Cedar Rapids Gazette, January 9, 1974, Page 7

Publication: Cedar Rapids Gazette January 9, 1974

Cedar Rapids Gazette (Newspaper) - January 9, 1974, Cedar Rapids, Iowa tchr (treble I\upitU (Dtqr-H-r Editorial Page Perpetual motion? Wednesday, January 9, 1974 Toward a global granary OF" ALL the proposals jamming the congressional docket prior to adjournment last month, none holds more promise of universal betterment than a grain reserve bill filed by Iowa’s Sen. Dick ('lark. The measure would establish domestic reserves of six major grains and feed grains and authorize American participation in formation of universally-administered grain reserves. To appreciate the need for domestic and global stockpiles of staples and livestock feeds, one need look no farther than banner headlines of the past several years: The notorious Russian wheat deal saw United States taxpayers underwriting bargain-basement grain shipments to Asia. Global food scarcities were eo-triggered by population explosions and failure of underdeveloped countries to improve their agricultural output. Burgeoning nutritional requirements grew from affluence in previously poor nations. Significantly, both the domestic and global sides of the Clark bill are aimed at creating order where confusion now holds sway. Overflow production from bountiful days could be held against times of underproduction and shortages. Moreover, stabilization of livestock feeds would prevent severe meat-price fluctuations. The demonstrably urgent domestic measures—calling for government reserves of corn, grain sorghum, barley, oats, wheat and soybeans—are similar to legislation filed in the house by Iowa Rep. Neal Smith. But the world-reserve proposal is the first ever offered in congress. It thus deserves far more attention than was accorded it during the congressional session’s eleventh hour. At first glance, formation of a global granary seems a mountainous task. For one thing, the initial urge among major cereal producing nations is to serve themselves first, then worry about the family of man. For another, the ideologies of the world seem too disparate to allow teamwork of the scope required in the grain-reserve effort. Vet the global food-population crisis shows no other way to go. As Author William Paddock argues in a new book, “What We Don’t Know”, traditional U.S. aid merely has allowed countries to evade their responsibilities in population control and agricultural development. The distinguished Americans, Britons and Canadians comprising the British-North American Committee believe the logical replacement of foreign aid is a food bank insuring against crop failure anywhere in the world. Clearly, congress should make official this country’s identification with that goal. . How to save energy A GOOD friend, who makes it a point to keep track of such things, is convinced the legislature could make a sizable contribution to the effort to save energy by limiting study committee meetings between sessions. His motivation for the little non-energetic study leading to this conclusion came when State Senator Priebe of Algona recently suggested cancellation of December legislative meetings to save energy. It turned out there were hardly any meetings scheduled during the last two weeks of December. But nine were held earlier, involving 66 legislators. Our friend’s figures show that if each of the 66 legislators involved actually showed up for the meetings, the mileage would run $1,543.40 at IO cents per mile for 15,434 miles traveled. They showed also that if the cars averaged 12 miles per gallon, Russian tyranny exposed the gasoline consumed would total 1,286 gallons These figures do not include the $40 per day salaries paid to each attending legislator nor the expenses paid for meals and lodging. It would bi' too much, of course, to expect the legislature to eliminate interim study committee meetings completely; there is a real need for some of them. Whether there is a need for all of them is another question. Still another question is whether the committees might function more efficiently, as well as economically, if fewer legislators were appointed to each committee. Now that we are experiencing an energy crunch, real or otherwise, these are questions that deserve consideration when the legislature makes plans for studies to be conducted during the interim between the 1974 and 1975 sessions. Raw-resource pools sense latent power By C L. Sulzberger PARIS — Possibly the most Interesting shift in world balances this dorado will eventually be seen not as the ending of two dominant military blocs and the start of a vaguely perceived pentagonal grouping — the United States, Russia, the European community, China and Japan — but as the emergence of the nonaligned underdeveloped lands as an effective global force This is not because of their immense population, once described to me by Algeria’s President Honan Boumedienne as “the Third World’s atom bomb.’ It is rather because that inchoate collection of nations possesses certain key raw materials which, if held back, can weaken if not paralyze at least some industrial powers. Oil is but the first and most flamboyant example of what may prove to be an emergent pattern. Boumedienne told me (February, 1971): “Petroleum is in Algerian earth. It must be used for the Algerian national economy and not for the benefit of other, richer lands. All the wealth of the Algerian earth belongs to the people of Algeria.” (This includes another key energy source — natural gas.) Sovereignty People's forum Harassed To the Editor; After reading the letter headed “Reasoning” on Jan. 3, and understanding the underlying message comparing the Miss Iowa-USA pageant to pornography, I realized that this must have been written by a member of or sympathizer with the Women’s Caucus. I find it hard to understand why the Women’s Caucus is so bothered by the pageant that someone finds it necessary to attack it in this manner. That type of group is usually the first to call for everyone to “do their own thing.” Most girls who enter pageants do so for the experience and fun that are involved. Some obviously are hoping to win scholarships, and I’m sure some are hoping to end up another Bess Myerson, Lee Merriweather or Mary Ann Mobley. Regardless of the reasons each girl has for entering, however, she should be able to do so without harassment from the Women’s Caucus or anyone else. As a woman I firmly believe that the Women’s Caucus is in error when it tries to force its views on other women through harassment, intimidation or any other means, I, too, believe in doing my own thing and do so with the support and encouragement of my husband and family. I also believe, however, in the rights of others to manage their lives as they see fit with no interference from me. It seems in recent years that many groups working for the rights of others are using their cause as an excuse to deny us some of the rights we already had. If the Women’s Caucus wishes to help the cause of women’s rights, there arc many areas in which to work constructively. Trying to stop pageants is, in reality, an attempt to deny some girls and women the right to participate in an activity they enjoy, and I consider that to be a destructive activity. Mrs. Billy W. Law; I ti 17 Sherbrook drive •on NE Bared wrongs invite grim justice By Don Oakley A SCANDAL like Watergate could never happen in the Soviet Union—happen and be exposed to an indignant public, that is. For one thing, it requires rival political parties. An independent judiciary arid legislative branch and a long tradition of adherence to the rule of law are essential ingredients. Not least of all, it demands a free and alert press. None of these things have the Russian people ever enjoyed, either under the czars or the commissars. The Kremlin might well wish that a “Watergate” was all that it had to contend with, however. A scandal of sui Ii monumental dimensions that the word is a pitifully inadequate label, a scandal long festering beneath the surface of Soviet life, has broken into the open with the publication in Baris of a new book by Nobel laureate Alexander I Solzhenitsyn. It makes Watergate look like a harmless cabal among kindergartners. The revelations and indictments contained in Solzhenitsyn’s “The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1906", go beyond those he has already written about in his other quasi-fictiU'JU'J books based on his ll years’ experience as a political prisoner and exile, such as “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch”. In his new book, which may be his Don Oakley crowning life’s work, Solzhenitsyn names real names of those involved, both as \ icitims and as authorities, in the Gulag— Joseph Stalin’s labor camp network. The Kremlin faces a double dilemma: how to prevent the revelations from inevitably filtering back to the Russian public, among whom exist thousands of survivors of Stalin-cra terror longing for some kind of justice; arid how to punish Solzhenitsyn without arousing an outcry in the outside world and causing repercussions that could adversely affect the U.S.-Soviet detente. It is — again to speak In wholly inadequate terms — reminiscent of the Pentagon Papers affair in this country. While the Nixon administration had nothing to do with the initial involvement in V ietnam and the papers held liU’.e that reflected on it and much that was already on the public record, it felt it necessary to attempt to squelch their publication in tin* interests of “national security,” and in so doing took extra-legal steps that proved much more disastrous than the publication itself There, of course, the comparison ends. The present Soviet leaders are the direct heirs of one of the most vicious tryannies the world has ever seen, a tyranny which fed on its own children and, in a generation, consigned millions of people to death, torture or brutal imprisonment. Even though it may have abolished some of the worst aspects of that tyranny, for the Kremlin now to permit its victims to come forward and tell the whole story, to permit trials of the officials involved, some of whom still hold positions of authority, would be to shake the Soviet Union to its very' foundations Doubts that some Americans may have about the fundamental justice of their system of government fade into nothingness alongside the Implications for Russia in “The Gulag Archipelago”. Americans have all kinds of remedies for Watergate, including the right to throw the rascals out in the next election, if not sooner. When justice comes to Russia, it will lie a terrible thing to behold Anil the more it is repressed, the longer it is delayed, the more terrible it will be Wasting light To the Editor: Sometimes I wonder if there really is a gas, oil and power shortage in our fair city. Every morning our street lights burn until 7:25. After checking, I find there are several thousand of these lights, and they burn 175-watt bulbs. On a clear day one can accurately read a newspaper at 7 a.m. on the streets. Passing some of our big factories here I found many big lights burning at 3:30 in the afternoon outside and not a person working or around. Also, many lights burn in front of stores and business places at that hour. What a waste. How many Christmas trees could have been lit up with this waste of power? Perhaps next year our beloved law-makers will try to eliminate Christmas altogether. To me sense. the whole setup doesn’t make Albert Semi I Ie 835 Fourteenth street NE LETTERS I he Gazette'* editorial tm fie welcome•    readers'    opinion*» subject to these guideline*: I .en nth limit: 400 words (im* letter per writer every 30 days. All may be condensed and edited without changing meaning. None published anonymously. Writer s telephone number (not printed) should _ follow name, address and readable handwritten signature to help authenticate. Contents deal more with issues and events than personalities No poetry. Boumedienne continued: “There must be increased prices . . . and we must assert our ownership ... the Algerian state, according to international law, has the right to nationalize any foreign concessions." The day after our talk he nationalized 51 percent of France’s petroleum concession. In July, 1972, he predicted in another conversation an energy crisis with the Middle East and North Africa becoming vital to world development. There is little disagreement among the oil states on this, no matter how much they may argue on other matters. The shah of Iran, although poles apart from Boumedienne, told me the last time I saw him (April 14, 1973): “The U.N. charter states specifically that all the natural wealth of a country belongs to that country . . . We know our fuel business and we will sell energy from an organization at least as trustworthy as that which existed before . .. Anyone who has the money can come and buy our product.” Since last October’s Arab-Isracli war, many of the most important petroleum-owning states (outside of North America) have readjusted to the old law' of supply and demand and realized they can make more money by withholding oil from the market while enormously boosting the price. This has worked like a dream, aided by lack of planning in the industrial West and Japan which somehow refused to believe it possible that they could lose eternal access to cheap fuels owned by other peoples. The shah told me in 1961 that the United States wasn’t doing enough to protect its access to oil abroad. Ile recalled later: ‘‘Nobody believed me then. But now your country realizes tin* importance of this.” Petroleum and natural gas are only part of the picture. New squeezes are inevHallie iii other areas. Copper could be next. At last year’s Arab summit, President Joseph Mobutu of /aire addressed the meeting (first non-Arab lo do so) and there have since been reports he was offered funds to stockpile copper from /aire and neighboring Zambia. /aire, Zambia, Chile and Peru are the four largest copper suppliers and, despite ideological arguments, they have all agreed to restrict exports if the existing favorable price structure threatens to collapse. Arab stockpiling (J Zaire-/am-bia copper would probably boost prices. Strong lever This same kind of logic is bound to lie applied to other materials. The law of supply and demand can be a handy weapon when properly used. To a large degree, neither the United States nor the Soviet Union (much less China) has been seriously inconvenienced by the first successful attempt to apply this law — in the instance of petroleum. They have access to largely sufficient stocks of their own and (especially the U.S.) can easily cut down wasteful usage. But the day is coming when the Third World applies more and more political leverage by restricting access to more and more items. This is normal logic. It is high time, therefore that the technically advanced West gets ready to act in unison (as tentatively suggested by Kissinger) to face inevitable difficulties which could further hamper its progress. If this is not done some Western nations face the possibility that a decade or two hence, because of their overloaded social commitments to themselves, they — and not the Third World — will be the earth s underdeveloped segment. New York Times Service C.L. Sulzberger Isn t It the Truth? By Carl Riblet, jr. National borders are becoming obsolete as money changing and petroleum diplomacy create a new breed of trillionairo: a man or consortium who can now go and live anywhere they choose in about the same degree of comfort and fear they would experience at home. All that must be decided in making the selection is under which law they will settle — the law of the computer or the law of the fang. “Money can do anything." —Charles Dickens InterOcean Pees* Syndicate Old virtues newly wrapped r By Helen B. Shaffer W onservatism’s future mulled ASHINGTON - The Republican party has doubtless suffered from Watergate and this party is considered to Im* the natural “home” of the conservative tradition in American politics. Does it necessarily follow, then, that conservatism too has suffered a setback? The answer is still in the future but there are some signs of Watergate’s effect on tho conservative-liberal balance. The Nixon administration has muted its talk of building a ‘‘new majority” from blue-collar constituencies in suburbia. The administration has also apparently backed down in attempts to dismantle a number of social-welfare programs that have long been the target of conservatives. The contrast between January 1973 and January 1974 in this regard is striking. A year ago, the President was all set to reverse a trend toward the “welfare state." At that time he exuded confidence and a strong sense of his authority to carry out these policies, whether congress went along with bim or not. Ile was buoyed by his landslide re-election victory the previous November. Now the steam has gone out of the administration's crusade against “welfare stoicism.“ Nixon’s plan for “new federalism” through extensive revenue-sharing with the states bas made little headway. And public esteem of the President has fallen amid demands for his impeachment or resignation The events following the first Watergate disclosures have been profoundly disturbing to many conservatives. While Nixon may never have been their ideal candidate for President, they nevertheless supported him and expected him to further their favored causes. Now there is fear that the damage to his prestige will discredit conservative positions As early as Sept 12, Sen. Barry M Goldvvater (R-Ariz.), "favorite son” of right-wing Republicans, accused “diehard liberals” of trying to “equate the irregularities of the Watergate affair with conservative principles generally.” The conservative weekly Human Events found it “disconcerting that in the wake of Watergate, the President has been yielding ... to political foes.” It chided conservative members of (‘(ingress for failing to warn the President that he would have to support conservative causes if he expected conservative support during his impeachment crisis. Vice-president Spiro T. Agnew s resignation on Oct. IO was even more disheartening to conservatives. William E. Buckley, jr., editor of the weekly National Review and brother of Sen. James I.. Buckley (Conservative-Republican, N Y ), cautioned his fellow conservatives not lo let Agnew’s disgrace sway them from upholding positions he had taken. He said Agnew had become so much “the incarnation of law, order, probity and inflexible ethics,” that conservatives were likely to feel that these qualities had fallen with him. Expectations for conservatism have risen and fallen during the past two decades, usually in response to the drift of everyday politics. When Clinton L. Rossiter wrote his fxiok, “Conservatism in America", in the early years of the Eisenhower administration, be said “the revival of conservatism in American politics and culture . . . (was) one of the wonders of the postwar decade.” But conservative optimism waned with the Democratic victories of 1960 and 1964, Helen B Shaffer only to surge forward again with the election of Richard M. Nixon in 1968 ( burns that conservatism is resurgent in politics arc based largely on analyses that indicate the end of the old Democratic coalition put together by L runklin I). Roosevelt. A “new majority” of conservative stamp was said to have emerged. But a smattering of elections held last November raised doubts as to how firmly the “new majority" is wedded to the Republican party. There were signs the blue-collar ethnic in suburbia is drifting back to the Democratic fold. What this means over the long term is uncertain. Both major parties contain conservative and liberal elements, and the old Roosevelt coalition itself contained conservative elements. Political decisions will, no doubt, continue to be made on a pragmatic basis, reflecting tin* necessities of changing circ uinstances. That usually adds up to a fairly liberal stance. But conservatism, if viewed as a general outlook rather than as a set of policy positions on specific issues, has a lot going for it. Disillusionment over the failure of past reforms to solve social problems has boosted conservative arguments against liberal nostrums. From the ranks of disappointed liberals has arisen a new faction referred lo as “neo-conservatives” who are having second thoughts on the standard liberal social policies. I he prestige of conservatism has gained from the emergence of witty, urbane, literate propounders of Its message, William F, Buckley, jr., is the best known of those who have helped dispel the Image of the conservative as a materialistic, self-interested busiru man. less They havi f .y „uvc resurrected lh,* image of th conservative as a moral, human intellectual aristocrat. It might even said that they have made It “( hie” ta a conservative, or at least riot un chh Im* one I tutorial Seton,ti, ttooorU i* and Im* ie to ;

  • Bess Myerson
  • Billy W.
  • C L. Sulzberger
  • Carl Riblet
  • Clinton L. Rossiter
  • Don Oakley
  • Helen B Shaffer
  • Helen B. Shaffer
  • Honan Boumedienne
  • James I.
  • Joseph Mobutu
  • Joseph Stalin
  • Lee Merriweather
  • Mary Ann Mobley
  • Neal Smith
  • Richard M. Nixon
  • Spiro T. Agnew
  • William E. Buckley
  • William F
  • William Paddock

Share Page

Publication: Cedar Rapids Gazette

Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Issue Date: January 9, 1974

RealCheck