The main advantage of a slogan as vague and general as “the great society” is that everyone can make of it what he pleases. No self-respecting society on earth wants to be anything other than great. No political leader would dare run on a platform which did not imply the possession of a vision of grandeur. Each of us has his own dreams, but they contain a common longing for a way of life which men are able to call great. All of which means that the phrase, “the great society,” says practically nothing; or better, that it says nothing until one gives it some content.
As a Catholic journal of opinion, now celebrating its fortieth anniversary, the great society has always meant for us the realization of the commonweal, the common good. We have never been tempted to believe that the good life for the individual can be achieved apart from the good life for all men. Thus we have rejected those economic theories which hold that unfettered competition, based on personal self-interest, will insure a decent living standard for all. Thus we have rejected the belief that each nation should be motivated only by its national interest, as if a balance of jingoistic self-seeking in the world will lead to a peaceful balance of power. Thus we have rejected a concept of states rights which would have the effect of depriving minority groups of their constitutional and human rights.
That list could easily be extended, but what matters is not the editorial stance of THE COMMONWEAL over the years, but the future of the great society. One thing seems evident: the quality of life within American society cannot be separated from the role that society is to play in the world. A nation dedicated to the proposition that only the material well-being of its own citizens counts will be a selfish nation, liable to corruption from within and a potential threat to other nations. We were happy to see Senator Goldwater defeated. He represented the spirit of the rampantly acquisitive society, a society of atomized individuals each seeking his own good. Not surprisingly, his candidacy lacked all vision of a wholly interdependent world community; foreign aid was to be measured only in terms of Americas political interests, not of an ethical stewardship of our nations great wealth.
Whether the rejection of Senator Goldwater means a rejection of the acquisitive spirit is uncertain; probably not. But at any rate it indicates the possibility of setting the American sights higher. The American people clearly will not accept a candidate whose goals are petty. The people at least want to feel that progress is being made toward justice, toward world peace, toward expanding human horizons. If President Johnson received a mandate, that is most likely where it lies. His mandate is certainly not based on his own popularity (which has never been great), nor is it necessarily based on an approval of all of his programs. If the people do not know exactly where they want to go, they have at any rate said they do not want to g o backwards.
In foreign affairs, it need hardly be said, there is an overwhelming desire to find an escape from nuclear terror. Nothing hurt Senator Goldwater so much as the suspicion that he would be irresponsible with the nations nuclear arsenal. Whether that accusation was just or unjust is beside the point. What counted was the nations rejection of nuclear saber-rattling. Whatever political mileage there was in the charge that our armed forces might be weaker in the near future, this was more than offset by a fear that our military power might have to be used in an all-out confrontation. The climate ought, then, to be good for further efforts in the direction of a meaningful East-West rapprochement, of fresh steps toward disarmament and of a peaceful solution to outstanding local conflicts.
In domestic matters, there is no stopping the Negro drive for equal rights. Many whites are not happy with this drive; given half a chance, they will probably hinder and resist it in the months to come. Even so, racism has gone out of style, and the chal lenge now is to devise laws and safeguards whic h can cut through the more subtle forms of opposi-tion bound to develop. Yet the gaining of full right s by no means exhausts the matter. Beyond that lie s the urgent need for greater economic opportunity, whether for the poor Negro or the poor white.
Let us now try to set forth in some detail the specific direction we believe the nation’s quest for a great society should take, both in its foreign relations and in its domestic policies. Though others could be cited, we want to suggest eight lines of progress.
1. Disarmament
The United States and the U .S.S.R. have been divided by “style” as much as by content in recent disarmament negotiations. The Soviets, accustomed to dealing in five-and ten-year plans, insist on commitment to a comprehensive disarmament scheme before embarking on a first step; anything less smacks of insincerity to them. The U.S., with its pragmatic tradition, distrusts pledges to sweep-ing disarmament programs as mere propaganda and prefers a step-by-step, trial and error approach. These differences may possibly be transcended by recent events demonstrating the common interest of the U.S. and Russia in preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. The moral and economic factors which have prevented nuclear proliferation obviously must be reinforced by international agree-ment. The U.S. should propose the establishment of non-nuclear zones, such as Latin America and Africa, within which the development, stockpiling, and use of nuclear devices would be banned by treaty. Inspection and enforcement machinery (which remains the key problem of any disarmament plan) could be constructed, either independently or through the U .N., thus providing the necessary pragmatic experience on which to base further disarmament agreements.
2. Coexistence
The Communist world remains divided. A number of satellite countries and party cadres in non-Communist lands have now expressed approval of the Khrushchev ouster, but not all. The present attempt to heal the breach between Russia and China has put a stop to the exchange of violent recriminations, but basic differences remain. Immediately there is disagreement on the calling of a world Communist meeting: in the background there is the new Soviet leaders’ pledge to continue a coexistence policy which the Chinese continue to denounce in no uncertain terms. There is also bitter contention over Mongolia, and the split in various Communist groups the world over reflects the over-all Russo-Chinese rivalry for leadership of a Communist movement bent on world domination.
Accordingly the American task is to further such independence and such divergences, and to approach each segment of the Communist entity dif-ferently. As of now it is Soviet Russia that possesses the industrial might and military strength. The balance of terror dictates “peaceful coexistence.” Conciliatory Kremlin policy should lead to reciprocatio n on our part. And just as the new leaders must come to see that responsible cooperation pays, so Soviet probing for Western weaknesses must be met with firmness on our part. This country does need to take the initiative by proposing to the Soviet Union imaginative agreements that will further world prosperity and peace.
Communist China is the power of the future. Contact must somehow be established between it and the United States. Late as it is, this is a better time to start negotiations rather than later when th e Chinese have risen to modern industrial and military strength. But trade restrictions to delay building up of the Chinese arsenal must be continued. Admittedly, a basis for negotiation is hard to come by. Willingness to sign a test-ban treaty or som e other meaningful demonstration of Chinese cooperativeness would be a feasible prerequisite. Recognition of the Mao regime will be politically difficult here without something on China’s part in return. Even so, some means must be found to start talking. Toward the satellites, the task appears to be les s complicated. The aim is to encourage independence from Moscow and Peking. In some instances, encouragement can take the form of increased trade , but the most promising means all round is a multiplication of cultural exchanges.
3. Technical Assistance
The achievement of independence, economic strength and political stability by underdeveloped nations throughout the world should continue to be a keystone of American policy. This will often involve assistance to non-aligned peoples antagonistic to the United States and, in many cases, to “un-grateful” nations that will not support us in votes in the U.N. As good a formulation as any for expressing America’s responsibilities toward, and aspirations for, the world’s have-not peoples can be found in the Alliance for Progress, which so far has been realized to an extremely limited extent. In this connection, America’s present threat to refuse to renew its substantial pledges of U.N. technical assistance unless Soviet Russia pays up what it owes the United Nations must not be viewed as an effort to reduce American foreign aid. It is primarily a warning to the non-aligned nations to uphold the fundamental rules of the U.N., as the acceptance of a double standard in this matter could be fatal to the growing potentialities of the United Nations for the preservation of world peace.
4. Western Europe
An economically healthy and independent-minded Europe is a reality to which U.S. foreign policy must adjust. The United States must oppos e the Gaullist dream of independent deterrents while recognizing its cause: the fear that America will not defend Europe now that Soviet rockets can carry the battle to U.S. rather than European soil. United States commitments to Europe must be strengthened and made concrete without the distribution of nuclear weapons or the stirring of Russian fear of Germany. We should, first, scrap the idea of the multilateral fleet—or, to save face, scale it down to the level of a non-nuclear experiment in international military cooperation. Second, we should encourage the Labor Party to proceed with its planned abandonment of Britains deterrent, thus helping to dissociate international “adulthood” from the possession of nuclear weaponry. Third, the U.S. must pursue a juggling act of a German policy, supporting Germany to the extent that rules out any temptation toward a reunification settlement on Soviet terms; urging (and pressuring when possible) German concessions such as recognition of the Oder-Neisse boundary; and opposing absolutely any further steps toward West German control over nuclear weapons.
5. Southeast Asia
A military solution to the chaos in South Vietnam is no longer foreseeable. U.S. forces in Vietnam are now talking about a “12- to 20-year”war, which seems to mean that a stalemate is the best we can hope for, while the worst—total collapse of the South Vietnamese regime—looms a much more probable alternative. The Viet Cong collects taxes in two thirds of the nation, and feels strong enough to attack our biggest airfield just outside Saigon: By all accounts the war has never gone so badly, and the possibility of the rise of a neutralist South Vietnamese regime, pledged to order the U.S. out of the country, becomes more and more distinct. However dangerous and unpopular at home, a negotiated settlement in Vietnam seems to be the only way out. General de Gaulle’s ideas here are worth exploring. A neutralist Vietnam, with some believable guarantees and perhaps a role for France or the U .N. as guarantor of the agreement, should be acceptable. With the way the war is going, however, we suspect that only a massive military build-up by the United States, and perhaps a token raid or two on North Vietnam, will be able to bring the Communists to the negotiating table.
6. Poverty
Thanks to a handful of writers, whose voices have been amplified by virtually the entire national press and by the President himself, a war on poverty is now taken for granted. Only the scope of the war is a live issue. In general, we think most estimates, including those announced by the President are far too low. When we talk about elimination of poverty as a rational goal of the worlds richest society, we are talking billions, not millions. It simply cannot be done within the framework of a balanced budget. General emphasis should not be on enlarging the dole (although the nation could well sustain a large permanent dole as the price of general prosperity) but on attacking the structures of poverty and enlarging individual opportunity. We would like to see a broad program for Appalachia, a strong domestic peace corps, a CCC for unemployed drop-outs, a larger federal role in rehabilitation and retraining, and attractive tax concessions for privat e enterprises that stress retraining.
7. Social Legislation
Mr. Johnson’s mandate is surely one for an active federal government. Some of the priorities here are holdovers from the Kennedy administration: health care for the aged under social security, broader aid to education, tax reform and housing programs. In connection with the latter, a department of urban affairs should be created, with cabinet status for its director. The cities badly need federal assistance, and in some cases urban problems such as transportation and air pollution already cut across city and state lines. The tax reform that eluded President Kennedy should be sought, with particular attention given to building pressure to close the depletion-allowance loopholes. Another urgent need is legislation to give the President standing authority to cut taxes when quick action is necessary to avert a recession. The long delay before Congress acts on anti-recession tax cuts badly impairs their usefulness. In the civil rights field, new legislation is unlikely for some time, but as long-term goals, laws on fair employment practices and fair housing, already on the books in many states, ought to cover the entire country.
Pension funds, though they take advantage of favorable tax conditions, are not protected by federal law, and should be. Aid to education should concentrate on helping the poorer states which are currently without the resources for first-rate educational systems, in many cases despite the fact that they spend proportionately more for schools than states such as New York and California. Aid, too, should benefit pupils of all schools, private and religious, where national interest dictates. To protect the nations most exploited work force, the one million migrant workers, legislation along the lines suggested by Sen. Harrison Williams subcommittee should be enacted. The law could cover contracts, housing and working conditions. The extensions of Public Law 78, which keep up the flow of cheap Mexican labor to compete with hard-pressed domestic migrant workers, should be ended. Despite the arguments of the few large growers, there is no shortage of U.S. farm workers.
8. Congressional Reform
In an age of crisis, the Congress of the United States must be capable of swift, sure legislation; many of its present procedures make this impossible. Chairmen of standing committees should be chosen by secret vote in party caucuses from amongthe three senior party members on each committee. The majority party members of the House Rules committee should be appointed every two years by the Speaker. The signatures of 218 Representatives, or even fewer, should bring any bill out from committee and onto the House floor. The members of the House and not the Rules Committee should determine whether a bill passed by the House should be sent to conference with the Senate; and the majority of members from each house appointed to a conference committee should by their votes have shown themselves in favor of the bill as passed by their particular house. The Senate majority leader should be authorized to present motions which, if adopted, would require committees considering major items of legislation to report them to the Senate within thirty days. No Senator should be allowed to hold the floor more than two hours, except by unanimous consent. The Senate should reinstate the right to cut off debate by a two-thirds vote on the motion of any Senator after a measure has been considered for fifteen hours over three days.
