Page 1000

A SALUTARY INFLUENCE In October 1969 several of the late president's friends organized the Dwight D. Eisenhower Society, in order "to promote knowledge and understanding of the accomplishments of the 34th President of the United States and General of the Army; the code by which he lived; and the signal qualities that made him in his time the world's most trusted figure." Beginning in 1970, this society observed the anniversary of Eisenhower's birth (October 14) by exercises at the statue, followed by a convocation in the College Union Building. Between 1970 and 1984 the convocation speakers included General Lauris Norstad, General Alfred M. Gruenther, Governor William W. Scranton, Dr. Edward L.R. Elson, Governor Richard L. Thornburgh, and President Gerald R. Ford. The society has always maintained a close working relationship with the College. By 1985 it had begun to contribute to an Eisenhower endowment fund, part of the proceeds of which were available for scholarships. Coming Apart at Gettysburg The social unrest which reached its peak in the late 1960s and early 1970s followed almost twenty years in which the dominant, but certainly never the only, themes were widespread acceptance of the traditional ideals of family life, the worth of organized religion, and the value of education at all levels. At the same time, as late as 1961, after a decade and a half of cold war, an American president in his inaugural address could still vow that "we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty." It was perhaps inevitable that sooner or later many Americans would begin to criticize what they insisted was an obsession with material things and a continuing great gap between the ideal and the reality in many aspects of our life. They also questioned whether American foreign policy, however well it might have promoted the nation's interests in the recent past, was now in need of major review and redirection. It was equally inevitable that this criticism and questioning would occur on every live college campus in the country. These were concerns closely related to the future of every young person, whether in college or not. Those who were satisfied with things as they were and who focused their attention on the excesses, both in word and deed, which occurred on many campuses were highly critical of what was taking place. They often threatened to cut off their financial support of certain institutions, and sometimes did just that. Those faculty, administrators, and trustees who were in varying degrees responsible for ongoing college and university programs were often perplexed by the difficulty in turning cam- 100