Mr. James Reston, the distinguished New York Times correspondent, writing from San Francisco, said, “The physical disorder of the [Republican] convention is over, but the moral disorder remains. . . .” Noting what he called its “jumble of high-sounding contradictions,” the “encouragement and unleashing of extremism,” and the “moral ambiguities,” he said, “the fight over principles has just been raised.”
Now Mr. Reston is one of America’s most scholarly columnists. His writings give much evidence that he knows more of history and philosophy than many of his colleagues. One suspects that he reads such eminent contemporary theologians as Dr. Paul Tillich and Dr. Reinhold Niebuhr, men who have devoted much of their noble thought to the “moral ambiguities” that spring from Man’s very nature, and permeate all his historical causes, crusades, institutions, organizations—and political parties. Man, especially political man, be he politician, voter, or commentator, is never wholly consistent in his aims, perfectly pure in his motives, totally free of malice, prejudice, hypocrisy, greed or ambition.
Comments