No War Hysteria

For years now government officials have insisted that one of the nicer aspects of the Vietnam war has been the Administration's refusal to indulge in much Red-baiting at home to inflame militaristic spirits. In general, this has been the case -- a few Republicans sputtered infrequently and the House Un-American Activities Committee staged a quickly aborted show last summer, but the Administration gave the general appearance of remaining a bit more tolerant. Things have changed.

Last weekend's encouraging protests in New York and San Francisco prompted White House press secretary George Christian to volunteer the information that the F.B.I -- never quite a bastion of free speech -- is closely watching such activity. Still worse, Secretary Rusk, who in the past has confined his Red-baiting to every variety of leftist abroad, charged on nationwide television that "Communists" were rather active in the anti-war demonstrations. So were plenty of non-Communist leftists, not to mention thousands of liberal Democrats. Characteristically, the Secretary ignored events and facts that would have dulled his noxious appeal.

The Administration's apparent decision to imply that anti-war demonstrations are in part the result of domestic Red subversion is fearfully reminiscent of the tactics Sen. McCarthy used in the 1950s. In addition, it demonstrates the President's reluctance to face up to what last weekend showed: many citizens of diverse views and background have become repelled enough by the United States' openended policy to take to the streets for as long as eight hours--a highly unusual political act.

It may be that the President feels that protests like Saturday's foreshadow the rise of a strong anti-Johnson political force. To distort the movement's character is no way of dealing with it. Instead, this tactic only serves to spotlight more garishly than ever the intellectual and diplomatic bankruptcy of America's present policy in Vietnam.