n;ilf indict U.
O
Q (1 O
iiii.ii.-Jihii -iir '" "
by STEVE COHN
College Press Service
Sen. George McOovern, the
first announced candidate for
the Presidency of the United
States, occupies the Senate
office formerly assigned to
John F. Kennedy. Its walls and
shelves are filled with
photographs and other
memorabilia that give the room
a JFK-RFK presence.
Also well-represented is
Abraham Lincoln, with a
portrait, three small statues
and a desk condensation of his
writings. This is the context of
the McGovern presidential
candidacy, finding its 'political
perspective in the liberal
tradition of the Democratic
Party.
What emerges from the
interview is the obvious fact
that the senator feds very
deeply about the war and
about poor people in this
country. He approaches these
issues from an almost
common-sense perspective, and
seems to reject ideological
explications and solutions for
them, denying the argument
that foreign intervention and
domestic inequality are deeply
rooted in the U.S. "free
enterprise" system. He speaks
for a foreign policy that would
SPifllT
(
OF
57
for
HAMBURGER, FRIES & COKE
Starts Wednesday-Saturday
. INTERNATIONAL
HUUSE faAKES
I
seek to actively coexist with
communist nations, and sees
no economic contradictions in
this.
At home, he talks in terms
of radically reordered
priorities, the cultural
politics of the student
movement is a far less urgent
question than the immediate
needs of the poor. He claims
that liberal politics can speak
to these needs.
The aura of power and
politics that would be expected
to surround presidential
candidate does not accompany
McGovern. His presence is that
of a good man, and it is an
impression that grows after
leaving his office.
Q. Some politicians have
made campus freedom and
dissent a scare issue, and have
called for severe reprisals, such
as cutting of scholarship and
loan funds, against students
and faculty who disrupt
"normal campus activity." Do
you perceive these
developments to be a serious
threat to free speech?
A. Yes, 1 do. I think the
federal government has to stay
out of the area of campus
discipline. If there is any one
factor that is more precious
A
if
u
miMYtlllS
h 1229 R Street s
than anything else on a
university campus, it is its
freedom. The federal
government is neither
competent nor does it have the
right to move into that area.
The university community is
going to have to establish its
own rules.
Q. A lot of the student
movement today is based no
on a political analysis but on a
cultural one. The movement
talks in terms of the quest for
community, meaningful work,
reform, etc. What sympathy
would you have for the
cultural perspective of the
movement?
A. Well, I think that is a
legitimate concern. Students
recognize more than rhetoric
will be required to deal with
our problems. I think what
bothers students and older
people alike is the enormous
gap between professions on the
part of politicians and what we
actually do. . . that to me is the
biggest single political problem
in this country today, to earn
the confidence of people in the
words of government officials.
Q. It has been said that a lot
of the students are seeking an
alternative life-style to the
current materialist posture that
is offered in American society.
One suggestion is a guaranteed
minimum income for all,
without a work provision.
Would you favor that?
A. 1 think the concern of
students about the materialism
of our society is a legitimate
one. Actually we have been
taught for years in the
churches and in our religious
heritage to recognie that
fact -that the claims of. life and
brotherhood are more
important than the claims of
materialism. For my own self I
think a higher priority than
guaranteeing an income tor
every citizen in this country is
to begin by guaranteeing a job
for everyone who wants to
work. I think that to many
students the importance of
that is not fully appreciated.
But to the poor man living in
Harlem or the South Bronx,
the most urgent thing right
now is a decent job. That's true
with the poor of this country
all across the nation. I think
the highest single priority righ
now would be for the federal
government to say we are going
to do what we can to build the
kind of economy where people
can find work at a decent wage
in the private sector, but failing
that we will quarantee a range
of public service jobs, not just
make-work jobs but things that
are in the public interest for
anyone who wishes to work.
Q. Do you believe that
the volunteer army concept
threatens to put too much
power in the hands of the
military. And wouldn't a
volunteer army produce
enlisted ranks composed even
more disproportionately of the
poor and the blacks?
A. I don't buy either one of
those assumptions. I think that
we ought to go back to a
voluntary system. . . that's
been the traditional American
way of recruiting military
manpower. The danger of a
military takeover comes when
the civilians quit doing their
job as trie responsible managers
of the military. If the
President, the Secretary of
Defense, and the Congress of
the United States will abide by
the Constitution we can head
off the danger of a military
takeover whether we have a
volunteer army or we have a
draft. With regard to the all
black, all Puerto Rican, all
Mexun-American or whatever
THE DAILY NEBRAS KAN
At:
J?
McGovern . .
teT n you want to use to
describe the composition of
the volunteer force, 1 think
that right now under the draft
system you have a
disproportionate percentage of
black and poor people in the
armed forces. By going to a
volunteer system at least you
would pay those people a living
wage and you would have to
compete in the open market
for support and enlistments.
Q. Would you be in support
of the planned April 24th
anti-war demonstration in
Washington? It is called in the
legal and peaceful style of last
year's moratorium.
A. From the practical
standpoint I question what the
impact of those
demonstrations is on public
opinion anymore. I
p'ticipated in both the
mobilization and the
moratorium a year or so ago,
and I was disappointed in the
impact they had on public
opinion. It's hard to keep
somebody from standing up
and waving a Viet Cong flag,
and unfortunately that's what
the television networks focus
on. It leaves the implication
that nobody is against the war
except for a few extreme
radicals and Viet Cong
sympathizers, whereas when
the polls are taken it shows
that the American people
overwhelmingly oppose the
war.
Q. South Vietnamese troops
have invaded Laos with
American tactical support.
There is a massive U.S.
presence literally hovering over
the combat in Cambodia. Do
you foresee a Senate attempt
to expand the Cooper-Church
Amendment to preclude
unequivocably an American
participation in the fighting in
these two countries?
A. What I would hope is
that we could not only do that
with the Cooper-Church
Amendment but that we would
go beyond that to the
McGovern-Hat field which
terminates all military
operations in Indochina. The
heart of the problem is that the
United States is fundamentally
mistaken in intervening in a
revolutionary struggle in
Southeast Asia.
Q. The President has
proposed a military budget of
a good man.
77.5 billion dollars, aside from
Indochina expenses. Do you
believe this sum can be
reduced?
A. Well, it can be reduced
by cutting out a new
generation of weapons that we
don't really need. Included in
that 77 billion is the ABM that
we don't need, the MIRV
system which we don't need.
Included is a new Cadillac
air-condition tank which we
don't need, included is several
billion dollars in new
expenditures for the navy that
go beyond any real security
needs, included is the new B-l
bomber, which before it is fully
constructed will probably cost
12-15 billion dollars. Those arc
all things that go beyond any
reasonable defense needs. Also
included is the assumption that
we are going to maintain
indefinitely 300,000 soldiers in
Western Turope (with 200,000
dependents) at a cost of some
14 billion dollars a year.
Q. What do you think of the
testimony emanating from the
Winter Soldier hearings now
being held in Detroit and the
war crimes hearings in general
that have been held across the
countrv bv Vietnam veterans?
A. I think that the charges
that have been brought by
these young men, all veterans
of combat in Vietnam, not
only deserve a hearing, but
need to be understood by the
members of Congress and by
the American people. What
they are saying in effect is that
the war itself implicates
American soldiers. . . in acts of
atrocity because of the very
nature of the war. Now really
what is the difference between
bombing or shelling with
artillery 70 percent of Quang
Ngai Province, which we have
done, and what Lt. William
Calley and his men apparently
did. We are all implicated in
the slaughter of the innocent in
Southeast Asia. Someday
historians looking back on this
war are going to indict this
country for our involvement in
Indochina. They are going to
point to the fact that perhaps a
million innocent South
Vietnamese civilians have been
killed by the massive military
technology of the United
States. That is a terrible burden
to have on the conscience of
this country.
PAGE 2
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 3, 1971