Lethbridge Herald (Newspaper) - January 19, 1971, Lethbridge, Alberta
- THE IETHBRIDGE HERALD - Tueiday, January 19, 1971 Carl Roivan What French problem: ? The reluctance of many western Canadians to accept the fact of the French language was raised by the Chamber of Commerce last week, and discussed in an editorial on this page on Saturday. Two questions remain. First, what about other language or ethnic groups? Second, what should be done about it here in Southern Alberta? While Canada is a blend of many cultures and its people came with a multiplicity of "mother tongues," the legal fact remains that French and English are the two official languages and ONLY French and English. These two have equal status. Ukrainian, Dutch, Japanese, and many others are interesting languages, and their use in Canada should not be smothered. But French and English are different. To lump French with German or Scandinavian is wrong. Since French and English are coequal, and all public business must be done in one or the other, it follows that those who can use both are in a preferred position. They have an advantage. Instead of having two people for one position, to deal with the public in either of the two languages, one will do. And at the moment proportionately more French Canadians than English - speaking Canadians are bilingual. That is to their credit. The only recourse for the non-French Canadians is to learn French. They can, if they want to. It may be difficult for those up in years, but they can insist that their children do. It may take one generation to make all Canadians bilingual, but reluctance to face the facts won't solve the problem any sooner. Western Canadian parents and citizens should therefore insist that facility in French be the objective of the public school systems, and that those in charge start moving in that direction immediately. Being prime minister or in some other way being a distinguished national leader is still a legitimate ideal for all children. Yet it is almost certain that Canada will never again have a prime minister who is not reasonably fluent in both languages. Since learning French (or any second language) bee o m e s more difficult with age, those children who do not become acquainted with French in the primary grades are almost certainly being barred from the potential of high public office. That is not fair to them. It is not fair to the children of Lethbridge. There is no "French problem," but there is a French fact. The only problem is the refusal of so many Canadians to face the French fact and to accommodate themselves to it. When every Canadian speaks to any other in the language, English or French, that comes easiest to him and with which he is most at home, and is understood by the other, and when the respondent similarly uses his most comfortable language, English or French, then Canadian unity will be safe. It's white down under .Australia subsidizes passage for British immigrants, as long as they are the right color which is white. No blacks, no browns, no yellows, no tinge of the tarbrush in the blood lines if you want to make your home down under. It's purely a matter of national jurisdiction. Whether other nations approve or whether they don't doesn't change the fact that Australia has a right to prevent nori - whites becoming residents if it wants to. Any country must be free to control its own immigration policies. But once that country has admitted its chosen immigrants, there should be no discrimination on racial grounds. The British can hardly object to Australia's immigration policy, be- cause Britain has such a discriminatory policy itself. But once a person, black or white or any other color, becomes a British citizen, resident in the country, there is no regulation which sets him apart from sharing the rights and privileges enjoyed by all citizens. When Australia refuses non - white British citizens a share in the assisted passage scheme if they want to leave, it is applying a discriminatory policy to these people. Britain subsidizes the scheme to the tune of about a quarter of a million dollars a year. The subsidy should be wihdrawn forthwith; otherwise Britain can be rightfully accused of racial discrimination against its own residents. 0 Canada, by permission! If there's anybody inclined to doubt the power and influence of international unions on the quality of Canadian life, hear'this. Most of the band recordings of our national anthem made for public gatherings and on the radio and TV are not produced by Canadian bands and are not recorded in this country. The local TV and radio stations use a recording of the Grenadier Guards band, cut in England. It's a splendid recording. So is the other disk frequently used made by The Royal Netherlands Navy band. Nevertheless neither one of these bands is Canadian, not because there isn't one in existence, but because the U.S. - controlled American Federation of Musicians refuses it permis- sion to record. The band in question is none other than that of the RCMP, one of Canada's most distinguished- and distinctive - body of men. But they don't belong to the AFM; ipso facto, they cannot record their magnificent rendition of their own national anthem. It's outrageous that Canada's proudest should be so victimized. The emphasis being placed on Canadian content by the CRTC makes this situation doubly anachronistic. A writer to the Toronto Globe and Mail suggests that outraged citizens should protest to the new Solicitor - General, Hon. Jean-Pierre Goyer. He advises the American Federation of Musicians to go to hell, and encourages the Moun-ties to record their music. Peace By Joyce Sassc A F'TER a fairly quiet spring and summer, things are getling a little jittery here in the Republic again. You see, there's an election campaign coming up, and the leader of the opposition is coming on stronger than expected, and business men are experiencing a serious financial slump. It might be OK to talk about the evils of corruption in high office when things are going good, and specific individuals aren't made vulnerable at a time when they are fighting to keep their high offices. It might be OK to talk about anti-communism being Mother Hubbard's apron - behind which the CIA hides when it wants to detain a would-be social reformer. But just be quiet rignt now, please. Don't rock the boat. "Suppression" - what's that? It can't have anything to do with with-holding the facts, with firing reporters for doing their duty, with exerting force to keep an article from being released to the public? Or, can it? Remember how it happened a couple of Christmases ago? We were down at "the farm" for tha holiday a couple of Canadian students over from Japan, a Korean professor who'd been a classmate of our hostess back in Toronto, and a couple of other colleagues from the next mission station along the line. We were sitting having a cup of coffee, trying to shaKe the cold out of bones that had spent live afternoon trudging back and forth through the open market. The conversation was as stimulating as the drink. In response to questions from our overseas guest, the professor replied "Oh yes, we know we are watched. Anyone who meets with twenty or more people is watched all the time. Jt lin.s to be that way in a coun- Yes, there is some good news these days WASHINGTON - There " aren't a lot of things to be genuinely joyful about these days, but I admit I'm glad: J. That the Surgeon General has proposed a ban on smoking in such public places as restaurants and airplanes. There is no one ruder than a chain-smoker who seems oblivious to the fact that his "right" to puff and blow runs roughshod over the comfort-and perhaps even the health-of others. I sat in a crowded little movie screening room recently behind a man who kept tossing up a foul - smelling smokescreen which drifted right into my face. Every time he blew I leaned over and blew the smoke right back against his head. It took him several minutes to get the message. Not so dense are the air travelers who find a jet of cold air aimed at them when they start blowing smoke in my direction. They very quickly make a deal not to blow their stench at me if I don't direct that breeze at them. The smokers will squawk at Dr. Jesse L. Steinfeld's proposed ban, but let them. A lot of people will enjoy a lot more meals and travel with a lot more pleasure if someone can curb the huffers and puffers who put their habit above everyone else's comfort. 2. That the Supreme Court agreed to review the conviction of Muhammad Ali for refusing to be drafted. The feeling is inescap able that prejudice against the Black Muslims and a dislike for Ali's mouthings were undue influences on Selective Service officials who rejected his request for conscientious objector status. It is especially good that the court's decision will come after the March 8 multi - million dollar championship fight between Ali and Joe Frazier. Not that I give a hoot who wins. But it is patently clear that Ali was stripped of his title and his right to earn a living in the ring without due process of law. In some states he was banned in clear contradiction of policies followed with regard to other fighters in a similar convicted - but - appealing status. Aside from all that, the Ali case just might induce the Supreme Court to clarify what now is a confusing web of legalities and generalities about who is or is not a conscientious objector. We need to establish once and L17 as close to North Korea as we are." One of the other girls, a veteran of 15 years, recalled being instructed how to fill out a registration card at the local police station. You know - name, age, date and all that. To give her more concrete guidance the officer handed her the card of a former missionary resident - complete with dates of departures, destinations, and when she ret'irned from each trip she took out of town. "Say," the student asked jokingly, "have you ever checked to f-ee if your house is bugged?" Remember the RCMP were having a bit of trouble about then. "Of course not." Such ridiculousness had almost gone ','jo far. "We haven't . . ." our hostess thought for a moment, ". . . have we?" Coincidental though it may have been, the phone rang at that moment, interrupting the laughter this last response incurred. "What's that? . . . Oh, the police station . . . Yes, Merry Christmas . . . The Who? Could you speak a little louder please . . . The people we have here, who are they? . . . They are our friends. They came from several different places. They've been invited here to spend Christmas with us . . . Yes, that's right. They'll be here until the 26th . . . No, not at ail. Goodbye!" What does it mean to be free? Is it nearness to the enemy camp that restricts that luxury, or is it the narrowness of our own thinking? Maybe Big Brother isn't watching, but someone else is. It's these fundamental values Unit you never appreciate until they have been moved beyuti.l your roach. It's these attitudes that make nie tlunk of home. "It's only fair to tell you that some of the new boys are calling for a leadership convention." for all that a man need not embrace an established or approved religion to be entitled to objections of conscience. 3. That Common Cause, the citizens' lobby headed by John Gardner, has filed suit to halt a situation where the laws relating to campaign spending are ignored, circumvented, and violated in a scandalous way. If you have read your newspapers lately, you know that the law says no person may contribute or loan more than $5,000 in any calendar year to or in behalf of any candidate for President, Vice President, Senator, or member of Congress. It says that no political committee can spend more than $3 million, including amounts spent by others with the committee's knowledge or on its behalf. ? * * You have also read that all sorts of dummy committees and blatant subterfuges are arranged to get around these Federal statutes. Gardner complains that "we have moved perilously close to the time when no American will be able to run for Federal office unless he is wealthy or willing to put himself under obligation to sources of wealth." That is good enough reason to be glad about this lawsuit. But there is another reason of even greater importance: this suit may end a corrosive situation where the men who make the laws and set the standards of law and order are themselves the political beneficiaries of sleazy violations of the law. We may never, under the best of circumstances, make this a society where there is not an excess of violent crime in poorer areas and embezzlement and price fixing in more affluent sectors. But we can be sure that fewer people will heed calls to ethics and good citizenship if they see their leaders constantly riding lawlessness into the seats of political power. So hooray for Dr. Stelnfeld, the Supreme Court Justices, and John Gardner. May their tribe increase. (Field Enterprises, Inc.) Seventies brings shift in concern of intellectuals By Flora Lewis in The Winnipeg Free.Press ]\EW YORK - The first year of the decade has brought surprisingly into focus the likely tenor of the 1970s. It is telegraphed by a notable shift in the concerns of American intellectuals. It is true that the coterie of self - conscious intellectuals is never typical of a nation's mood and perceptions. They are always off on the horizon, sometimes on a deadend track and sometimes discerning the path that many will later follow. A rule-of-thumb test of separate true leads from false is the amount of public irritation that they cause. The public tends to shuck off fringe excitements as frivolous. It tends to be upset, even angered, when it intuitively recognizes the prickle of the future. The abandon, the wild styles, the endless self - examination and final bitterness of the 1960s were foreshadowed by Jack Kerouac and the beatniks. A decade ago, American literature was obsessed with navel contempla tion. Alienation meant the individual's personal discomfort in society. The Subject was the bruised ego. Even as the Kennedy era sought to revive elegance and aristocratic style, the artists were (smashing form. They proclaimed a purely personal esthetic, free of rules, the shape and color of a psychedelic trip no one can share. The beautiful people faded away, without heirs. The hippies and the Yippies and the Weather men succeeded the beatniks. The prevailing intellectual trend this past year has been in the opposite direction - from concentration on self to concentration on society, its basic premises and needs. The artists and writers and thinkers are still alienated from the majority, but they are reaching out now to study and gather in the crowd. Charles A. Reich's "The Greening of America," Theodore Roszak's "The Making of a Counter - Culture," even an ostensibly political-topical book, Garry Willis' "Nixon Agonistes," point the new way. It isn't alotgether new, of course, nothing ever is. Herbert M a r c u s e and the New Left broke the ideological ground several years ago, but they were bogged down in obsolete shackles of Marxism. They still thought the problem was capitalism, and that production by some other system was the answer. The new per- ception is that the problem is not just a system but production itself, a dilemma posed by the struggle for well-being and the profoundly changed terms of that struggle. There is now a wide, many-sided groping for a thesis of the human's condition when man's survival no longer depends on the conquest of nature. For the first time in all history, survival depends on man's ability to protect nature so that it can continue to sustain him. That includes his own nature, pummeled by machines so ingeniously devised. Population and technology, not only including the atom bomb, have reversed the equation of life. Mr. Reich calls the awareness of need for another ethos Consciousness III, which he says must supersede the attitudes of the old frontier and the subsequent corporate state. Mr. Roszak notes that the American "counter - culture" owes more to the traditions of anarchism (not anarchy) and Uto-pianism than to Marx. The deeper rebellion isn't about the exploitation of workers but about too much organization. It seeks to give people the sense of doing something worthwhile through revival of the sense of community. There is still some useless nostalgia in all this. Talk of an "outmoded work ethic" is a sentimental yearning for pre-industrial pastures, as though they could be recreated with-o u t pre-industrial drudgery and privation. Purging the command to work hard and Pauling adds to enemy list i N his laboratory nuclear physicist Linus Pauling has performed some remarkable deeds. Among other things the 69-year-old Stanford University chemistry professor is the only human being to win two Nobel Prizes (Madame Curie had one and a half). Pauling, who won tlie 1954 Nobel Prize for Chemistry and the 1962 Nobel Peace Prize, has thrown a bridge from quantum physics to chemistry, exploring the chemical bonds that hold atoms together and linking molecular abnormality with hereditary disease. Outside his lab Professor Pauling has been just as remarkable. For one thing, he once sued the Defense Department in an attempt to halt nuclear testing. There were many others. He has protested against Vietnam, for peace, against the bomb, against tlie ABM, for the Rosenburgs and against moon rncks. The latest remarkable deed performed by Linus Pauling, however, has made him more controversial than two Nobel Prizes and questioning the worth of moonrocks ever did. lie wrote a book, "Vitamin C and the Common Cold." It's a thin little paperback, only 109 pages, but its repercussions have been enormous. To begin with, says a Manhattan druggist, the book "has made aspirin our second-best i^eller. Everybody's buying Vitamin C. We can't keep enough in stock." And to end with, it has added the drug industry and the American Medical Association to Pauling's impressive list of adversaries. The common cold, of course, is extraordinarily common. It occurs more often than all other diseases combined. Each year, Americans spend millions By Lee Mueller, NEA Service of dollars on drugstore remedies to combat colds. And now along comes Linus Pauling with a cure - massive doses of Vitamin C - and a cause. Drawing from Dr. Douglas Gildersleeve's magazine article "Why Organized Medicine Sneezes at the Common Cold," Pauling accuses tlie medi c a 1 profession and drug industry of downplaying the merits of Vitamin C so as not to jeopardize their own business flow. True or not, the medical profession at least makes a point of sneezing at Linus Pauling. "Prof. Pauling is a nu c 1 e a r physicist, not a doctor," said New York University's Dr. Adrian Zorgniotti (medical men are careful not to refer to academic Ph.D. - types as "doctor"). "Pauling has the advantage of being a Nobel laureate. He's like a baseball player who goes around making speeches about politics. People listen to him because he's a baseball player, not because he knows anything about politics. "Prof. Pauling has offered no scientific proof of his assertions. His opinions are backed up only by his personal-type authority. "People should stay in their own area of competence," said an AMA spokesman in Chicago. Drug companies limit their remarks to: "Passing fad-like the copper bracelet." Of course, people have been taking Vitamin C (ascorbic acid) for years as a presumed protection against cold. Pauling's contribution - based on first - hand (his own) information - has been simply to prescribe more of it. Since 1966, Pauling and his wife have been taking Vitamin C in gigantic doses. Ordinarily, l'j milligrams (thousandths of a gram) of Vitamin C a day will prevent death from that old sailor's malady, scurvy. Pauling, however, suggests daily dosages of up to 10 full grams, if necessary. That's the equivalent of the juice of 200 oranges. The Paulings no longer get colds, he says. "I may have a little catchl-ness in my throat or start feeling as if I'm getting a cold, but then I take more Vitamin C and it goes away." succeed won't rejuvenate tired social blood. The need is to replace over-organized work with more satisfying activity. But these books and others are an effort to break the grip of the notion that man must go on trying to put down nature rather than to placate it. To me, this means that at last the serious effort has been launched to adjust to our different world with reason, analysis and insight, the tools of philosophy. That is the likely theme of the 1970s, regardless of political brouhaha. It does not mean serenity. The answers are still beyond reach and the unreasoning fury of frustration is mounting. Turbulence seems unavoidable when the most fundamental premises of our civilization must be reopened to question. But it is encouraging. No longer are the scouts of our mental and moral and esthetic frontiers just telling us how lost they feel alone in a bizarre landscape. They have started exploring again, looking for greener pastures beyond tlie nonsense and decay they taught us to recognize. Looking backward Through the Herald 1921 - Experimental stations on the prairies, where eradication of smut in wheat can be studied, were advocated by John Bracken of the Manitoba Agricultural College. He declared the country was losing nearly $10 million through damage of rust. - Louisburg, N.S. is one of the most law-abiding towns on the continent. During 1930 there was not a single arrest for drunkenness, theft, assault or any similar charge. It was not necessary to call one session of the police court during the year. 1941 - Almost 14 years after the French airmen Nungesser and Coli vanished on an attempted trans Atlantic flight from Paris to New York, a pencilled note in a bottle has been found at Shippigan Gully, N.B. It is not know whether the message is authentic, but it has been forwarded to officials in Ottawa. 1951 - At least 50 new Integrated housing units may be built in Lethbridge this year. Council approved a proposal to build homes on 19th and 20th streets in the Silverdale division. 1961 - Unemployment in Canada shot to 528,000, a jump of 99,000 from the mid-November total. The year-end figure for 1960 marks a post-war record for the month. The Lethbridge Herald 504 7th St. S., Lethbridge, Alberta LETHBRIDGE HERALD CO. LTD., Proprietors and Publishers Published 1905-1954, by Hon. W. A. BUCHANAN Second Class Mail Registration No. 0012 Member of The Canadian Press and the Canadian Dally Newspaper Publishers' Association and the Audit Bureau of Circulations CLEO W. MOWERS, Editor and Publisher THOMAS H. ADAMS, General Manager JOE BALLA WILLIAM HAY Managing Editor Associate Editor ROY F. MILES DOUGLAS K. WALKER Advertising Manager Editorial Page Editor "THE HERALD SERVES THE SOUTH"