◆ SpookStack

di asf H -¢ been unwilling to do so.” The ion execuiive noted that there wag nothing in the option agreement giving the LBJ Company authority to polige Capital Cable's programs. The FCC took Kellam at his word. No documentary evidence was sub- mitted to support the claim. And on Degember ]!—two days after Kel- lam mde his last reply—the Com- mission’, denied TV Cable's petition for a waiver. The majority opinion held that there were no special cir- cumstances in the Austin case to war- rant an @xception to the no-waiver policy. The lone dissenter, Commis- sioner Lee iLoevinger, said there had been no shawing that the local John- son station, KTBC-TV, was in need of protection from TV Cable through the blackout rule, Loevinger, the Commission's’ newest member, had only recently been imported from the Justice Department's anti-trust divi- sion, which he headed. Meanwhile, ag a result of the Bobby Baker case, Washington newsmen were already prowling through FCC records on n the Johnson family broad- etcte cas¢ fluttered diregly into the bright spotlight of public: attention, hiuing the national news media for the first time. Emboldened by the publicity, TV Cabie made one moré assault on the blackout rule last Jaquary. It asked the FCC for reconsideration. Nearly four more months of deliberation passed, and finally last month the Commission announced it would stick to the earlier verdict. The grounds: TV Cable had not shown good faith but tried to change the rules in the middle of the game by accepting the restriction and then attempting to have it annulled. { Nevertheless, the FCC failed to ad- dress itself to the cencral issuie of the dispute: why the government should use its power to insulate from’ compe- tilion a prosperous station like KTHC-TV, which had a big stake of iis own in the success of a commu- nity antenna system. Because: the question remains unanswered, ‘and because Presidential family incerests are substantially alfected, the Austin case will continue to rattle in the political closet long into the year. The Cut of if Vitnf » Vs ND WY by JAMES A. WECHSLER “Doesn't Black Nationalism carry with it the notion of re- turning to Africa?’ I asked. “Yes!" he replied, “but this is aur long-range goal... .” “In joining the civil rights struggle, are you not contra- dicting your previous position, that is, of not working with whites, and having given up on America?” His answer was immediate; “Na! First I believe the black man must lead his own fight; in _ fact, the Black Nationalist must become more involved and force the white man out, for he is the most deceitful creature on earth. I intend to prove that you can’t get civil rights in this country. Then I intend to elevate the idea of civil rights to the plane of human rights; this way, we can go to the United Nations and show the world what this country really is... The black man is maturing, he is waking up. That ts why I say that we will have real violence. I have found out that the black man the street thinks like I think. Where they are unwilling to talk in front of others, they are will- ing to tell me what they really feel...” ~—-FROM AN INTERVIEW WITH MALcoLM X, PUBLISHED IN The Liberator MAGAZINE. I FIRST encountered Malcolm X some- what over a year ago when we were participants on 2 radio forum. I had read a good deal about him _~ had a general notion of what he had been saying to increasingly large audiences on Harlem street comers. I had been told that he was articu- late, well-informed, quick and skill- ful in debate. I rather looked for- ward to the evening as a phase of my own education; it was on a pro- gram conducted by Barry Gray and 1 knew there would be an hour or more available for the discussion. Malcolm is a tall, slender, graceful man with a highly inteliectualized face that can alternately light up with anger and laughter; one might easily mistake him for a young acade- mician; off the air, he is disarming and quiet-mannered. But when he is performing, bitter sarcasm becomes his favorite tone. Two aspects of the discussion stand out in memory. One was an out- growth of his harsh and by now familiar denunciations of the estab- lished Negro leadership. I suggested to him that there was a certain pre- sumptuousness in his derisive dismis- sal of such figures as A. Philip Ran- dolph who have rendered so many . years of dedicated, selfless service .to the struggle against oppression. Mal- colm’s answer was swift and disdain- ful: “Randolph fought Marcus Gar- vey"—a reference to an = ancient episode in the history of the Negro liberation movement in which Garvey fought for a separatist, nationalist policy for Negroes. Malcolm rendered the verdict with the. finality of a Stalinise of the early Thirties to whom someone had ventured some favorable comment about a leader of the Second International. One could hardly avoid wincing as one listened to this self-righteous, self-possessed, self-proclaimed young savior condemn a man whose life has been so rare a