Alexander Ginzburg, October 18, 1981
“A totalitarian government usually arises with the help of one factor, namely mass terror. The human rights movement in the USSR began in the mid-1950s; it could not have come into being earlier because right before this, in the Soviet Union, there was a 40-year period of bloody, mass terror; approximately 66 million people were killed.
“After the October 1917 revolution, the number of intellectuals who remained could be counted on your fingers. The next victims were the peasants because they were the best carriers of the nation’s historical memory. By the mid-1940s, entire national groups were exterminated.”
“Stalin’s death in `953 ended the most severe and bloodiest repressions in the country. By 1956, people began to feel that they could no longer live under repression and wanted to be heard by the government.
“I had written a lot and was published a great deal but became frustrated with government censorship. The Soviet Secret Police arrested me after I had put out three issues of a magazine called Syntaxis. This ‘childish amusement’ cost me two years of my life spec in a labor camp.
“The human rights movement in the Soviet Union has attempted to form free trade union, much as the Solidarity movement in Poland. But so far Solidarity has not been successful in becoming a mass trade union movement. In 1977 the trade union leaders were placed in insane asylums (by the KGB) and still are sitting there”

Congressman Barney Frank vs. Cal Thomas, October 4, 1981

Thomas: “The Moral Majority’s main tenets are prolife, support of the traditional male-female relationship, anti-pornography and against legalization of drugs, and pro-American.
Today religion and religious principles are suffering from discrimination The trend in America is to secularize government and bleach the culture clean from religious influence. The Moral Majority is a pluralistic political group whose supporters are mad and not going to take it any more. However, the organization does not act as a political arm twister.”

Frank: “The Moral Majority invokes religious positions to argue for the illegitimacy of its opponents’ positions.”

Thomas: “The Moral Majority deplores the double standard toward the voice of the left vs. the voice of the right. Both sides have their nuts. We’re dealing with ours and I hope the left is dealing with theirs.”

Frank: “There are excesses by the new left that I find objectionable. The Moral Majority supports legislators who oppose abortions but also oppose child nutrition and day care. From their perspective, life begins at conception and ends at birth.”

Thomas: “The greatest danger, something worse then war, is to be silent, and the Moral Majority will never be guilty of that. We would rather be arrogant and accurate than be wishy-washy and afraid to speak out.”

Frank: “The Moral Majority’s attitude is, ‘We will decided and if you disagree you are immoral.’”

Norman Lear, March 29, 1981

“The religious New Right has grown so strong that it threatens the spirit of liberty for this generation. The ‘Christian New Right’ is threatening the freedom of expression of others through a rapidly growing network of TV and radio stations that is blanketing the country, espousing the same far right fundamentalist points of view while attacking the integrity and the character of anyone who does not stand with them.”

“These leaders and organizations have ever First Amendment right to express themselves as they wish. But if we agree that the American experiment is based on the conviction that a healthy society is best maintained- not by an attempt to impose uniformity but through free and open interchange of differing opinions- then the dogma of the religious New Right violates the spirit of the First Amendment and the spirit of liberty by claiming a kind of infallibility.”

“The religious New Right is making a claim to infallibility. To disagree with their conclusions on numerous matters of morality and politics is to be labeled poor Christian pr unpatriotic or antifamily.”

“The root cause of America’s problems is out choice of bottom-line behavior. No one will take the chance with an original idea – not when the name of the game is to win fast. In industry, government, or academia, leadership everywhere seems all ready to sell the future short for a moment of success.”

Daniel Yergin vs. Barry Commoner, October 26, 1980

Commoner: Our growing dependence on foreign oil is because of actions taken by the oil companies in their own self-interest. Oil companies should be turned into public utilities. People, not company profits, should run

Yergin: Although oil companies do make large profits, attacking them diverts attention from the real cause of the energy crisis- the political and economic implications of the world’s limited oil supply. The United Sates could use 30-40% less energy without sacrificing its present standard of living. Energy conservation is an issue of survival.”

Isaac Asimov, October 12, 1980
“I predict an enormous industrial revolution in space. I foresee interplanetary expansion and industrialization as viable ways of solving many world and natural crises.
“All worldwide organizations will strive to work towards planetary expansion. Disasters such as the effects of a possible nuclear war, diminishing oil supplies, volcanic eruptions, and other possible mishaps could, if not addressed, lead to compounded problems.
“We should be spreading ourselves throughout the universe. Interplanetary expansion could lead to possible solutions to these problems and serves as an alternative place for people to pioneer to in the even of a catastrophe.
“More money should be invested in space exploration activities. There are enormous industrial resources in space. The true catastrophe is men using their time on foolish parochial projects.
”Unity amount nations is essential if interplanetary expansion is to be considered, Nations must work together in order for expansion and building or space settlement to take place.

Vance Packard, May 4, 1980
“The energy crisis is with us and the only way to deal with it in the next five years it to use cold turkey conservation. One of the most promising energy resources in the future will be nuclear fusion. But it will take 15 to 20 years before it will be fully developed. For the present coal is one of the solutions for the energy crisis, but coal is a nasty business. All alternative energy sources are promising but not for the next five years.
” We didn’t want to face the fact that we lived in a finite society, and today we are paying the price for our ignorance. Some people think it is their God-given right to jump into their air-conditioned cars and go to a night football game which lights the whole area for miles around with oil. In five years we will be in serious energy crisis, and in 15 years we will be out of petroleum.
“I don’t believe Regan when he says we can become energy self-sufficient if we decontrol the oil industry. One way to alleviate the oil crisis is to develop synthetic fuels. Another way is the use of corn as a fuel. But the use of corn might raise some moral questions: What is more important, gasohol or the use of corn as food for starving countries?”

John Kenneth Galbraith, October 14, 1979

“ The great conservative revolution is no more that old conservatives talking louder. A large share of all economic comment comes from people with comfortable economic positions, who have access to the media. And as the conservative voice becomes louder, it seems to suggest that the tide of public opinion has shifted to the right.

“ It is the beginning of wisdom to mistrust these great right-wing revivalists. Many of their ideas are deeply in conflict with reality. Their philosophy can be summarized as ‘Services are a burden hoisted on unwilling taxpayers for no particular reason by bureaucrats.’

“ The ideal free market system is inoperable in today’s economy because of monopolies and oligarchies. Something is wrong when economists argue that Exxon and neighborhood newsboys are operating under the same economic forces.

“ The argument that the market gives people choices while the intervention of government takes choice away ignores the fact that government intervention gives freedom to the poor although it takes some freedom away from the more affluent.”

David Halberstam, October 7, 1979

“Television is dangerous; it has strengthened some institutions and weakened others. It has made society more volatile and far less structure.

“ The Pope and Ted Kennedy have the gift of theatre that makes them effective on television; it has given us a whole new kind of candidate. The coming of television ushered out the era of party system politics.

“ Americans know the government as slow, corroded, and awkward. They search for the nonpolitician who has style but not necessarily substance. One reason the president’s power has increased is that he can get on TV anytime he wants. With this unlimited exposure goes the danger that the people may get too much of him. The demented media hype raises expectations higher than capacity of government to fulfill them.

“TV has also come to determine what is news. Asking if a demonstration really happened if it is not covered b the media is akin to asking if a tree that falls in a forest with no one around makes a noise.

“Print is more important that even before. TV evaporates. A newspaper holds its turf. It becomes the daily menu.”

Phyllis Schafly vs. Karen DeCrow, April 29, 1979

Schafly: The ERA’s requirement that women be assigned to military combat is the greatest take-away of women’s rights. History offers no example of wars won with coed battles.

DeCrow: People are laughing at the new draft proposal. They are saying that we will lose our military strength if women are drafted. But given today’s weapons, physical strength is not an issue.

Schafly: ERA has nothing to do with equal pay or equal rights.

DeCrow: ERA will make the gains made in overcoming sexual discrimination permanent. 51% of the population is female, 17% hold jobs with a salary of $15,000 or more, and for every dollar a man earns, a women earns 50 cents. You can change these statistics by lending your support to get the three remaining states left to ratify the amendment.

Schafly: The ERA would require that husbands no longer support wives. You don’t have to accept that husbands should support wives, but ERA would not make it a free decision.

DeCrow: In the fight for ERA, there is the myth that women need to be protected and that ERA will take this protection away.

Schafly: Forty million husbands support their wives. Should we tell them that their support is wrong because we have entered a new era?  We don’t have the right to change these terms.

DeCrow: The person who has the most gain form the ERA is the housewife. According to a survey, the housewife performs $3.4 billion of service each year. Yet she is entitles to no money but the money her husband chooses to give her. It is time to change that. ERA will not change the country overnight but it will end sexism under the law.”

Schafly: All I see in ERA is the takeaway of rights women already have.

DeCrow: It is disgusting for a nation who holds itself out as a leader in human rights not to hold out equal rights for women. Women might not have been at the last supper but they certainly will be at the next.

Prof. Norman Rasmussen vs. Prof. Henry Kendall, April 8. 1979

Prof. Rasmussen (head of MIT’s Dept. of Nuclear Engineering):

“ Despite the nuclear accident at Three Mile Island, nuclear power is the cleanest and most efficient form of energy available and should remain a key component of the U.S. energy picture.

“No new energy discovery will result in a sudden solution to the electricity supply problem. Even with a full commitment to alternative energy sources like solar, geothermal, and nuclear fusion, the implementation and commercial use of these technologies is 25 years away. The safety record of the nuclear industry is outstanding, and industry can learn from Three Mile Island and prevent similar incidents in the future. With the myriad different uses and demands for energy today, it is unrealistic to expect the United States could get along with less power in the future than in currently consumes. Forcing industries to curtail its consumption of power could cause more unemployment and an adverse ripple effect on the economy. If we wait for a no-risk solution to the energy problem we’ll surely get no solution at all.”

Prof. Henry Kendall:

“Industry and government are recklessly promoting nuclear growth at the expense of safety and, unless this course is reversed, nuclear accidents like Three Mile Island will occur every year or two.

“Three Mile Island was a near brush with catastrophe. The risks of nuclear power are unacceptable. Government and industry have concealed and misrepresented the risk of nuclear power and delayed the implementation of safety programs. The government has violated the public trust in the question of nuclear power.

“We need nuclear programs that are above suspicion; all nuclear plants around the country should be reinspected and, in some cases, shut down in order to be retrofitted for safety.”