ustxtxb_obs_1967_11_10_50_00007-00000_000.pdf

,e existence with other nations with different cultures and ideologies. Hostility and suspicion presently exist but this does not have to be a permanent state of affairs. Witness our present endeavor to build bridges of friendship with Russian and the eastern European communiists. Take a good look at the current president of the United Nations, who is from Rumania. The alternative approach assumes that our country is willing to let each nation determine its own destiny and that we will respect its territorial integrity. This leaves the role of winning souls for Christ with the churches, where Protestants think it should be. When Jesus was on trial for his life, he said to Pilate: “My kingdom is not of this world; if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now my kingdom is not from hence.” Suggested Reading Mr. Dickson’s remarks were based in part on his readings of the following: How the United States Got Involved in Vietnam, by Robert Scheer, copyrighted and published by The Fund for the Republic, Inc., Box 4068, Santa’ Barbara, California, 93103. Vietnam: Crisis of Conscience, copyrighted by National Board of Young Men’s Christian Association, published by Association Press, 291 Broadway, New York, N.Y. 10007; Behrman House; Inc., 1261 Broadway, New York, N.Y. 10001; and Herder and Herder, Inc., 232 Madison Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10016. The Lessons of Vietnam, by Senator George S. McGovern, reprinted from The Progressive, Madison, Wisconsin 53703. The Arrogance of Power, by Senator William Fulbright, published by Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., and Random House, Inc., New York, N.Y. China and U.S. Far East Policy, 1945-1966 Congressional Quarterly Service, 1735 K. Street N.W ., Washington, D.C. 20006. 0 Thoughts on Vietnam The following is a combination of the two pamphlets which Fagan Dickson wrote in April, titled “Thoughts on Vietnam” and “Vietnaman Evangelistic War with Catholic Overtones.” Mr. Dickson recalls that he wrote the pamphlets “to clarify my own mind. When I showed it to Mrs. Dickson, her reaction was so violent that 1 put it back in my Vietnam file. In order to gain some support for my conclusions, I set about reading books on our foreign policy towards China and Southeast Asia . . . When we lost the aircraft carrier Forrestal I decided to make my views known.” Austin Obviously, our government is following thoughts which are not in the American tradition when it adopts war as an instrument of foreign policy without a declaration by Congress and follows a policy of intervention in violation of the territorial integrity of foreign nations. It must be relying on thoughts other than those found in the United States Constitution, or the United Nations Charter, to make such actions “right.” Our goal in Vietnam is fighting communism, according to Secretary Rusk, yet our nation is making treaties and building bridges of friendship with communist nations of Eastern Europe. If the President expects our people to unite behind his leadership in an ideological war, he should issue a White Book setting forth his thoughts, so that the people can read, study and believe in them. Our government disavows imperialism as our goal, but it does not tell us what ideals our men are being asked to die for, when the “enemy” is not a nation, or a people, but an ideology. Since General George Marshall, on June 5, 1947, at the Harvard University Commencement, announced this country’s willingness to help rehabilitate war-torn Europe, this country has invested more than one hundred billion dollars in foreign aid. This generosity had such tremendous appeal to the whole world that the leading nations of Europe, Japan, the Soviet Union and even Israel are following our lead. This great Christian act of humanity is now being invalidated by the vast cost in dollars anti _lives of our bombing and napalming in Vietnam. It would seerrito be axiomatic that a society that is coming-apart at the seams at home has no businessin a series of foreign wars with no clearly defined objective. The younger citizens from every college campus in America are yelling to us in every way they know how that our professed values have lost their meaning as an inspiration for progress. The Negroes are rioting to demand a more meaningful share in our modern democratic society; organized crime exists in our cities and it is unsafe for law-abiding citizens to walk on our streets in many places in our cities at night. Maybe it is out of desperation and futility that our government is seeking military confrontation with the thought that this will unify the country by making us forget our own problems. The Chinese, in all probability, will follow this course to solve their internal problems, but I do not believe that this country is that bankrupt. But we will be bankrupt and we will wind up in a dictatorship, in my considered opinion, if we continue to follow our present course in international affairs. A POLICY OF intervention in violation of the territorial integrity of other nations in order to fight communism is prompted by the same kind of thoughts which this country was faced with domestically during the McCarthy era. Because of the constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and press and the principle of separation of church and state, we were able in this country to successfully defend against McCarthyism at the time. But, if our government is following the same thoughts on an international basis, there is sure to be a revival of McCarthyism in this country. It doesn’t make sense for a father to have a son killed in Vietnam fighting communism and not do something about the public libraries, teachers and fellow travelers in this country who may, in his opinion, be corrupting the minds of the rest of his family with evil thoughts. Just as our government is disregarding the United States United Nations’ Charter \(Chap. 1, Art. 2, McCarthys can be expected to rise again and violate our constitutional guarantees. The thoughts of Mr. Barry Goldwater, expressed in his famous teaching: Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue will become the rule in domestic and foreign affairs. The overwhelming majority of Americans thought that they voted in the last election to bury this witch hunting philosophy in favor of the rule of law in both our domestic and foreign policies. It appears now that there has been a misunderstanding. Mr. Goldwater is winning after all. When Mr. Goldwater is quoted in the national press \(September 11, saying that President Johnson “now feels in his heart that he knows that I was right” about Vietnam, there is a certain amount of logic in his observation. In his view, the Johnson policy is McCarthyism turned international. “Every trouble in the world today is caused by communism,” Goldwater said. He, too, thinks it is a holy cause. Secretary of State Dean Rusk and Ambassadors. Lodge and Bunker, seem to share this view. Like Mr. Goldwater, they seem to be so “hung up” with the Puritan ethic that they have a phobia about communism. Could it be that they do not see the weaknesses in the communist system and the rise of nationalism throughout the world? Do they not know that communism in every socialist country is of a different brand and that communists have more problems than they have answers? Do they not know that defense of their own territory against foreign intervention is the strongest instinct of all humans on this earth and that communists are Rus November 10, 1967 7