June 9, 1976

'Interdependence' Futile Bicentennial Event

The date of January 30, 1976, certainly won't go down in history with the same significance as July 4, 1776 - yet it may be a small footnote marking the most futile of U.S. Bicentennial projects.

A Declaration of Interdependence was "signed" four months ago in Philadelphia by 124 Congressman promising "to bring forth a new world order."

It was a silly little exercise in liberal rhetoric so dear to the hearts of social activists.  The declaration was composed by Henry Steele Commager, professor of history at Amherst College, and a scholar of considerable prestige.

Because of Commager's reputation, the 74-year-old historian was able to obtain preliminary support from more Congressmen than the usual claque of liberals.  When the text of the statement was publicized, however, many lawmakers attempted to withdraw their names.

Like all good fishermen.  Commager refused to let his fish off the hook.  The Declaration of Interdependence was proclaimed in solemn ceremony, along with the names of "signers" who hadn't signed nor attended the event.

No one paid much attention to the affair at the time.  It has become controversial in recent weeks because of a three-page mimeographed bulletin now being widely circulated.  Titled "Wake Up America!", the flyer asserts Commager's declaration is a global document meant "to replace the United States Declaration of Independence."

"For the sake of Jesus Christ and freedom for your children, take these signers out of office," says the unsigned bulletin.

The names of the usual bevy of liberal Congressmen appear - those from Ohio being Representatives John F. Seiberling (D-Akron ), Louis Stokes (D-Cleveland) and Charles A. Vanik (D-Cleveland).

Twenty-Republicans were listed, most of them also of liberal persuasion.

Prominent, however, was Senator Hugh D. Scott of Pennsylvania - minority leader of the senate and a moderate to conservative Republican.

Senator Scott's press aide told me this week that he did not sign the Declaration of Interdependence but "has endorsed its principles for the purpose of study and discussion."

To that end, here some excerpts: "WHEN in the course of history the threat of extinction confronts mankind, it is necessary for the people of the United States to declare their interdependence with the people of all nations and to embrace those principles and build those institutions which will enable mankind to survive and civilization flourish.

"TWO CENTURIES ago our forefathers brought forth a new nation; now we must join with others to bring forth a new world order ... To establish a new world order of compassion, peace, justice and security, it is essential that mankind free itself from the limitations of national prejudice and acknowledge that the forces that unite it are incomparably deeper than those that divide.

"WE AFFIRM that the resources of the globe are finite, not infinite, that they are the heritage of no one nation or generation, but of all peoples, nations and of posterity, and that our deepest obligation is to transmit to that posterity a planet richer in material bounty, in beauty and in delight than we found it.  Narrow notions of national sovereignty must not be permitted to curtail that obligation."

Other sections of the declaration call for "international supervision," "international cooperation," and "regulation by international authorities."

These phrases are, of course, flowers of truth to liberals but red flags to conservatives.  There is no middle ground for Senator Scott's study and discussion.

I can understand Professor Commager's desire to cap a long and distinguished career with an immortal document of his own invention.  Unfortunately he misjudged the temper of the times and the immature development of the rest of the world.  You cannot hurry history.

In addition, I felt the imitation of the Declaration of Independence for so naive an approach to controversial economic problems to be in poor taste.

It is rather sad that the ringing phrases and the high-level support was one sided.  Not a single foreign dignitary attended the ceremony or even indicated tentative support.  To this extent, the fears of conservatives are confirmed - the declaration is just another one-way street that funnels U.S. assets to welfare nations.  Nothing comes back to America.

There is no question that the world is interdependent, as the liberals contend.  We must find mechanisms whereby we can trade together without demanding a single standard of culture and conduct.

The time is not yet ripe for an international political break through.  Even if we convince ourselves we should give away our grain, steel and capital, how do we convince other nations to sell us oil, chrome, fish, industrial diamonds, coffee and tin at reasonable prices?

Before we can abandon U. S. sovereignty for a new world order, there must be an equal willingness by other nations to do the same.

There is not the slightest inkling that such mutual understanding exists.  Until then we should study history more closely.

If we work hard at it, the world might be ready for a declaration of interdependence at the U.S. Tricentennial.

Author: Lindsey Williams