m
i
L
L
DA
D
Published by the students of Montreat-Anderson College
Monday, 9 Noyember 1970
THOUGHTS ON THE REVOLUTION
This issue contains two par
ticularly interesting and sig-
nigicant documents. They repre
sent as well as anything else
the points of view characteristic
of the two major factions of what
has come to be known as "the
movement" in the United States.
They also give us some idea of
the misapprehensions under which
both camps labor.
The first is part one of an
interview with Mr. Gerald Lef-
court, chief legal spokesman of
the Black Panther Party on the
East Coast, Mr. Lefcourt, as
you will no doubt notice, is a
Marxist, and a rather rigid one.
The essence of his position is
'^) inasmuch as we live under a
of the bourgeoisie,
within the framework
society are closed
change and, therefore,
is the only way out;
dictatorship
all channels
of political
to radical
revolution
and, (2) any oppressed group—
specifically, the Black Panther
Party—is justified in using any
means to resist and end their
oppression.
The second is an analysis of
the Weathermen by Mr. I.M, Ter-
hune, a writer for NEW UNIVERSITY
at the University of California,
Irvine. Mr. Terhune^s bias is
clearly revolutionary, although
not necessarily Marxist. Wiile
he endorses selective terror
bombing as a tactic, he Opposes
for political and ethical reasons
the strategic use to which it
has been put by the Weathermen.
There seem to be at least four
serious flaws in one or both of
these positions. The first is
STAFF
Frank Austin, Editor-inChief
Richard Lance, Cultural Editor
Gene Hines, Montreat Editor
A1 Seitner, National/International
Editor
Patricia Butler, Business Manager
Janet Stone, Faculty Advisor
The opinions presented here re
present only th views of the
contributors.',, and are not neces
sarily the views of the College
or the Student Government Asso
ciation,
Mr. Lefcourt’s belief that a noble
cause justifies any means used
for its realization. It is to
Mr. Terhune’s credit that he
neatly deflates this idea in the
last paragraph of his analysis.
It is not to his credit, how
ever, that in doing so he throws
around such phrases as "revolution
for the people," "personal lib
eration," and "revolution of life"
without adequate definition. One
wonders how a revolutionary or
ganization can possibly attract
and hold the committed and well-
informed members it must have
to be successful if those members
do not know the meaning of their
ovm aims.
Third, both authors assume the
United States to be in a "pre-
revolutionary"situation. This
is hogv/ash. Although, by a vjildly
optimistic estimate, there may be
500,00 committed revolutionaries
in this country, they have no
chance of success in the forseeable
future. They would lose in guer
rilla warfare; guerrillas must
have the support of a large se-
ment of the people to exist, and