MEANING OF COMMUNISM TO AMERICANS ADDRESS BY VICE PRESIDENT NIXON

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75-00149R000500450097-5
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 9, 2003
• Sequence Number: 97
• Publication Date: August 22, 1960
• Content Type: OPEN

AU~ 6
Apr ed'For Release 2004/01126 :2CI9
' 1- DP75-00149R000500450097-5
1960 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENAT~F -c
cited but rarely specified social change MFJ
have all tailed to, break or even to weaken
the bond between aging parents and adult
children. Moreover, it is a social relationship
of true reciprocity. When asked: "Do you
ever help your children or other close rela7,
tives in any way?" 72 percent of our responn
ents replied, "Yes."
Peter Townsend, reporting from his survey
in East London, did not find much "hard
evidence of neglect on the part of old peo-
ple's children. * * * Widespread fears of the
breakdown of family loyalties and of married
children's negligence seem to have no gen-
eral basis in fact. Doctors, social workers;
and others who express such fears may some-
times forget they are in danger of general-
izing from an extremely untypical subsec-
tion of the population or from a few extreme
examples known personally to them. * * *
So far, at least as the old are concerned,
therefore, there is no justification for an
attempt to supplant the family with state
services."
LIFE IS SIMPLER
Our data indicate that very similar conclu-
sions can be drawn for the United States.
In fact, when the respondents in our survey
were asked, "Do you believe that a new de-
partment of government could do something
important for you personally that is not be-'
ing done now?" the majority (60 percent)
said, "No."
Social workers and other interest groups.
often insist that "modern life has become so
complicated" that our aging eitizens need
someone else to tell them how to take care
of themselves. But our survey suggests that
the majority of our older people do not seem
impressed by an increasing complexity of
life, nor do they expect this problem to loom
large within the next 10 to 20 years. On the
contrary, they can think of many chores and
problems of daily life that have become
much easier for them than they were for
their own parents and grandparents.
In conclusion, the data presented in this
paper strongly supports a reexamination of
the conceptions of the aging in the United
States. It may be seriously questioned
whether increasing age is pathological, per se,
as is implied by the alarm with which It is
viewed by many researchers, professional
helpers, and policymakers. While attempt-
ing to study the aging, the social scientists
may make them objects, rather than per-
sons, and in so doing produce problems
where none previously existed. There seems
little doubt that the (widespread) caricature
of the aging derives from application of the
experience of a generation ago to a new type
of over-65 population.
Finally, it must be emphasized that this
paper does not deny that parts of our popu-
lation of all ages, including old age, are
dependent, inadequate, ill, and unemployed.
The authors share feelings of sympathy for
such persons. The study here reported, how-
ever, shows that the aging, like others in our
population, are not characteristically depend-
ent, inadequate, ill, or senile.
It is hoped that further research into the
normal can be carried out. Since all re-
sources are limited, whether of family, kin,
private or public agencies, the recognition
that the dependent and helpless in our aging
population are limited in number will allow
available resources to be applied with dis-
crimination, with far greater hope of return
to the society and to its people.
ORDER TO DISPENSE WITH CALL OF
CALENDAR
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that the
call of the Calendar under rule VIII be
dispensed with.
CA1ILSOIa In the chair). Without objec-
tion-Ails so ordered.
EANING OF COMMUNISM TO
AMERICANS-ADDRESS BY VICE
PRESIDENT NIXON
Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, leader-
ship, in our times, is a great and chal-
lenging responsibility. Among men of
honest hearts and good will, the defini-
tion of leadership may, and does, differ.
For those in the Nation, in politics, or
In other walks of life who are fulfilling
the responsibilities of leadership within
the full range of their potential, how-
ever, we can be deeply grateful.
The parrotlike critics who echo the
cry of lack of leadership in others should,
I believe, ask of themselves, "Am I, in
my role of life, providing leadership,
creating new understanding, offering
constructive solutions to problems, con-
tributing new ideas for progress, at-
tempting to build a better road for our-
selves, the Nation, for the future?"
Unless this is being done, criticism of
others contains the needs of self-con-
Yesterday V resident re-
leased a stajzgUle d"1Glean-
Ing of G'on mun t l to "Arrier'icaiis" `` In
ffi'$ "llumbld1udgment; this 6kdd t t'ef-
fort to create a better understanding of
the blight and threat that is commu-
nism is a distinctive service, not only to
the American people, but to the free
world.
As Vice President NIXON pointed out,
the question is no longer, are we against
communism. Rather, the question looms
high, and we have not yet found all the
answers: How can we most effectively
understand communism's weaknesses
and prepare counterattacks in the ideo-
logical battle to win men's minds?
Naturally, there will be varying view-
points on this analysis of the meaning
of communism. Nevertheless, I believe
that the address represents a construc-
tive, creative, practical contribution to
filling a void in our understanding of a
menace to freedom and constructing a
better foundation upon which to counter
the Communists' multipronged efforts-
ideological, cultural, military, eco-
nomic--to take over the world.
Reflecting a quality of real leadership,
and a new, worthwhile effort by a can-
didate for public office, this represents a
unique kind of contribution to public
thinking that could profitably, for all of
us, be continued and emulated, by both
Republicans and Democrats.
Reflecting a creative contribution to
the West's efforts not only to better un-
derstand how to stop the outspreading of
communism but eventually to establish
a climate in which the people them-
selves now under Communist control
can recapture freedom and regain a
voice of self-determination, I ask unani-
mous consent to have the full text of the
Vice President's statement on the mean-
ing of communism to Americans printed
at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
15747
(S CSC _ARD NS grs . Vice President, United
_E"'America)
The major problem confronting the peo-
ple of the United States and free peoples
everywhere in the last half of the 20th cen-
tury is the threat to peace and freedom pre-
sented by the militant aggressiveness of
international communism. A major weak-
ness in this struggle Is lack of adequate un-
derstanding of the character of the challenge
which communism presents.
I am convinced that we are on the right
side of this struggle and that we are well
ahead now in its major aspects. But if we
are to maintain our advantage and assure
victory in the struggle, we must develop, not
only among the leaders, but among the peo-
ple of the free world a better understanding
of the threat which confronts us.
The question is not one of being for or
against communism. The time is long past
when any significant number of Americans
contend that comunism is no particular con-
cern of theirs. Few can still believe that
communism is simply a curious and twisted
philosophy which happens to appeal to a
certain number of zealots but which consti-
tutes no serious threat to the interests, or
ideals of free society.
The days of indifference are gone. The
danger today in our attitude toward com-
munism is of a very, different kind. It lies
in the fact that we have come to abhor
communism so much that we no longer rec-
ognize the necessity of understanding it.
We see the obvious dangers. We recognize
that we must retain our present military and
economic advantage over the Communist
bloc, an advantage which deters a hot war
and which counters the Communist threat
in the cold war. In the fields of rocket tech-
nology and space exploration, we have risen
to the challenge and we will keep the lead
that we have gained. There is no question
that the American people generally will sup-
port whatever programs our leaders initiate
in these fields.
What we must realize is that this struggle
probably will not be decided in the military,
economic, or scientific areas, important as
these are. The battle in which we are en-
gaged is primarily one of ideas. The test is
one not so much of arms but of faith.
If we are to win a contest of ideas we must
know their ideas as well as our own. Our
knowledge must not be superficial. We can-
not be content with simply an intuition that
communism is wrong. It is not enough to
rest our case alone on the assertions, true
as they are, that communism denies God,
enslaves men, and destroys justice.
We must recognize that the appeal of the
Communist idea is not to the masses, as the
Communists would have us believe, but more
often to an intelligent minority in newly de-
veloping countries who are trying to decide
which system offers the best and surest road
to progress.
We must cut through the exterior to the
very heart of the Communist idea. We must
come to understand the weaknesses of com-
munism as a system-why after more than
40 years on trial it continues to disappoint
so many aspirations, why It has failed in
its promise of equality in abundance, why
it has produced a whole library of disil-
lusionment and a steady stream of men,
women, and children seeking to escape its
blight.
But we must also come to understand its
strength-why it has so securely entrenched
itself in the U.S.S.R. why it has been able
to accomplish what it has in the field of edu-
cation and science, why in some of the prob-
lem areas of the world it continues to appeal
to leaders aspiring to a better life for their
people.
It is to fl-,d the answers to these quest_ons
that in this statement I want to discuss
Approved For Release 2004/01/16 : CIA-RDP75-00149R000500450097-5
 Approved For Release 2004/01/16 : CIA'RDP75-00149R000500450097-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE August
communism as an idea---its economic phi;:-
osophy, its philosophy of law and politics,
its philosophy of history.
This statement will admittedly not be
simple because the as bject is complex.
It will not be brief because nothing less
than a knowledge in d mpth of the Communist
idea is necessary if v,e are to deal with It
effectively.
In discussing the idea I will not offer pro-
grams to meet it. I I itend inwa later,;;tl3te-
ment to discuss the, tietics and vulnerabil.
ities of the Commuriii t' cocispiisry ar1+ hour
we c fashion s. strategy for victory.
I anticipate that some might understand-
ably a:sk the question--why such a lengthy
discussion of communism when everybody Is
a rintt it already?
If -che free world is to win this struggle.
we must have men anc women who not only
are against communise a but who know why
they are against and vho know what they
are going to do about it. Communism is a
false idea, and the answer to a false idea is
truth, not ignorance.
One of the fundamen'als of the CommaNst
p~~loeophy is a belief that scS7!f` pass
xnevi ably? hrou 11 cfr afn stages. Each of
these 'st~s`suppose~d generate the nec-
essity inc Its successor. Feudalism contained
withir. its loins the see 3 of capitalism; cap-
italism was, in other words, to supplant
feudalism. Capitalism, in turn, moves in-
evitably toward a climax in which it will be
supplanted by its appointee successor, com-
munism. AU of these 1 hin to an abrupt
end in March of 1921. It was E. catastrophic
failure. It brought with it administrative
chaaos and an almost_inconcelsable disorder
in economic affairs, culminating in appalling
shortages of the most elementary necessities.
Competent scholars estimate its cost in
Russian lives at f> million.
The official Russian version o this experi-
ment does nit deny that it was an enormous
failure, It attributes that failure to inex-
perience and to a mythical continuation of
military operation:, which had in fact al-
most wholly ceased. Meanwhile the Ru fan
economy has been 1Yt'OVIng steadily toward
the market- princip':.e.
-Ulke:fdcw-aL labor is controlled by wages,
so that the price of labor is itself largely
set by m irket forces. The spread from top
to bottom of industrial wages is in many
cases wider than it is in this country. Man-
agerial eflciency is promoted by substq 'lal
economic peentjyp, in the form of bonuses
khd even more substantial perquisites of
various kinds. Erises are run on a profit
and,,?loss basis, Indeed, there are all the
paraphernalia of an advanced commercial
society, with lawye:.s, accountants, balance
sheets, taxes of nxa:ay kinds, direct and in-
direct, and finally even the pressures of a
creeping inflation.
The allccation of resources in Russia prob-
ably now ;ones abo'sxt as close to being con-
trolled by the market principle as Is possible
where the government owns all the instru-
ments of production. Russian economists
speak learnedly of following the method of
balances.
This impressive phrase stands for a very
simple idea,. It means that in directing pro-
duction and establishing prices an effort Is
made to come out even, so that goods for
which there is an i.nsufflcignt demand will
not pile ux,, while shortages will not develop
in other fields where demand exceeds supply.
The method of balances turns out to be
something a lot of us learned about in
school as the law of supply and demand.
All of this isnot to say that the Russian
economy his fully realized the market prin-
ciple. There are two obstacles that block
such a development. The first lies in the fact
that there is a painful tension between what
has to be done to run the economy efficiently
and what ought to be happening according
to orthodox theory. The result is that the
Russian economist has to be able to speak
out of both sides of his mouth at the same
time. He :ins to be prepared at all times
for sudden ;hafts of the party line. If today
he is condemned as an unprincipled revision-
ist who apes capitalist methods, tomorrow
he may be erked from the scene for having
fallen into a sterile orthodoxy, not realizing
that Marxism is a developing and creative
science.
The other obstacle to the realization of a
free market lies in th's simple fact that the
government owns the whole of industry.
This i iear s, for one thing, that the industrial
units are ht ge, so that all of steel, or all of
cosmetics, fir example, Is under a single
direction. ''his naturally creates the eco-
nomic condi ;ion known as all o IX,pnd the
imperfectly functioning e which at-
tends that condition.
Furthermore, a realization of the market
principle would require the managers of the
various unite of industry to act as if they
were doing something they are not, that is,
as if they were directing independent enter-
prises. Understandably there Is a consider-
able reluctance to assume this fictitious role,
since the manager's reward for an incon-
venient independence may well be a trip to
Siberia where be is likely nowadays, they
say, to be made chief bookkeeper in a tiny
powerplant 300 miles from the nearest town.
Meanwhile, a constant theme of complaint
by Moscow against the managers is that
they are too "cousinly" with one another
and that they are too addicted to "back
scratching." They ought to be acting like
capitalistic entrepreneurs, but they find this
a little difficult when they are all working
for the same boss.
One of the most familiar refrains of Com-
munist propaganda is that "capitalism is
dying of its internal contradictions." Le
fact, it would be hard to imagine a system
more torturec. by internal contradictions
than present-c;ay Russia. It constantly has
Approved For Release 2004/01/16 : CIA-RDP75-00149R000500450097-5
 Approved For Release 2004/01/16 : CIA-RDP75-00149R000500450097-5
to preach one way and act another. When
Russian economists and managers discover
that they have to do something that seems
to contradict the prophets, they usually
don't know which of three justifications-
all hazardous-they ought to attempt: (1)
To explain their action as a temporary de-
parture from Marxist propriety to be cor-
rected in a more propitious future; (2) to
show that what they are doing can be justi-
fied by the inherited text if it is read care-
fully and between the lines; or (3) to in-
voke the cliche that Marxism is a progres-
sive science that learns by experience-we
can't, after all, expect Marx, Engels, and
Lenin to have foreseen everything.
These inner tensions and perplexities help
to explain the startling "shifts in the party
line" that characterize all of the Communist
countries. It is true that these shifts some-
times reflect the outcome of a subterranean
personal power struggle within the party.
But we must remember that they also at
times result from the struggles of conscien-
tious men trying to fit an inconvenient text
to the facts of reality.
The yawning gap in Communist theory, by
which it says nothing about how the econ-
omy shall be run except that it shall not be
by the market principle, will continue to
create tensions, probably of mounting in-
tensity, within and among the Communist
nations. The most painful compromise that
it has so far necessitated occurred when It
was decided that trade among the satellite
countries should be governed by the prices
set on the world market.
This embarrassing concession to neces-
sity recognized, on the one hand, that a
price cannot be meaningful unless it is set
by something like a market, and, on the
other, the inability of the Communist sys-
tem to develop a reliable pricing system
within its own government-managed econ-
omy.
The Communist theory has now had a
chance to prove itself by an experience ex-
tending over two generations in a great
nation of huge human and material re-
sources. What can we learn from this ex-
perience? We can learn, first of all, that
it is impossible to run an advanced econ-
omy successfully without resort to some
variant of the market principle. In time of
war, when costs are largely immaterial and
all human efforts converge on a single goal,
the market principle can be subordinated.
In a primitive society, where men live on
the verge of extinction and all must be con-
tent with the same meager ration, the mar-
ket principle largely loses its relevance. But
when society's aim is to satisfy divers human
wants and to deploy its, productive facilities
in such a way as to satisfy those wants in
accordance with their intensity-their in-
tensity as felt by those who have the wants-
there is and can be no substitute for the
market principle. This the - Russian ex-
perience proves abundantly. That exper-
ience also raises serious doubt whether the
market principle can be realized within an
economy wholly owned by the government.
The second great lesson of the Russian
experience is of deeper import. It is that
communism is utterly wrong about its most
basic premise, the premise that underlies
everything it has to say about economics,
law, philosophy, morality, and religion.
Communism starts with the proposition that
there ar6 no `'thilversal truths or general
truths 'af human_ nature. According to its
t
~~` tYrcYe'"fW` nothing one human age
can say to another about the proper ordering
of society or about such subjects as justice,
freedom, and equality. Everything depends
on the stage of society and the economic
class that is in power at a particular time.
In the light of this fundamental belief-
or rather, this unbending and all-pervasive
disbelief-it is clear why communism had
to insist that what was true for capitalism
could not be true for communism. Among
the truths scheduled to die with capitalism
was the notion that economic life could be
usefully ordered by a market. If this truth
seems still to be alive, orthodox Communist
doctrine has to label it as an illusion, a ghost
left behind by an age now being surpassed.
At the present time this particular capitalist
ghost seems to have moved in on the Rus-
sian economy and threatens to become a
permanent guest at the Communist banquet.
Let us hope it will soon be joined by some
other ghosts, such as freedom, political
equality, religion, and constitutionalism.
This brings me to the Communist view of
law and politics. Of the Communist legal
and political philosophy, we can almost say
that there is none. This lack is, again, not
an accident, but is an integral part of the
systematic negations which make up the
Communist philosophy.
According to Marx and Engels the whole
life of any society is fundamentally de-
termined by the organization of its economy.
What men will believe; what gods, if any,
they will worship; how they will choose their
leaders or let their leaders choose themselves;
how they will interpret the world about
them; all of these are basically determined
by economic Interests and relations. In the
jargon of communism: religion, morality,
philosophy, political science and law con-
stitute a superstructure which reflects the
underlying economic organization of a par-
ticular society. It follows that subjects
which fall within the superstructure permit
of no general truths; for example, what is
true for law and political science under cap-
italism cannot be true under communism.
I have said we can almost assert that there
is no Communist philosophy of law and
political science. The little there Is can be
briefly stated. It consists in the assumption
that after the revolution the"Vill`be"a. die-
the dictatorship of the
POT) and that this dictatorship will
for a while find it necessary to utilize some
of the familiar political and legal institu-
tions, such as courts. (There is an in-
credibly tortured literature about just how
these institutions are to be utilized and with
what modifications.) When, however, ma-
ture communism is achieved, law and the
state, in the consecrated phrase, "will wither
away." There will be no voting, no parlia-
ments, no judges, no policemen, no prisons,
no problems. There will simply be factories
and fields and a happy populace peacefully
reveling in the abundance of their output.
As with economic theory, there was a time
In the history of the Soviet regime when an
attempt was made to take seriously the ab-
surdities of this Communist theory of law
and state. For about a decade during the
thirties an influential doctrine was called
the commodity exchange theory of law. Ac-
cording to this theory, the fundamental fact
about capitalism is that it is built on the
economic institution of exchange. In ac-
cordance with the doctrine of the "super-
structure" all political and legal institutions
under capitalism must therefore be perme-
ated and shaped by the concept of exchange,
Indeed, the theory went further. Even the
rules of morality are based on exchange, for
is there not a kind of tacit deal implied even
in the Golden Rule, "Do unto others, as you
would be done by"? Now the realization of
communism, which is the negation of capi-
talism, requires the utter rooting out of any
notion of exchange in the Communist econ-
omy. But, when exchange has disappeared,
the political, legal, and moral superstruc-
ture that was built on it will also disappear.
Therefore, under mature communism - there
will not only be no capitalistic legal and
political institutions, there will be no law
whatever, no state, no morality-for all of
these in some measure reflect the underlying
notion of an exchange or deal among men.
The high priest of this doctrine was
Eugene Pashukanis. His reign came to an
abrupt end in 1937 as the inconvenience of
his teachings began to become apparent.
With an irony befitting the career of one
who predicted that communism would bring
an end to law and legal processes. Pashu-
kanis was quietly taken off and shot without
even the semblance of a trial.
As in the case of economics, since Pa-
shukanis' liquidation there has developed in
Russian intellectual life a -substantial gray
market for capitalistic legal and political
theories. But, where Russian economists
seem ashamed of their concessions to the
market principle, Russian lawyers openly
boast of their legal and political system,
claiming for it that it does everything that
equivalent bourgeois institutions do, only
better. This boast has to be muted some-
what, because it still remains a matter of
dogma that under mature communism law
and the state will disappear. This embar-
rassing aspect of their inherited doctrine the
Soviet theorists try to keep as much as pos-
sible under the table. They cannot, however,
openly renounce it without heresy, and
heresy in the Soviet Union, be it remem-
bered, still requires a very active taste for
extinction.
One of the leading books on Soviet legal
and political theory is edited by a lawyer
who is well known in this country, the late
Andrei Vishinsky. In the table-pounding
manner he made famous in the U.N., Vi-
shinsky praises Soviet legal and political
institutions to the skies and contrasts their
wholesome purity with the putrid vapors
emanating from the capitalist countries. He
points out, for example, that in Russia the
voting age is 18, while in many capitalist
countries it is 21.
The capitalists thus disenfranchise mil-
lions of young men and women, because,
says Vishinsky, it is feared they may not yet
have acquired a properly safe bourgeois
mentality. As one reads arguments like this
spelled out with the greatest solemnity, and
learns all about the safeguards of the Soviet
Constitution, it comes as a curious shock to
find it openly declared that in the Soviet
Union only one political party can legally
exist and that the Soviet Constitution is the
only constitution in the world which frankly
declares the directing role of the party in the
state.
One wonders what all the fuss about vot-
ing qualifications is about if the voters are
in the end permitted only to vote for the
candidates chosen by the only political
party permitted to exist. The plain fact is,
of course, that everything in the Soviet Con-
stitution relating to public participation in
political decisions is a facade concealing the
real instrument of power that lies in the
Communist Party. It has been said that
hypocrisy is vice's tribute to virtue. The
holding of elections in which the electorate
is given no choice may similarly be described
as an attempt by communism to salve its un-
easy conscience. Knowing that it cannot
achieve representative democracy, it seems
to feel better if it adopts its empty forms.
When one reflects on it, it is an astounding
thing that a great and powerful nation in
the second half of the 20th century should
still leave its destinies to be determined by
intraparty intrigue, that it should have
developed no political institutions capable
of giving to its people a really effective voice
in their government, that it should lack any
openly declared and lawful procedure by
which the succession of one rule to another
could be determined. Some are Inclined, to
seek an explanation for this condition in
Russian history with its bloody and irreg-
ular successions of czars. But this is to
forget that even in England, the mother of
parliaments, there were once in time long
gone by, some pretty raw doings behind pal-
ace walls and some unseemly and even bloody
struggles for the throne.
But where other nations have worked
gradually toward stable political institutions
Approved For Release 2004/01/16 CIA-RDP75-00149R000500450097-5
 Approved For Release 2004/01/16 : CIA-RDP75-00149R000500450097-5
5754 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
guaranteeing the Integrity of their gavern.-
given Social order ma
be jud
ed
If the
t
ments, Russia has remained in a state of ar.?
rested development. T eat state will continue
until the Russian leaders have the courage
to declare openly that the legal and politi-
cal philosophy of Mani, Engels and Lenin is
fundamentally mistaken and must be aban-
doned.
How heavy the burs ten of the inherited
Communist philosoph:' is becomes clear
when the concept of Is v itself is under dis-
cussion.. Throughout tae ages, among men
of all nations and creeds, law has generally
been thought of as a curb on arbitrary
;power. It has been Cu: iceived as a way of
substituting reason for ; orce in the decision
of disputes, thus liberating human energies
for the pursuit of aims is ore worthy of man's
destiny than brute surv val or the domina-
tion of one's fellows. No one has supposed
that these ideals have e?er been fully real-
1usd in any society. Like every human in-
;;titution, law is capable of being exploited
ihr selfish purposes and if losing its course
through a confusion of purposes. But dur-
ing most of the world's history, men have
thought That the questic ns worthy of dis-
cussion were how the institutions of law
could be shaped so that ;hey might not be
jsrverted into instruments of power or lase
,ia sense of their high mis ,ion through sloth
or ignorance.
What is the Communis; attitude toward
title intellectual enterprise in which so many
great thinkers of so man v past ages have
j?ined? Communism contdgne all of it to
tie ashcan. of history as a fraud and delu..
sic-;, beneath the contempt of Communist
science. How, then, is law defined today in
Rissi.a? We have an authoritative answer.
;[t it; declared to be the tot,ility of the rules
of oonduct expressing the sill of the domi-
nant class, designed to pro.note those rela-
tio'a;hips that are advantageous and agree-
a.ble to the dominant class.
.,aw in. the Soviet Union s not conceived
as a. check on power, it is openly and proud-
ly ar.. expression of power. In this concep-
tio i surely, if anywhere, the bankruptcy of
communism as a moral ph losophy openly
declares itself.
I; is vitally important to. emphasize again
that all of the truly imposbng absurdities
achieved by Communist thought--in what-
ever field: In economics, in I olitics, in law,
in morality--that all of thee( trace back to
a single common source. That origin lies in
a belief that nothing of universal validity
can be said of human nature, that there are
no principles, values or mor;.l truths that
stan-t above a particular age cr a particular
phase :.n the evolution of society. This pro-
You ni negation lies at the ver,? heart of the
Cor ir.unist philosophy and gi;es to it both
its motive force and its awesome capacity
for destruction..
It is this central negation that makes com-
muni,;:x, radically inconsistent sdth the ideal
of ht;rnan freedom. As with ather "bour-
geois" virtues, once dismissed cor..temptu-
ously, Soviet writers have now aken up the
line twat only under communism can men
realise true freedom. This lire may even
have a certain persuasiveness ;or Russians
in tha individuals tend to prize those free-
doms tiny are familiar with and not to miss
those Choy have never enjoyed. A Russian
transplanted suddenly to As.erican soil
might well feet for a time unfree in the
sense t tat he would be confront td with the
burden. b:? making choices that .re was un-
accusto'ned to making and thse he would
regard :is; onerous. But the problem of free-
dom goes deeper than the psychological con-
ditioninp of any particular Individual. It
touches ti..e very roots of man's fundamental
concepticon of himself.
The Communist philosophy Is basically In.
consistent with the Ideal of freedo a because
it denies that there can be any standard of
moral truth by which the actions of any
y
g
.
Individual says to government, "Thus far
may you go, but no farther," he necessarily
appeals to some principle of rightness that
stands above his particular form of govern-
ment. lit is precisely the possib:Ifty of any
-such standard that conesiuniarn radically
and
uncompromisingly denies. Marx and
Engels had nothing but sneers for the Idea,
that there are eternal trurlts, such as free-
dom, justice, etc., that are common to all
states of society-
They contend that them are :ao eternal
truths. All ideas of right and wrong come
from the social system under which one lives.
Ii that systern requires tyranny and oppres-
sion then tyranny and oppreslon must with-
In shat systern be accepted, there can be no
h;g_yer court of appeal,
Not only do the premise.; of Communist
philosophy make any coherent theory of
freedom impossible, but the actual structure
of the Soviet regime is su?Y. that no true
sense of freedom can ever develop under
it. To see, why this is so, It is useful to
accept the Communist ideolo v pros sionally
and reason the matter out purely in terms
of what may be called hurl as eng:..veering.
Let its concede that a strugt.la for political
power goes on in alts countries and let us
assume in keeping with M.aralat views that
this struggle has absolutely not.hilie; to do
with right and wrong. Even C;:?om this per-
v-rsely brutal pc:dnt of view, it is clear why
a sense of freedom cat never develop under
the Soviet regime. In a constitutional dem-
ocra:y the struggle for political power is as-
signed to a definite arena; It :_: roped off, so
to speak, from the rest of life:, In the So-
viet Union, on the other hand, there is no
clear distinction between polaics and eco-
nomir;, or between politics and other hu-
ma:n a tivities. No barriers eidit to define
what is a political question tad what is
not. Instead of bung ordered and canalized
as it Is in constitutional densocracles, the
strugfile for political power in Russia, per-
vades, or can at any time, pervade every
department of life. For this reason there
is no area of human interest-the intellec-
tua.'., ilterary, scientific, artistic or religious-
that; may not at any time beconi:; a battle-
ground of this struggle.
Take, for example, the situat.o,i of a So-
viet architect. Today without doubt: he
enjoys a certain security; lie 1s not likely
to lie awake fearing the dread knock at the
door at midnight. Furthermore he may
now see openi:ag before him in the prac-
tice of his professign a degree of artistic
freedom that his predecessors did not en-
joy. Bur he can never be curb that he
will nw; wake up tomorrow mot:ring and
read ::n the papers that a new line has been
laid down for architecture, since his profes-
sion, like every other, can at asp' momant
be drawn into the struggle for power. He
can never know the security es.joyed by
those who live under a system where the
struggle for political power is fenced off, as
It were, from the cther concerts; of life.
When Soviet pciltics invades a Held like
architecture, it cannot be said to spread
beyond its proper boundaries, for it has
none. It Is precisely this defect in the So-
viet regime that in the long run prevents
the realization of the Ideal of freedom un-
der communism.
It is only In the constitutional democra-
cles that the human spirit can be perma.?
nently free to unfold itself in as many di?.
sections as are opened up for it by its cre-
ative urge. Only such governments can
achieve diversity without disintegration, for
only they know the full meaning of those
wise restraints that make men free.
Since the Communist; philosophy of his-
tory is the central core of Its ideology, that
philosophy has of necessity permeated every
theme I have so far discussed. Briefly
stated, the Communist philosophy of his-
ory is that man does not make history, but
is made by it.
Though commun;'.sm denies to man the
capacity to shape his own destiny, it does
accord to him a remarkable capacity to fore-
see in great detail just what the future will
impose on him. The literature of commu-
nism is full of prophecies, tacit, and ex-
plicit. Probably no human faith ever
claimed so confidetAly that it knew so
much about the future. Certainly none
ever ran up: a greater number of bad guesses.
On a rough estimate the Communist record
for mistaken propliec:es stands at about 100
percent.
Among the conclusions about the future
that were"Ithplicit in the Communist phi-
losophy, or were drawn from it by its phoph-
ets,.wq gin game the following:
That communism will first establish it-
self In countries of the most advanced capi-
talism;
That In such countries society will grad-
ually split itself into two classes, with the
rich becomir g fewer and richer, the labor-
ing masses sinking steadily to a bare level
of existence;
That under capitalism colonialism will in-
crease as each capitalistic nation seeks more
and more of tlets for its surplus produc-
tion;
That in capitalist countries labor unions
will inevitably take the lead in bringing
about the Communist revolution;
That as soo:i as communism is firmly es-
tablished steps will be taken toward the
elimination of the capitalist market and
capitalist political and legal institutions;
etc., etc.
As with other aspects c,f communism, this
record of bad guesses 13 no accident. It
derives from the basic assumption of Marx-
ism that man has no power to mold his in-
stitutions to meet problems as they arise,
that he is caught up in a current of history
which carries him inevitably toward his pre-
destined goal it philosophy which embraces
this view of maa's plight is constitutionally
incapable of predicting the steps man will
take to shape his own destiny, precisely be-
cause it has in advance declared any such
steps to be impossible. Communism in this
respect is like a man standing on the bank
of a rising river and observing what appears
to be a log lodged against the opposite shore.
Assuming that what he observes is an inert
object, he naturally predicts that the log
will eventually be carried away by the rising
flood waters. When the log turns out to be
a living creature and steps safely out of the
water, the observer is, of course, profoundly
surprised. Communism, it must be con-
fessed, has shown a remarkable capacity to
absorb such shocks, for it has survived many
of them. In the long run, however, it seems
Inevitable that the Communist brain will
inflict serious damage upon itself by the tor-
tured rationalizations with which it has to
explain each successive bad guess.
This brings us to the final Issue. Why Is
It that with all its brutalities and absurdi-
ties communism still retains an active appeal
for the minds and hearts of many intelligent
men and women? : or we must never forget
that this appeal does exist.
It is true that ir. the United States and
many other countries the fringe of serious
thought represented by active Communist
belief has become abraded to the point of
near extinction. It is also the fact that
many people everywhere adhere to groups
dominated by Communist :leadership who
have only the slightest inkling of commu.
nism as a system of ideas. Then again we
must remember that in the Communist
countries themselves there are many intelli-
gent, loyal, and hard-working citizens,
thoroughly acquaintel with the Communist
philosophy, whoview that philosophy with
a quiet disdain, not unmixed wtih a certain
sardonic pleasure of the sort that goes with
Approved For Release 2004/01/16 : CIA-RDP75-00149R000500450097-5
 Approved For Release 2004/01/16 : CIA-RDP75-00149R000500450097-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE
witnessing, from a choice seat, a comedy of
errors that is unfortunately also a tragedy.
Finally, we must not confuse every gain of
communism with a gain of adherents to
Communist beliefs. In particular, we should
not mistake the acceptance of technical and
economic aid from Moscow as a conversion
to the Communist faith, though the contacts
thus established may of course open the way
for a propagation of that faith.
With all this said, and with surface ap-
pearance discounted in every proper way, the
tragic fact remains that communism as a
faith remains a potent force in the world
of ideas today. It is an even more tragic
fact that that faith can sometimes appeal
not only to opportunists and adventurers,
but also to men of dedicated idealism. How
does this come about?
To answer this question we have to ask an-
other; What are the ingredients that go to
make up a successful fighting faith, a faith
that will enlist the devotion and fanaticism
of its adherents, that will let loose on the
world that unaccommodating creature, the
true believer?
I think that such a faith must be made
up of at least three ingredients.
First. It must lift its adherents above the
dread sense of being alone and make them
feel themselves members of a brotherhood.
Second. It must make its adherents be-
lieve that in working for the objectives of
their faith they are moving in step with
nature, or with the forces of history, or with
the divine will.
Third. It must be a faith that gives to its
adherents a sense of being lifted above the
concerns that consume the lives of the non-
believing.
All of these ingredients are furnished in
abundance by communism, In the Commu-
nist philosophy the first two ingredients are
fused into one doubly effective amalgam. To
become a Communist is no longer to be alone,
but to join in the march of a great, op-
pressed mass of humanity called the prole-
tariat. This silent, faceless army is being
carried inevitably to its goal by the unseen
forces of history. There is thus a double
indentification. History belongs to the pro-
letariat, the proletariat belongs to history.
By joining in this great march the Commu-
nist not only gains human companions but
a sense of responding to the great pull of the
universe itself.
Now, the picture I have just painted is
not one that even the most devout Com-
munist can comfortably carry about with
him at all times. Indeed, there are prob-
ably few Communists who do not, even in
their moments of highest faith, sense some
of the fictions and contradictions of the
dogma to which they are committed. The
absurdities of the Communist Ideology are,
however, by no means immediately apparent
to the new convert, who is likely to be in-
trigued rather by the difficulty of under-
standing them. The old believer sees no
reason to point out these absurdities, partly
because he does not wiah to undermine the
faith of the young, and partly because he
has become inured to them, has learned to
live with them at pease, and does not want
to disturb his own adjustment to them.
One of the key fictions of the Communist
edifice of thought is the belief that there
is in modern industrial society an identifi.
able class of people called the proletariat.
That such a class would develop was not a
bad guess in 1848 and Marx had other econ-
omists with him in making this guess. As
usual, history perversely took the wrong
turn. And as usual, this has caused com-
munism no particular embarrassment, for it
continues-with diminished ardor, to be
sure-to talk about the proletariat as if it
were actually there. But professing to see
things that are not there is often a sign of
faith and furnishes, In any event, a bond o!
union among believers.
To many of its American critics, commu-
nism has appeared as a kind of nightmare.
Like awakened sleepers still recoiling from
the shock of their dream, these critics forget
that the nightmare is after all shot through
and through with absurdities. The result
is to lend to the Communist ideology a sub-
stance that in fact it does not possess. If In
moments of doubt the Communist is inclined
to feel that his philosophy is made of air
and tinsel, he is reassured and brought back
into the fold when he recalls that its critics
have declared this philosophy to be pro-
foundly and powerfully vicious.
Part of the tarnish that an uncompliant
history has visited on the Communist
prophecies has in recent years been re-
moved by the achievements of Russian tech-
nology. It is now possible to identify com-
munism with the land that has the highest
school buildings, the hugest outdoor rallies,
the most colossal statues and the space
satellites that weigh the moat tons. It is
not difficult to make all this appear as a
kind of belated flowering of the promises
communism began holding out more than a
hundred years ago. It is easy to make men
forget that none of the solid accomplish-
ments of modern Russia came about by
methods remotely resembling anything an-
ticipated by Marx, Engels, or Lenin.
In suggesting the ingredients that go to
make up a successful fighting faith, I stated
that such a faith must be one "that gives
to its adherents a sense of being lifted above
the concerns that consume the lives of the
nonbelieving." I have purposely left this
aspect of the Communist faith to the last
for it is here that the truly nightmarish
quality of that faith manifests itself.
Not that it is any objection to a faith
that It enables those sharing it to be.indif-
ferent to things that seem important to
others. The crucial question is, what is it
that men are told not to heed? As to the
Communist faith there is no ambiguity on
this score. It tells men to forget all the
teachings of the ages about government, law
and morality. We are told to cast off the
intellectual burden left behind by men like
Confucius, Mencius, Plato, Aristotle, St.
Thomas, Kant, and Bentham. There are
no "eternal truths" about society. There is
no science of social architecture. Only the
simple minded can believe that there are
principles guiding the creation of sound legal
and political institutions. For the enlight-
ened there Is only one rule: Smash the exist-
ing bourgeois economic and legal order and
leave the rest to the spontaneous class or-
ganization of the proletariat.
In diplomatic dealings the Russians dis-
play great respect for American military
and economic power, but consider us hope-
lessly naive in matters political. We are
still concerned with trifles they feel them-
selves long since to have left behind, trifles
like: How do you help a people to realize
self-government who have had no experi-
ence with its necessary forms and restraints?
liow following the overthrow of a tyranny do
you suggest steps that will prevent an in-
terim dictatorship from hardening into a
second tyranny?
It is not that the Communists have ideas
about sound government that differ from
ours. According to strict Communist theory
there can be no ideas on such a subject. If
a gray market for such ideas has gradually
developed in Russia it has not yet reached
the point of being ready for the export
trade. Russia has engineers able to help
the underdeveloped countries build roads and
dams, and there is no reason to question
the competence of these engineers. But
whoever heard of Russia sending an expert
in political institutions to help a new coun-
try design an appropriate form of representa-
tive self-government? Not only would such
a mission stand in ludicrous incongruity
with the present situation of the Commu-
nist countries in Europe; it would be a
repudiation of the basic premises of the
whole Communist philosophy.
Even in the economic field, Russia really
has nothing to offer the rest of the world
but negations. For a long time after the
establishment of the Soviet regime it was
actively disputed in Russia whether for com-
munism there is any such thing as an eco-
nomic law.
Communistic ideology has had gradually
to bend before the plain fact that such laws
exist. But Russia has as yet developed no
economic institutions that are more than
distorted shadows of their capitalist equiv-
alents. Russia may help a new country
to develop electric power. It has nothing to
say about the social institutions that will
determine how that power will be utilized
for the good of the whole people.
This great vacuum that lies in the heart
of communism explains not only why its
philosophy is in the long run so destructive
of everything human, but why in the short
run it can be so successful. Consider, for
example, what it can offer to the leader of
a successful revolution. A cruel dictator-
ship has been overthrown. It had to be
overthrown by force because it permitted no
elections or never counted the vote honestly.
Following the successful revolt, there must
be an interval during Which order is kept by
something approaching a dictatorship.
Sooner or later, if the revolution Is not to
belie its democratic professions, some move-
ment must be made toward representative
self-government. This is a period of great
difficulty. There is no mystery about; its
problems. They fit into an almost classic
pattern known from antiquity. The revolu-
tionary leaders must find some accommoda-
tion with what Is left of the old regime.
Sooner or later the firing squad must be re-
tired. Even when this is done vengeful
hatreds continue to endanger the successful
operation of parliamentary government.
Among the revolutionary party, men who
were once united in overthrowing plain in-
justice become divided on the question what
constitutes a just new order. Militant zeal-
ots, useful in the barricades, are too rough
for civil government and must be curbed.
If curbed too severely, they may take up
arms aginst the new government, etc.
What can communism offer the revolu-
tionary leader caught in this ancient and
familiar quandary? It can, of course, offer
him material aid. But it can offer him
something more significant and Infinitely
more dangerous, a clear conscience in tak-
ing the easy course. It can tell him to for-
get about elections and his promises of
democracy and freedom. It can support
this advice with an imposing library of
pseudo-science clothing despotism with the
appearance of intellectual respectability.
The internal stability of the present Rus-
sian Government lends an additional persua-
siveness to this appeal. If Russia can get
along without elections, why can't we? Men
forget that it is a common characteristic of
dictatorships to enjoy internal truces that
may extend over decades, only to have the
struggle for power renew itself when the
problem of a succession arises. This is a
pattern written across centuries of man's
struggle for forms of government consistent
with human dignity. It is said that the
struggle for power cannot under modern
conditions, with modern armies and modern
weapons, take the form of a prolonged civil
war. That is no doubt true in a developed
economy like that of Russia. The shift in
power when it comes may involve only a
few quick maneuvers within the apparatus
of the party, which have their only outward
manifestation in purges or banishments that
Approved For Release 2004/01/16 : CIA-RDP75-00149R000500450097-5
 Approved FRelease 2004/01/16 : CIA-RDP75-00149R000500450097-5
seal the results. But the fact remains that
the fate of millions will be determined by
processes which take to account of their in-
teree-is or wishes, in which they are granted
no participation, ant which they are not
even permitted to obse rve.
It must not be fcsgntten that modern
Russia was for an Indefinite period prior to
1.953 governed by a tyranny. This is ad-
mitted in. Russia tocay. To be sure, the
term "tyranny" is not used, because accord.,
ing to the Communist Thilosophy a term like
that betoken a naive and outdated view of
the significance of governmental forms.
The Soviet term is "the cult of personality."
According to the official explanation Stalin
and his followers in ; ome mysterious way
became infected with a mistaken view of
Stalin's proper role. According to ancient
wisdom. this was because Stalin ruled with-
out the check of constitutional forms and
without effective popular participation in his
government. In the words of Aristotle,
written some 23 centuries ago, "This is why
we do not permit a is an to rule, but the
principle of law, because a man rules in. his
own interest, and becon.es a tyrant."
It is plain that Stall a at some point be-
came a tyrant. Accord.ng to Aristotle this
-was because Russia did not base its govern-
ment on the principle or law. According to
.he Communist theori some inexplicable
.slippage of the gears, so ne accidental coun-
tercurrent of history, lei Stalin to embrace
incorrect notions about himself.
If mankind is to su-vive at a level of
dignity worthy of its great past, we must
t.elp the world recapture, some sense of the
teachings of the great thinkers of former
ages. It must come again to see that sound
legal and political instit itfons not only ex-
press man's highest ide:.l of what he may
become, but that they ale indispensable in-
:itrumer.Lts for enabling him to realize that
ideal. It would be comforting to believe
that the forces of histo. y are working in-
,!vltably toward this reali ration and that we
Ico are cooperating with he inevitable. We
can only hope that this is sc. But we can
know that the forces of human life,
struggling to realize its,3f on its highest
plane, are working with as and that those
ox,ees need our help desperately.
SOCIAL SECURITY AMENDMENTS
OF 1965)
The PRESIDING OFF'ICEER. Is there
further morning busines?? If not, morn-
business is conclude d.
Without objection, th ~ Chair lays be-
fire the Senate the unfinished business.
The Senate resumed t; le consideration
of the bill (H.R. 12580) , the social se-
o arity arnendmen.ts of 1960.
Mr. YOUNG of Ohio. Mr. President,
it is my happy personal i ecollection that
2!i years ago I was a Men. ber of the con-
gress that overwhelmingly enacted the
most humane and advanced social leg-
is::asion in our Nations Y.history-the
Sa..al Security Act.
I' have stated before, at d I shall again,
that this is one of the many imprints
I'ianklin :D. Roosevelt has left upon the
parses of our Nation's hist.)ry, an imprint
that we hope and belie'e will endure
fo:'e?aer,
.9.1so, It is a happy relollection that
later, as a member of the Committee on
Ways and Means of the Hiuse of Repre-
seriaatives, I helped draft the present lib-
ere used and expanded , ocial security
program. In fact, some of the para-
graphs that are now in the Social Se-
curity Act were originall;' in my own
GRESSIONAL R [;CORD - SENATE August 22
Republicans and Dena crats ;;like, sat in
a nonpartisan and a nonpolitical manner,
in our shirt sleeves, and helped draft the
amended and liberalized social securiry
law during the 81st Congress.
Mr. President, Amerite a has :never been
a Nation content to stand still and rest
on the laurels of the past..
It has been our tradi;:.on and our his-
tory always; to move forward, always to
take newer and greater steps in the in-
terest of the welfare o the American
people. Piecemeal, pate .iwork and after -
tlie-fact legislation hat proved to be in-
adequate to meet, the netoais of our elderly
citizens. We must :learn to anticipate
needs, not to be tangled in the confusion
of interpre!sing them long u.fter they
have swept onto the scene.
Mr. President, in my judgment, the
legislative proposal reported from, the
Committee on Finance and now before
the Senate, will not meet, nor does it
seriously attempt to meet, the needs of
the day. It represents, however, a step
in the right direction. `ihe same is true
with regard to the pro:cosed substitute
offered by the distinguished senior Sena-
tor from New York [Mr. JAVITS].
Frankly, I do no, partilularly like the
approach of the substitute proposal, but
I intend to be present aid to listen to
all of the arguments made for and
against is before the vote is taken.
The bill before us at least recognizes
the need for a medical cure plan for the
aged. I suppose this is is itself some-
what of an achievement, considering the
tremendous opposition to the concept
from the American Medical Association
and from other "ice ieee" oriented
groups.
n speaking in this manner of the
A31erican Medical Association, Mr. Pres-
and surgeons of the United States. I am
referring to the House of Delegates of
the American Medical Association, the
little group of willful men in control of
the American Med :cal Association who
operate one of the most pcwerful lobbies
in Washington, D.C.; men who are not
truly representative of the physicians
and surgeons of this country.
The fact is that in my Suite of Ohio,
in the neighborhood State of Pennsyl-
vania, in the State of New Mersey, and I
believe in the State of No--v York, and
elsewhere, physicians and surgeons on
every occasion, when a referendum has
beer taken on the question. "Do you de-
sire to join the social security system?"
have voted in every instance in the af-
firmative as they did in Ohl:) by 68' per-
cent. expressing the will of gene rank and
file cf the medical men of the country to
join the social security system. Despite
this, the reactionary House o:i Delegates
of the American. Medical Association is
constantly lobbying to prevent. the inclu-
sion of physicians and sur;eons under
the beneficient provisions of our social
security law.
In fact, we have reached the situation
where practically the only group of pro-
fessional men in the United States not
included within the social security sys-
telT.h are the phy sicians and ;urgeo:rls.
Mr. President, I am one who believes
that our social security system should be
made universal, that it should apply to
all employees and to all self-employed.
We should provide that upon retirement
or upon disability those who are covered
by the social security program will re-
ceive no; a mere handout but an ade-
quate sun, in older that, with whatever
little savings they have been able to ac-
quire during lifetimes of constructive
effort, they may live in some comfort and
with dignity. ,
The simple fact, Mr. President, is that
medical expenses rise with a person's
years. At the same time, for most peo-
ple, the ability to meet those needs de-
clines rag idly once the person is off the
payroll an an employee.
Mr. President, it is a unique circum-
stance that in the other body a bill has
been introduced to permit physicians
and surgeons to be covered by social se-
curity on ern optional basis instead of on
a compulsory basis. Think of that sort
of outrage which is sought to be perpe-
trated upon our social security system,
which all of us desire to continue to be
actuarially sound.
Our social security system was actu-
arially sound and is actuarially sound.
Of cour, e, this proposal for optional
coverage for physicians and surgeons
will not get to first base. It will be
shelved in the Committee on Ways and
Means of the House of Representatives,
as it should be. Assuming any group of
professional men could get away with
going into .,he social security system on
an optional basis instead of on a compul-
sory basis, all the young men in that pro-
fession would not be at all interested in
doing so. Naturally they would wait un-
til-they became 631/2 years of age to join
the social security system, and then
would soon share in its benefits.
If the mec'.ical profession really has the
audacity to claim it is entitled to that
treatment, where would we stop'? Why
should not a garage mechanic or anyone
else be entitled to go into the system on a
voluntary basis instead of on a compul-
sory basis? Within (months' time the
;social security system would no longer be
actuarially sound.
Mr. President, we sometimes lose sight
of the fact that we. are dealing with peo-
ple, with human beings instead of mere
statistics. Iri this expanding system of
safeguards against the hazards, the
cruelties, and the penalties of old age
new concepts of security and human dig-
nity are involved, as well as a new re-
lationship between the individual and
his Government,
The hope we all cherish is an old age
free from care and want. To that end
men and women toil patiently and live
closely, seeking to save something for the
day when they can earn no more. The
dignity of every American is involved in
the legislative proposal, which we in the
Senate shall be considering during the
present week.
The bill before us, as reported from
the Committee on Finance of the Sen-
ate, provides a "means test," sometimes
called a "needs test," which would be ap-
plied before an individual could receive
some of the benefits. A sick, elderly per-
Approved For Release 2004/01/16 : CIA-RDP75-00149R000500450097-5