Whenever the temptation to read the Daily Egyptian opinion page sets in, it is best to realize the possible consequence of finding a letter there from Richard Whitney. Why? Not because his political viewpoint is necessarily wrong or because his writing style is boring to read. No, essentially the reason for avoiding a letter from our finest spokesman of the local National Lawyers Guild is that he enjoys making insupportable slanders against people he is apparently intimidated by but does not otherwise know.

As an employee of American Standard and a campus representative of Intercollegiate Studies Institute, I have to ask one simple question. How does Mr. Whitney qualify his self-proclaimed status as representative of the whole working class? More likely, he represents that small minority willing to risk everything in vain pursuit of absolute justice via social engineering. I know it takes all kinds and I do respect Whitney’s moral sensibility. I wish, however, that in his weak attempts to destroy the character of people like Jeanne Kirkpatrick and more recently, Pat Buchanan, he would no t assume authority which he does not possess.

I am tempted to take Whitney’s March 6 letter apart sentence by sentence and show its faults. such an ambition, however goes beyond reason considering the time such a project would consume. His premise that collective unity guarantees the best interests of the working class deserves some scrutiny, if nothing else. How high a priority this best interest is Whitney does not concede. What happened to the virtues of diversity by the way? Does that apply only in questions of race and sex and not apply in beliefs systems?

Advertisement

Mr. Buchanan could very well be a racist as Mr. Whitney contends. On the other hand, Elvis could still be alive and UFO’s might soon invade our planet making even Mr. Whitney’s sloganeering seem novel by comparison. What can we expect next from our future lawyer? Maybe a challenge against generally accepted accounting principles? Or how about slander against Pat Sajak, who could be the sinister force behind societies’ imperfection, after all. It’s just possible isn’t it?