European Stars and Stripes (Newspaper) - April 2, 1990, Darmstadt, Hesse Page 10 column the stars and stripes William f. Buckley or. A Wrangle Over the psychotropic drug treaty a or i,1 in try mat 1 _ i _ in m not r1an�. I. _ a in a television debate on the question of whether the United slates would be better off decriminalizing drugs rep. Charles Rangel d-n.y., the influential chairman of the House select committee on narcotics abuse and control made the usual Points about the a we done to care about children. He then pronounced that among other dereliction to reduce the Price of drugs in order to eliminate the Black Market would be in a violation of our sitting to my right on the affirmative panel was Ira Glasser the executive director of the american civil liberties Union. I scrawled out on a note pad in front of him a what treaties a he scrawled Back a a a so the head of the Acle a scholarly gentleman of very wide experience conversant with every Legal implication of our War on drugs had never even heard of our drug treaties. Desperate i scratched out another note and this time passed it to the debate partner on my left judge Robert Sweet of the Federal District court of new York. Did he know about these treaties a never heard of the injunction in courtroom exchanges not so different from those at a debate forum is that you should never ask the witness a question unless you know and can therefore Cope with the answer he is going to give. Well i would take a Chance. A her congressman Rangel. What treaties Are you referring to a he said there were quite a few of them. A name he hesitated. I bore Down. A Well for instance the psychotropic drug treaty of 1987.�?� distributed by King features Syndicate you must deny it emphatically a after the drug debate rep ran cr1/g a f Nedwich and sipping coca cola. A guest a what provision in that treaty would be violated if we federalized the Sale of drugs a rep. Rangel said that the treaty denied to its signatories the right to Market drugs except for the Public health. I let it go. And later in the evening thought Back to a debate last fall on the Wisdom of the marketplace at which professor John Kenneth Galbraith was a member of the opposing panel. Former Sens. Gary Hart and George Mcgovern and rep. Patricia Schroeder All democrats were being on this particular evening Ever so careful Given the Public mood on the subject the marketplace is a a in a see Eastern Europe not to slight too harshly the uses of the marketplace. Professor Galbraith volunteered that it had great uses in Many situations. A professor Galbraith some years ago you debated in favor of the Resolution that a the marketplace is a snare and a have you changed your mind on the subject a a i have i was taken Aback. A it was before the Cambridge Union in 1970, and the debate was broadcast in great Britain and in the United states and maybe 7 million people heard a i have on the air plane the following Day we sat by each other and he complained of the treatment he had received in the College paper that morning. A did you think i was a vapid a a your memory was certainly vapid if that a the word for it on the Resolution we debated at a Bill when you deny something gel a a o on accosted him jvosr1 Inis psychotropic treat of 1987 ?1 never heard of it a y Charles Rangel leaned v head Back and laughed pro aria a a is a a he demanded a treaty did no the Quot he pointed to me with the Grin on he face that has charmed his constituent co by hey acre a a a do Moderator Michael Kinsley laughed too. He has the same Pebie crossfire a he said where he appear regularly opposite Pat Buchanan people come on the program and one of them will say a we sold 400 million tons of wheat to South Africa a and somebody else says a that a crazy it was 100 million tons and it Wasny to wheat it was soybeans and it Wasny to South Africa it was no Way you can just go out and get verification on the i nodded. No Way. Someone then asked a what happens i mean when there is just a Flat contradiction like that a i looked at Charles Rangel who was still beaming with impish Delight Over his psychotropic treaty. He added to the pleasure he had got from it Quot the Senate a he said with feigned melodrama a had a hell of a time ratifying it a everybody laughed even More a no. Seriously. What happens when Public figures make up facts a the guest pursued his Point. I volunteered to take him out of his misery. A what happens a i said a is nothing. Nothing happens. Right Michael a a ooh yes a Michael Kinsley said a nothing Universal press Syndicate Flora Lewis ethnic minorities need Protection from majorities circumstance has a Way of tripping up thought by categories and global communications now make that evident. After All the yardstick has to be a moral sense. South Africa is moving to negotiate its Way out of an oppressive racist system. The principle of one person one vote cannot be denied As the essence of democracy. And yet one vote to do what anything at All recognition of human rights requires a certain Protection of the individual regardless of How Many disagree. Americans founders soon realized that a majority is not always just and wrote the Bill of rights to set limits to its Power. They established an Independent judiciary to oversee compliance against social passion. Conservatives in South Africa want to assure a group rights against an overwhelming majority. What they mean is to protect Whites against unlimited and they fear vengeful domination by Blacks although they put it in terms of but sorting out people by groups with different rights is the very foundation of apartheid which is racist by definition. Protecting minorities has a generous resonance in most parts of the world but not where it Means protecting one minority a monopoly of the Power and the wealth. In Transylvania recently frightened ethnic hungarians were talking to a Western reporter after their insistence on the right to use their own language and preserve their own culture and Community had resulted in brutal attacks by ethnic romanians. A do you mean apartheid a asked the reporter. The hungarians were shocked. Of course not they said but they wanted to be themselves. A romanian visitor to Paris said the violence had been provoked by people from the Countryside trucked into the town of Stirgu mures by the newly revived peasants party. Not All thugs in Eastern Europe were secret police. Not All anti communists were democrats. Old memories of hungarian oppression when the area was ruled from Budapest have survived alongside the later inequities imposed from Bucharest. In Western Poland which was part of Germany before Stalin forced the whole country to move Over so he could absorb Eastern Poland there Are still ethnic germans despite massive postwar expulsions. They too Are claiming group rights beyond the individual guarantees that a new polish Constitution is expected to provide. Even in France proud to have Given birth to the declaration of the rights of Man difference brings honest principles into conflict. Separation of Church and state is a deeply embedded gain of the revolution. There was recently a Sharp controversy Over the right of Muslim girls to Wear a form of veil in Public schools a reflection of the growing friction Over North african immigrants and their religion. People Are killing and abusing each other All around the world because of racial ethnic and religious difference. Talks on How to end apartheid in South Africa Are delayed and complicated by violence Between supporters of the african National Congress and the Zulu inkatha movement. Nelson Mandela a claim to pre eminent Black leadership will be measured by his ability to find an agreement with the Zulu Leader chief but Elezi that the followers of both will accept. Pretoria is toying with ideas about a Senate based on territorial representation rather than population but every major territory has a Black majority or groups but that smacks of apartheid to gain White acceptance of Blacks voting rights. It wont be easy to find a formula that satisfies principle and allays fear. Is definition of groups Good or bad or just in Nia and unjust in South Africa is the individual the Only definition democracy allows or should diversity be institutionalized ethnicity is a human cultural and social reality that cannot be wiped out even by so powerful an ideology and Force As communism represented. Should it also be a Legal reality if so Are he Rar a tolerable based on numbers on property. On Hist try on the assertion of inherent superiority. Fragmentation into Sovereign states is ardently urged by some As a solution. But it Stilt the aggrieved minorities and it goes against the w Many needs that require surmounting nationalism. There Are answers but they Are not Simp Esse ing a Universal Rule brings inevitable cont Rodi a circumstance matters and it comes Back Toone command to support the weak and respect the o g of humans. We have to learn to live with our Knowle be people Are individuals who identify with g a there a always More to learn. New York time the opinions expressed in the columns and on this Page represent those of the authors and Sav ii As represent info the View
