A troubled American’
argues for a new
_US. foreign policy.

THE ARROGANCE OF POWER.
By Senator J. William Full-
bright (Vintage Books. $2.20).

T IS hardly surprising that the
first printing of this book
was sold out within a week

for it is something exceptional
when the Chairman of the
Foreign Relations Committee of
the United States Senate issues
sharp criticism of presidential
policy, and particularly when he
is in the same political party.

Senator Fullbright is a trou-
bled American. He looks at the
world of today and the role of
his country and feels little satis-
faction.

“America,” he says, “is show-
ing some signs of that fatal pre-
sumption, that over-extension of
power and mission, which has
brought ruin to great nations in
the past. The process has hard-
ly begun, but the war which we
are now fighting can only accele-
rate it. If the war goes on and
expands, if that fatal process
continues to accelerate until
America becomes what she is
not now and never has been, a
seeker after unlimited power
and empire, the leader of a glo-
bal counter-revolution, then
Vietnam will have had a mighty
and tragic fallout indeed.”

Vietnam, of course, has be-
come the fulcrum of dissent over
U.S. foreign policy, and Full-
bright, who certainly is in a
position to know, sees it only
as an extension of a direction
of policy that he feels has a
fundamental error. That error is
the failure to see the fact that
opposition to Communism per se
makes impossible a constructive
foreign policy role for the Unit-
ed States.

The lack of empathy for revo-
lutions of today Fullbright lays
to the fact that the U.S. is an
“unrevolutionary society” and
with the built-in bias against
Communism fails to appreciate
‘the people’s revolutions of the
middle of this century and be-
comes the ally of dictators and
despots of all sorts.

“Present realities,” he says,
“require a revision of priorities
in American policy. The basis of
my criticism of American policy
jn Southeast Asia and Latin
America is a belief that Ameri-
can interests are better served
by supporting nationalism than
by opposing Communism, and
that when the two are-encoun-
tered in the same political move-
ment it is in our interest to ac-
eépt a Communist role in the
government of the country con-

cerned rather than to undertake
the cruel and all but impossible
task of suppressing a genuinely
nationalist revolution.”
Fullbright feels that with such
a realistic approach America
could regain prestige in the
countries of Asia, Africa and
Latin America. In his own way
he expresses the view that the

American way of life is the best -

but he objects to the way it is
being advanced and. wants a
method that will not bring so
much wrath upon the head of
his country.

He sees madness in America’s
attempt to become the police-
man of the world, madness in its
assumption that you can have
guns and butter, madness in its
appearance as a predatory im-
perialist state. .

His hope is for America to
perform services of which “no
great nation has ever before
been capable. To do so,” Full-
bright says, “we must acquire
wisdom to match our power and
humility to match our pride.”

Underlying his criticism is a
recognition of the ability of man-
kind to destroy itself through a
nuclear holocaust.

He is critical of the Senate’s
abdication of its role in debate
on foreign policy. He is critical
of those in high places who at-
tack dissent.

“Gradually but unmistakably,”
he says, “America is showing

signs of that arrogance of power

which has. afflicted, weakened
and in some cases destroyed
great nations in the past. In so
doing we are not living up to
our capacity and promise as a
civilized example for the world.
The measure of our falling short
is the measure of the patriot’s
duty of dissent.”

Coming from Fulbright, this
discovery of an America which
most of the rest of the world
really doesn’t need to be told
about can play an important role
in sharpening the growing de-
bate over foreign policy that we
can see unfolding. It is the posi-
tion of peaceful coexistence and
peaceful competition expressed
from the side of capitalism and
by a representative of the capi-
talist system who has few ques-
tions on the essentials of the
system. This, however, really
strengthens his position in the
U.S. today in developing a new
alignment with a new foreign
policy that would include with-
drawal from Vietnam and non-
intervention in revolutions in
Asia, Africa and Latin America.

In a rather penetrating com-
ment on the difference in moral
reactions in the United States to
the “excesses” of the Red
Guards in China as compared
to the anti-Communist terror in
Indonesia, he comments, in sad-
ness: “One can only conclude
that it is not man’s inhumanity
to man but Communist manifes-
tations of it that arouse the
American conscience.”

The full impact of this book
on American rethinking of
foreign policy is yet to be seen.
One thing, though, that can al-
ready be said is that this Sena-
tor from Arkansas has pulled no
punches within the. framework
of his own pro-American preju-
dice. It can only be hoped that
he can convince his fellow
Americans of his position.

Fulbright makes quite clear
where he stands in this lucid
presentation of a man whofe
views can help shape the future
foreign policy of his country.

‘(P.C.)

Z. BOYD (in Dissent)

ROUGH GOING!

THEATRE

ANADIAN history, from Fif-

ty Million B.C. to Confed-

eration, is ribbed in the
20th annual Spring Thaw (sub-
titled My Country What’s It to
You?) now at the Royal Alex-
andra Theatre in Toronto as part
of an extensive national Centen-
jal Year tour.

It may be remembered that
last year’s review considerably
watered down its acid content
and at the time the show’s
producer, Robert Johnston, an-
nounced future Thaws would
stress entertainment over poli-
tical satire.

The 1967 edition, happily, has
not fulfilled this promise. While
the present Thaw is not exactly
a scorching political satire, it
does offer some rude remarks
about our past and our present,
debunking some myths and Jam-
pooning some historical figures.

We are reminded of the U.S.
contro] of our natural resources.
The sacred rules governing the
country’s earliest exploitation
are revealed to us. A monologue
on armed services unification
(called eunuch-fication) ram-
bles over a number of other
political areas.

The 1967 Thaw, for the first
time, was written by one man,

Donald Harron, insta
score or so of authors,
sult is a greater unity ©
and a better balance. —
- The principal ingt
comedy. Especially fun
Fur Piece, Charles thé’
The Fur Commandmel
ducts of Canada, |
Hoofers, Majority
Yea Wolfe, Yea: 1
calm! — a basketbal
choreographed as ; ba
Pictures projec
large screen provided mi
the laughs. It is a fast®
beautifully costumed hi
show, directed by Ala
and with music and Re
Marian Grudeff and
Jessel. in
Spring Thaw has q
noted for its resource
of talented actors W a
sing and dance, mime iat
lesque, and keep you a
for the better part of he
ing. This should n0!
prising, for the
among the top in the!
Barbara Hamilton,
tie, Douglas Chambé
therine McKinnon, Pe
Diane Nyland, Bes ald
Ron Tanguay an
ron. Matt

Capful of Pennié
is vibrant theaf

ECEIVING its world pre-

miere at Toronto's Cent-
_ ral Library Theatre is the
Aries production of A Capful
of Pennies by John Coulter,
the Canadian author of Riel and
of the opera Dierdre.

Edmund Kean’s career in the
English theatre is examined
shortly before 1814 and during
his later triumphs on the stage
of Drury Lane. :

We see him as a complex
person who knows his talent
and his failings: He is not al-
ways pleasant or decent. He is
cynical, he can be cruel, he
drinks too much, he frequents
low dives, he becomes involved
in scandal.

He denounces himself as “a
mountebank to a world of
mountebanks,” he deplores his
position an “an artist among
the philistines.’ The actor’s
trade, he says bitterly, is a trap.

Mr. Coulter shows us the the-
atre as a commercial business
and as an amusement for the
upper crust of the time, but
chiefly he shows us how one of
England's greatest actors was
affected by this environment —
an actor of whom the writer
Coleridge said that to watch
him was “like reading Shakes-
peare by flashes of lightning.”

This new play is a vibrant
thing, rich in theatrical skills,

E-
April 14, 1967—PACIFIC TRIBUS

with live and pointed ©
and strong character:
James Cunninghal
rector, has a really fi
work with and My
background is lovely: ext
characterizations a© ig
individual scenes, & ‘nt
the first act, seem pel
and the transitions
scenes tend to nevis
Sean Mulcahy, ig!
backstage, at home ® by
ern: is a vital figu jp
bitter and gay, © ta
of “society,” impuder
rogant, “his own wor
His performance !8 a)
commendable since, ¢
down flamboyancy ‘ inte
trates on a deeper
tion. als |
Supplying portray?” ya
siderable impact es
Macleod as_ his ee
conquest,. Nancy K his
wife, Lyn Wright ics hi
flame, Morna WaleS © ‘pe
ther, Claude Bede v
chester Theatre ow?®
rick Boxill as Arn0™ —

{
he

theatre pictures, ”
of Kean before 2%

«ited
Indians when he visil®

a