selfBy 1968 the SAB had succeeded Unsatisfactory, and the problem before reporting. definition, at the same time in obtaining faculty approval of department balked at the propriety providing the adivsor with the kind voting student representatives on the of such a grading scheme, the The belief in mass, participatory of personal knowledge helpful in major faculty committees. professor then reported a grade democracy lost broad support deciding what the most productive Moreover, a strengthened belief in of 100 for each¡student. The Yale learning experiences are for the value of and necessity for student- through its association with the College Dean, refusing to accept Yale-Panther events of spring 1970. individual students, then it is unclear initiated participation was reflected these grades, argued that they were Student participation on faculty that fifteen willing faculty members in several changes in the SAB itself. not "credible" to the faculty. ~mmittees lost its appeal to per college can be found who are Its members were once again General disgust with all grades rose all but a dedicated and unrepresencapable of making the kind of elected, it increased .its membership when it was rumored that the tative few, and even then general commitment this would entail. to include juniors, and it began to Selective Service System would use interest was commensurately write pamphlets to fellow students class rank in determining deferweakened.

It seems possible that students will rather than faculty ~ommittees. ments. look on this program as an infringeThus, when the Study Group on ment of their freedom to, in Dahl's The SAB started issuing "Guide to the Future of Yale--the Dahl The Yale Daily News exercised terms, "treat college as a cafeteria, Yale," written by Derek Shearer, and Committee--spent last year conunexpected leadership in focusing where the courses are chosen hapadvocating the loophole approach to student attention on grades. Although Yale's education: "Learn the sulting the community on their hazardly on the basis of taste and the SAB and the Student Committee complaints and visions of Yale, willingness to pay or work for the tricks and you can do whatever you student concern was moderate and on Teaching recommended student," rather than as a meaningwant here." The immediate success moderate revision of grades to an ful elaboration of that freedom. restrained¡ in comparison to the of the student-initiated coeducation eight-point letter system, the level of interest years ago. A small drive, singlehanqedly engineered and Course of Study Committee group of students did meet Yet, even if one were to grant that foisted on a reluctant administration startled many students by proposing the mentorship program is a regularly and issue several policy by student Avi Soiffer in the fall of and gaining faculty approval for reports--for the most part ignoredsubstantive and potentially liberating 1968, created an upsurge in student a four-point Honors, High Pass, Pass, to the Dahl Committee, but their alternative to the existing confidence and desire to change Yale.

Fait system, in effect until this year. activities not only had little bureaucracy, the chances are great Almost anything seemed possible. impact but were virtually unknown that it will never be implemented.

The spring of 1969 saw the most ln 1967-68 student participation by other concerned students.

Insofar as it might encourage and complete expression of participation increased, inspired by the dramatic Presumably, the recommendations permit a student to fashion a nonchanges of previous years. As a result and alternative at Yale, in the form of of the Dahl Report will be considered departmental or perhaps non-academic the Coalition for a New University, a of pressure from the Student by the faculty and its committees course .of studv. ano insQfar as it would movement for radical reform within Committee on Teaching and the this year, unless the temporary insist that students take the primary the University. CNU was also the best faculty committee appointee over responsibility for deciding what is Council of Masters, an all-faculty organized student movement 'Yale has the summer to evaluate the worth learning, the mentorship program committee was appointed to reassess ever seen. Growing out of a c1ty represents too great a departure for the educational potential of the financial implications of the Report-planning seminar on institutional the faculty to support. puts further consideration out of the residential colleges. Attention focused on the "sophomore seminars," change, CNU evolved through weekly question. meetings of undergraduates and created in 1952 by a gift from Paul Mellon, and which were then graduate students, and concerned In many ways, the Dahl Report The possibility of a dramati~ inbeing used by large departmental itself with a broad spectrum of Yale responds to questions raised by the crease in non-departmental maJors courses as discussion groups for issues: use of space and architecture, CNU. For the first time, a faculty is threatening, especially to underclassmen. Meanwhile, some the relationship of the University to report has seriously considered the smaller departments. The elimcolleges, resenting the departmental New Haven, quality of teaching, college as a community of more than ination of existing "special exploitation of college resources, undue limitation of credit, power scholars and students. It discusses programs"--such as Directed Studies, began giving student-initiated allocation within the University, the need for attracting more Early Concentration, the Five Year non-credit seminars on subjects like representation of minorities and "creative types" into the teaching B.A. and Scholar of the House-" Race, Riot, and Poverty. " women, and "poets and playwrights" and student community. It recomon the grounds that all students in the student body and faculty. mends the improved use of space at should create their own programs, The committee's Hall report CNU provided an umbrella publicaYale to ease the social flow. It is also threatening.

Optional provided for a well-endowed program tion for articles by individuals and urges more creative use of existing programs with limited an~ prefof seminars, originating in th~ groups as diverse as Masters and Yale space, within and outside the erential admissions are s ubJect to colleges at student or faculty SDS. In addition, it held a four day residential colleges. greater departmental and facul~y suggestion, on subjects not available workshop on educational issues at In the mentorship program-the supervil;ion than 1,000 alternative in standard departmental offerings.

Yale in which over half the university major educational proposal, and courses of study.

This proposal created a truly stud~nt population participated in in a sense, the key to the whole alternative system in which any student one form or another. report--it responds boldly to Twenty years later, the likeliwith a~ ~~ea and a d_esire ~ learn Three key issues emerged from the need expr~,ssed for "self-definhood seems great that the events could Jmtlate a cre~h_t-be~~ course, CNU's inquiries: access to information, ition of goals, and for tJ:l~ ~e~~l-. of 1952 will be repeated . ~ught by. any qualified indiVldual participation by students and nonopment of "moral capabilities With m or outside of Yale College. In faculty in govenlance, and the need for which to face a "d~sorienting society."

A Clear Guide ... (continued from page 5)

his report ready for faculty consideration by November. He has expressed the cautious hope that some of the committee's suggestions may be put into effect by the 1973-74 academic year.

it raises of the administration's credibility. As Brewster indicated in his September 8 letter to the Corporation he feels his own credibility has been threatened. It remains to be seen just how much of the damage is repaired by the ~port of the Provost.

The Blum committee is not the The faculty has received an only University planning group that annual "crisis report" from the has suffered from the deficit Provost each year since 1970, the discrepancy. Controversy generated year when austerity measures were

by Yale's financial affairs has also first put into effect. The faculty .delayed chances for serious tended to disregard these reports, discussion of the suggestions for and t here was a certain sentiment long-range changes in the academic 'among them that the Administration structure of the University set forth in the Dahl report. Academic changes was crying "wolf." During the _spring of 1972, however, when the have been swept aside by more Administration reported on the pressing financial questions, projected state of the University's especially those centering on the 'financial health during consideraextended semester plan suggested in tion of the extended semester the appendix to the report. Dahl proposal, the faculty at last and his group are especially began to believe that an emergency chagrined by the attention focused existed. This partially explains why on the relatively minor appendix to the faculty created the Summer the report. "Had the deficit Study Committee. question never been mentioned , our With the surprising news from report would have received more the Treasurer's Office this fall , serious considerat ion, ., Dahl says. there was cause for many faculty As the matter stands, Dahl feels members to believe that the Adthat the misprojected deficit ministration had cried " wolf" and the ensuing controversy again. Reductions had been made has "discredited the Dahl report in the number of faculty positions as a whole. " starting in the year 1970-71, reductions that hit the ranks of Another important, yet less untenured junior faculty tangible, consequen~e of the . especially hard, and, in the deficit discrepancy 1s the quest1on opinion of some faculty members,

lowered the quality of Yale teaching. Although the need for the faculty cutbacks is apparently not mitigated by this year's unexpectedly low deficit, the effects of a huge deficit that never materialized must be reckoned with if the Administration is to maintain its credibility with the faculty.

4 One last damaging effect of the deficit affair is the pressure heaped , perhaps unfairly, on the Treasurer himself. Especially in :the press coverage of the deficit revelation, there were reports of internal politicking and personal criticism of those responsible for computing the projected deficit.

There was speculation that Brewster's letter to the Corporation constituted such a criticism of the Treasurer. This speculation overdramatized the point of Brewster's letter and at the same time clouded an already complicated issue. Perhaps during the heat of the publicized controversy, some tension did exist between the President and the Treasurer.

However, Brewster later expressed regret that his letter had been interpreted as a personal attack on Ecklund . Ecklund refused to ;comment on the tone of the letter.

The budget is predicted by the University Budget Committee, not by the Treasurer himself, and is based upon projections made by the Budget Department and the various University officials in charge of budgetary units. Blame for incorrect estimates cannot fairly be attributed to the inadequacies of any individual but rather to the system now used to monitor Yale 's financial situation.

Some changes have already been made in the system. For example, the composition of the University Budget Committee has been changed to include three academic deans in order to give better representation to Yale 's academic sector. In addition, it has been suggested that the faculty charter include a standing committee to monitor the financial situation and report periodically any changes in the financial picture.

Uncertain as the process of economic forecasting seems to be, 'the University has good reason to expect changes in the system that will provide the more reliable financial figures so important to the planning of its future. As O'Connor admits, "We could be more on top of things." •

•

-

. -·: h _,

•

30 waterfront street new haven

-

.... .-..:

., -\.

the new haven terminal

-

•'

. (continued from page 13) President has about winning the game. He had more assurance, personally, than this President. But the Vietnamese had suffered much had been so disappointed over Gen~va, that they were just as arbitrary as th~y could be. And that was a great mistake from their own point of view, for they could have had this war over a long time ago."

Fulbright is steadfast in his opposition to present Administration policies. He has concluded that they want to maintain a pre-eminent American presence in Southeast Asia.

"I don't think the people knew in 1968 or know now what is in the mind of the President--and it's not a policy of disengagement. Vietnamization means control by proxy."

The first step would be an end to the Vietnam war, ended the way the French ended their war-with a conference. We would accept a mixed government, including communists, and we would not attempt to maintain a major US position in Southeast Asia.

Fulbright would shift away from what he describes as America's "great power militariam." This would involve both the rejection of military responses to political problems, and a substantial reduction in US bases and commitments abroad. He would also avoid new commitments like those the Administration is now negotiating with the Portuguese and Greek dictatorships for bases in Athens and the Azores.

He would revert to a •policy of non-intervention. No more military and CIA involvements as occurred in Greece and the Dominican Republic. No more public funds for private organizations like Radio Free Europe. No longer a free hand to the Pentagon propagandists within our own country.

He would continue to pursue the ~etente with Russia and C:hina, lookmg for areas of common mterest and possible cooperation. (Fultiright has applauded the President's efforts in these directions. After the China trip, he wrote Nixon, congratulating him and pledging his full support. No reply came from the President.) As much international tension as possible, including the Middle East powder keg, would be moved inside a revived UN. And foreign aid would be redirected from military assistance towards developmental projects.

Finally, he would attempt two crucial changes in foreign policy practices. First, believing that the "cult of the strong Presidency" has created a crisis-oriented Presidential dictatorship in foreign policy, he would try to restore Congress' Constitutional role in declaring war, making treaties, and advising the President. "The American Congress is indeed a slow-moving and sometimes inefficient body," he observed last year, "but to those of us who have developed an appreciation of the capacity of people in high places for doing stupid things, there is much to be said for institutionai processes · which compel people to think things over before plunging into action."

tional Wilsoriian-"classic" as he puts Secondly, in what is a dramatic it--at a time when "neo-balance of reversal for a country that has known power" has become the new orthodoxy. a quarter century of permanent Kissinger is the only member of crisis, he would de-escalate the the Administration with whom relations importance of foreign policy itself. have not soured; indeed, they lunch Too much emphasis--often in together occasionally either at Sans retrospect a kind of hysterical Souci or Fulbright's home. And they emphasis--has taken our eyes away share certain common ideas, partifrom the urgent problems at home-cularly that the "two camps" and has diverted the time and money division of the Cold War is over, and they need. "I would guess," Fulbright that Russia and China are in many said, "that fully 80 percent of the ways conservative states with which President's working hours are concerned we can pursue "businesslike relations." with the war in one way or another.

Someone might prepare a speech tor Yet they differ in fundamental him on social problems, and he gives premises. Kissinger's balance of power it, but that's all." assumes that struggle and war are the natural order on the world scene.

As surely as Johnson meant Fulbright Every tiny quake in tht> Third World when he attacked the "Nervous Nellies" threatens American security and only so President Nixon obviously had him the artful management by the likes in mind when he criticized those of Henry Kissinger can prevent "former internationalists" who have collapse into war. In contrast to become "neo-isolationists." Fulbright this pessimistic world outlook is obviously sensitive on that score, Fulbright assumes that peace ~an and reacted with exasperation. "My be as natural a state as war. He is · ene~ies call a~l this isolation. I. call it suspicious of the crisis ~anagers and non-mtervent10n. Call It anythmg questions the entire validity of the you like. But we should cut out many international 'game of nations.' of these commitments--all too many Perhaps touched by utopianism he of them wasteful and unnecessary and believes that, as he said last ye~. dangerous. But this does not mean the UN has been the "one great we withdraw from the world.'' new idea in the field of international relations." Unlike Kissinger, he Obviously, Fulbright is not an regards change and revolution as isolationist. But he is also not an ininevitable, but does not believe that all change threatens us. ternationalist in the interventionist school of the Deans (Acheson and Rusk) or in the managerial school of Moreover, Fulbright makes a the Princes (Metternich and Bismarck). number of pointed criticisms of a He is in many respects a very tradibalance of power system--~at powers

offSec, xgrox, bindin~,

laminatin£ ,

collgraphy , des:en c _) r-nsters

letterheads invitations ~mas

cards, menus,

Show us your Student I. D. card and we'll give .YOU one of ours. tlLIVI\.IOH

A.H'\I AMCU

JI"WIUT

L~ - Ton

~.eo·:-.:.*::u;

=::"

l~~L~·-

v

ments,

rlyers' bra:hures ' ads, l1ckets.

~ CSAV!t>DISTRIBUTORS N ~ IDENTIFICATION

announce-

Ul lAC< Of C..OD >0<1 >TOOl AOOOI»

This card enables you, as a student at Yale, to purchase at Catalog Code prices from Paysaver Catalog Showrooms in the Acme Shopping Mall, 1245 Dixwell Avenue, only 7 minutes from Yale.

We carry top name brands in stereo components, radios, cameras, ~elevisions, and small appliances. Check our low, low Catalog Code prices. We employ sales people to help you select the best merchandise your pocket can afford.

Come in and visit our showroom, check our prices, and tell us what you think. Most merchandise is in stock. Be sure to pick up your FREE 1973 Catalog today.

Acme Shopping Mall 1245 Dtlwell Awe.

Showroom Hours·

Near H~·N.H.ltne Between Pets &Ctmts

Phone 288-5263

Mon.·Sat.l0-9

CATALOG SHOWROOMS

Goocfwa:i co >y

cenfer

1g6 college :st.

624-0194

s

•

(

•

..

.

becoming captives of their smaller allies, the tremendous restrains imposed by nuclear weapons, that balance of power systems tend to breakdown as Kissinger's vaunted Vienna system collapsed in August 1914.

While others have made many of these specific points, Fulbright's program, in its entirety, has a coherence. In effect, he has articulated what is today's "opposition line" more clearly than anybody else.

His influence lS clearly felt today, however, only in Congress' efforts to get back its role in policy-making "Nobody has had more impact than him," said Stuart Symington. "A lot of people prattle on the floor about the dignity of the Senate, but he's the one who's worked really hard to preserve the prerogative of the Senate. The Senate's new look is embodied in how he handles it. If he should not come back to the Senate after the 1974 elections, it would be a disaster for the country."

Not everybody bends to Fulbright's leadership. He has been criticized lately for tactics. Moreover, a dozen or so Senators can be expected to vote immediately against any legislation or resolution bearing his name. And a lot of Congressman simply resent him. Last year, Rep. Thomas Morgan, ·chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, was asked what had happened in a conference meeting between his committee and the Fbreign Relations Committee. "Nothing happened," Morgan snapped, "except that Professor Fulbright lectured us for an hour."

Congress to reassume its proper role is the existence of the war!'

His secretary buzzed him. He would have to go to the floor shortly to vote on a war fund cut-off---a vote in which the Administration would once again scrape through.

But he continued, "When you have a Congress and a country dominated by this war fever, the feeling that our men are on the front lines--" He shook his head. " It's an atmosphere almost impossible to overcome."

"It's true, as societies become more complex, there's a natural tendency toward the concentration of power in the executive. And an economic crisis or a war always leads to an exaggeration of executive power.

We've been in a fof'o/:rear -~risis.

This is the fundamental reason for the deterioration of Congress.

There's nothing you can do until you can get over the feeling that there is impending disaster, and you've got to look to the great leader."

Yet Fulbright has been doing something. He and Eugene McCarthy made dissent respectable. Beyond that, Fulbright was the first to begin-at first tentatively a decade ago, then with increasing confidence--to suggest the outlines and orientations for a new US foreign policy. He began this effort long before the old orthodoxy had collapsed, at a time when Henry Kissinger was still engrossed in the nuclear doom books of the Cold War.

So, he may be less the outcast, the Cassandra, and more the teacher than he recognizes. He is as much the foreign policy professor as Kissinger. For this new NixonThe tum-about in Congressional Kissinger line--in its better moments, attitude on its role can be dated to stripped of its geopolitical jargon· August 17, 196 7, when Undersecand Spenglerian gloom, separated retary of State Nicholas Katzenbach from its powerful anti-communist told a Foreign Relations Committee remnants--shows remarkable hearing that, in the context of the congruity with the Fulbright outVietnam War, "the expression of line. It turns out that they too declaring war is one that has become have been listening, at least outmoded in the international arena." some of the time. It's just that Katzenbach was thus saying that the they prefer to forget where they Presidential prerogative on major heard it first. questions was virtually complete.

The conversation, as it ended, In the years since, the Senate, returned to the Vietnam war. sometimes a majority, but more Fulbright always returns to the often a substantial but growing minority, war; it is an obsession, but one has sought to regain its role. This grounded in our recent history. new kind of bipartisanship has taken For him the war is both a sign and many forms-from the anti-ABM a cause of our misfortunes. It has coalition, to stop-the-war amendments, to efforts to force the President to crippled our foreign policy, drained reveal all secret executive agreements. resources, eroded the national life, and destroyed the credibility of But, as the Haiphong mining and government. more recent escalations of the air His secretary had buzzed him war prove, Congress' role in foreign again, and the bells for a vote were policy is more brave talk than ringing as he walked from his office actual fact. The message was clear in into the hallway of the New the subdued, almost-empty hearing Senate Office Building. He was rooms during the testimony on the asked how effective he has been. He Pentagon Papers on the mc.rning was standing now by the special Nixon's mines off Haiphong were elevator for Senators that would activated. It was even clearer in a take him to the ba&ement, where caucus during the May crisis when he would catch a tram that would a Senator who had called for an carry him to the Capitol. The " audience" with the President was Senate page held the door open. sharply reminded by Mike Mansfield: Fulbright shrugged, as though weary "Not an audience, but a meeting. at the end of a long, frustrating, day.

He's not king-yet." " I haven't been effective at all, have I? The war's still going on." He " We've been trying everythmg we said it matter-of-factly, almost can think of," said Fulbright, "but coldly. Perhaps there was in his we've been thwarted. One of the voice a note of sadness as well. • main reasons for the inability of

the

• haven ne~v

tern1inal

30 water, front street new haven 469·1319

..

with stereo components by Advent. Sansui, and BSR,

$400 now buys you all ~a:iBJ~ the music.

Until very recently. if you set out with four hundred dollars to purchase a complete stereo system. you were likely to be disappointed. To purchase a music system that could reproduce the lowest octave(s) of deep bass, you found you had to spend about six hundred dollars; for four hundred dollars a component system did not exist which could produce really low bass.

But this has now changed. Because of two new products, we are now able to offer (and guarantee) a complete AM/FM stereo phonograph system which provides the necessary range to reproduce all music. The system consists of two new Smaller Advent Loudspeakers, a Sansui 350A AM/FM stereo receiver. and a BSR 510A/X automatic turntable with a Shure elliptical diamond cartridge. The new* Smaller Advent Loudspeakers and the Sansui receiver· make possible the increased performance and lower cost of this system.

The Smaller Advent is the only loudspeaker costing less than the original Advent which can reproduce the entire musical range. Through the Smaller Advent you can hear the bottom octave of piano and pipe organ, the lowest notes of the double bass. or the bottom string of an electric bass guitar: (These low frequency sounds have a lot to do with the enjoyment you will derive from your music system.)

On all kinds of musical material, and. under most listening conditions likely to apply in most homes. the Smaller Advent is the equal of any speaker system available.

No technical sorcery is responsible for the surpnsmg performance of the Smaller Advent Loudspeaker. To build into the speaker its excellent low frequency capabilities, Advent has had to give up a small amount of efficiency and power·handling ability: the Smaller Advents will not play as loudly as the larger Advents.

1

.....

FRED LOCKE STEREO IS KIIOWI FOR ITS VAlUIS •ECAUSE:

We •p.~coohre only"" •••••• coMponent••h~eh we laaow •••

The Sansui AM/fM stereo receiver provides enough power to satisfy both you and the Advent speakers; it delivers into the four-ohm Advents more than 15.0 watts of RMS power, over the entire audio range, with less than 0.5% total distortion. (RMS is the most demanding and least flashy of the various power rating systems.) The FM and AM tuner sections of the Sansui receiver are both sensitive and selective: weak stations as well as strong will be received with a surprising fullne~s and clarity.

To match the level of quality which the Sansui receiver and the Smaller Advent speakers represent, we recommend the BSR 51 OA/X automatic turntable. It has a good heavy platte r, a convenient cueing control. and minimal (also inaudible) wow. flutter, and rumble. The BSR. with the Advent speakers and the Sansui receiver, allow us to offer you a quality sound system at a cost substantially lower than that which was previously possible.

We include with the BSR a dust·cover, a base, and a Shure cartridge - a smooth, light-tracking, wide-range cartridge with fine high frequency capabilities. It complements the excellent high frequency characteristics of the Smaller Advent Loudspeakers and the Sansui receiver.

The complete system, guaranteed for two years, parts and labor. costs $399.

You can sit back and hear all the music. * In most talk about stereo equipment, a "new" product is one that is either "better" or "worse" than a "not-new" product. (Sometimes it is "the same", but with a few additional frills - black-light front panel, Day-Gio controls.

Remote Control, etc.) The Smaller' Advent Loudspeaker is really "new" not better or worse than the original Advent. It was design~ to answer a very real need - the need for a quality loudspeaker at a low cost and of small size which could provide every sonic character that most people associate with the best possible loudspeaker, when connected to a low-cost receiver or amplifier.

ADVENT

w .. ofe n'IOfe COf'l'l.pehllve ,,. O¥f' f"'Kn We co"y o w.de t4'~fi!On of bfoi'Hh. iond~. many new on4 ••· """~pt-.4~

We noo-to.., competent

S

'*'',__to h..tp wfow.n we ••• "~ w.. bocS. wp o11 • •••• w1th o f'l'loney - ltociL

wni'IICO

foctl•ht>• •

...,..,..ct with thlt ......,

•

totttfoctton ,..,..,.

FOR YOUR PROTECTION tf you purchas-e thi1o system ond feel that '' n not the value thot you thought it wo..,ld M . you moy return •t for o full case refund w•thtn one week - osk "'' few de· toils.

JtJJt os wtth any other sto<l. item in our store,

1533 State Street, New Haven, 787-0183 (our new Annex) 136 Park Street, New Haven, 776-5600

(