Change of Climate
By RICHARD
AA ccoRDING to Gallup Poll figures released ..five days before Mr. Khrushchev's visit, 89 per cent. of Americans hope that he will be treated 'in a courteous manner.' Not all those, one gathers, who share this hope feel that the exchange of visits is a good idea. Some, in explaining their views, said that since the President had determined to go to the Soviet Union, courtesy to Khrushchev was called for by prudence rather than principle; we want no harm or humiliation to come to our President, and we must therefore accord the Premier the kind of treatment we hope the Presi- dent will receive. A surprisingly large number of Americans, however, are prepared to extend a real welcome and believe that the visit will advance the comity of nations. A Trendex poll taken a few weeks ago showed about 75 per cent. convinced of the wisdom of the course the President had chosen. A poll taken now might show a somewhat larger percentage. To those who have been trying to observe American public opinion through the Cold War years, these figures are astonishing. To a degree, presumably, they reflect a judgment not so much of the President's wisdom in making a par- ticular decision as of his wisdom in general; had he rejected the idea of an exchange and described it as an outrageous one, he might have had between 75 and 89 per cent. backing him up. Public opinion is odd.
Still and all, the climate has changed in many Ways. It went completely unremarked in this Country a few weeks back that a celebrated former Communist, a man who is still a Marxist of sorts, was wandering around the country, at the govern- ment's invitation, talking with officials of our defence establishment. He was the Right Hon. John Strachey, who was here under the Smith- Mundt programme, which meant that to a degree the author of The Coming Struggle for Power was enjoying the- patronage of Senator Karl Mundt, Republican of South Dakota, friend and ally of the late Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, former stalwart of the House Committee on Un- American Activities, treasurer of Mundt Loan and Investment, co-author of the Mundt-Nixon Anti-Communist Bill, as well as former National Vice-President of the lzaak Walton League, to list only a few of his distinctions. It was surprising enough to find Mr. Strachey here under these auspices; after all, during the great flowering of liberalism twenty-odd years ago, he was stopped in New- York harbour by immigration officials and confined for weeks to Ellis Island, where, if memory serves, he gave instruction in rugby and Lenin to others similarly detained. But it was almost impossible to credit the advice that his purpose in coming here—and ours in having him —was exchange of views and information on matters relating to the national defence. Yet the advice was authentic and the purpose, evidently, fulfilled. It simply could not have happened five Years ago.
* * CRIMES OF VIOLENCE committed by adolescents are much in the news. There have been some especially hideous ones in New York lately, and the usual responses are being made by the usual people. Task forces of sociologists and psycholo- gists are looking for causes, and, somewhat in advance of finding them, proposing remedies. The mayor and the governor have initiated an ex- change of visits to discuss new approaches by welfare agencies and officers of the law. Respon- sible newspapers are pointing out that it is wrong to assume that the crime rate is going up merely because irresponsible newspapers choose to dwell at length on a few recent crimes.
Thus far, the one question of real substance that has been dealt with is whether the police power can be and is being effectively used to restrain violence. Many people believe that the solution is a greater number of policemen and a broader warrant for the use of force by individual officers. `They should be free to use their nightsticks,' it is commonly said, and the saying may have great merit. A propos of this, one enterprising reporter has brought to light a most significant develop- ment. He has learned by extensive interviewing that the cops are restrained from the use of force by something more inhibiting than departmental regulations. There is an inner voice counselling them against meeting violence with violence. Murray Kempton of the New York Post had the striking idea that policemen, like other men of their time, had become convinced that spanking, swatting, and pushing around children does no good and may, indeed, scar their psyches. He tested this hunch by talking with many of them and promptly confirmed it. By and large, New York policemen shrink from violence, especially violence directed at the young. Their lot is not made unhappy by orders to take it easy with the billy club; they regard the orders as sensible and humane, and few are nonconformist enough to want to use their weapons except in preventing, at the last moment, acts of violence to others or to themselves.
WE HAVE A NEW LABOUR LAW, and the unions are, in the main, unhappy about it. Most of them have favoured legislation requiring the regular filing of financial statements and a stricter account- ability of union officers for their business trans- actions. The new law does these things, but it goes beyond them and forbids certain techniques for exerting economic pressure on employers and on rival unions. It provides stiffer penalties than we have had up to now for the union that tries to force one employer's hand by taking action against another with whom the first does business. It forbids 'recognition' picketing—that is, the picket- ing of an employer dealing with a union with which the picketing organisation is in dispute over jurisdiction. Authorities on labour who are not presently associated with unions believe that little will be changed by the law, which they say is filled with loopholes and escape hatches. The law is directed mainly against the International Brother- hood of Teamsters, the world's largest and, probably, least savoury union, and if its provisions are enforceable the union and its head, James Hoffa, may suffer. It is argued, though, that Hoffa and the Teamsters are today so strong that no employer who wished to stay in business would be likely to risk the consequences of filing a com- plaint.
Previous page
