Your recent article soliciting an
increase of letters to The Cavalier
Daily was an understandable
one. Nevertheless, you seem to
have misplaced the blame for the
dearth of letters. Usually, letters
to the editor reflect not the apathy
or activism of the reading public
but, rather the controversiality and
value of the editorials written.
Take my case for example. I
am not now writing because of
my sense of social commitment or
lack of it but, rather to clarify
an undocumented interjection you
made in your editorial "Illegitimacy:
Who Pays?", an interjection
the import of which transcended
the import of the stand
taken by the editorial itself. You
stated that "after the failure of
liberals' poverty program was dramatically
shown in the summer's
rioting, it is obvious welfare
practices need a thorough review."
I would appreciate your clarifying
why the poverty program belongs
to the "liberals," and in fact,
who the "liberals" are? Secondly
I would appreciate your demonstrating
that the major goal of the
poverty program was to prevent the
summer's rioting and that since the
goal has not been fulfilled, the
program is a "failure."
Sincerely,
Neil Matlins
4th year College
By "liberals," we meant those
members of the Johnson administration
who organized the
poverty program and now administer
it. The poverty program presumably
was directed at narrowing
the distressing gap in the United
States between the many who have
so much and the few who have
so little. It raised the hopes of
this latter group, but it barely
scratched the surface of their
troubles, and there you have one
of the major reasons for the ghetto
rioting. The idea that the poverty
program—and the whole liberal approach
to poverty—was a failure
comes from the distinguished liberal
Daniel P. Moynthan, a Harvard
and M.I.T. urbanologist and
former assistant secretary of labor.
—Ed.
