and deeply dismayed about their lethalness,ntheir threat to society, their distribution,nand—last but not least —nagainst the permissiveness, even malfeasance,nof those who are insensitivento the drug problem and its many dimensions.nHad it been a gathering of academiciansnwishing to encourage the drugnsubculture, praise the innocence andnminimize the medically proven perniciousnessnof mind-altering drugs, bothnbroadcast and print media would havenmobbed the auditorium. But after all,nthe First Amendment is here to protectnthe journalist’s right to decide what hendoes not wish to do—even if what hendoesn’t want to do is to help societyncombat its most devastating affliction. DnThe Message BusinessnIn one of Time magazine’s recentnissues, entitled: “Is Capitalism Working.'”nanyone could read the followingnstatements:nWhat Have We Lost?nSaint Barbara was a virginnmartyr; according to medievalnbelief, praying to her would assurenone of bliss in the momentnof death. Santa Barbara, a citynin California, is the capital ofnthe hot-tub industry. Or so wencan read in the abundant, lavishnpromotional brochures thatnreach us from Santa Barbara andnare obviously published by inspirednhot-tub makers. On thenmeticulously reproduced covers,nvivid pictures of Boschlike configurationsnand conglomerationsnof naked bodies of all ages andndegrees of attractiveness crowdnhot tubs like ostensibly happynLiberal Culturen%nChronicles of CultttrenEvery democracy practices some versionnof capitalism. The reason isnclear: political freedom is impossiblenwithout economic freedom . . . whilennot returning to the earlier hands-offnposture, government leaders mustnrecognize the limitations of economicncentral direction and restore some lostnfreedom to the free enterprise system.nWe would have hoped that some ofnthose wonderful people who were thenfirst to rebel against the merciless swaynof the Marxian-socialist-liberal ethosnin economics—like Ludwig von Mises,nFriedrich Hayek, Wilhelm Ropkewouldnbe mentioned as pioneers ofnTime’s recent turnabout. It occurrednto us, however, that Time’s editors maynnot even know of their existence or recognizenthe impact their work had onnRonald Reagan, William Simon, JacknKemp and their confreres. Besides, itnwould be against Time’s liberal religionnto credit avowed nonliberals with correctnthinking—be it in economics ornsardines. The flashing smilesnand facial expressions of beatitudenindicate the ultimate in relaxation,naccording to the promoters.nThese activities arencalled “communal bath-taking,”n”beautiful orgy without sex,”n”Cannibal Soup,” “experimentsnin human communicationnthrough closeness and wetness,”n”the act of meditating,” etc. Onenoverinspired lady proselytizer exults:n”Suddenly you realize younare looking at persons instead ofnbodies; the bareness just makesnyou feel that each person is easiernto get to.”nThe hot-tub theorists, propagandists,nphilosophers and salesmennunanimously claim thatncommunal nudity has very littlento do with sex. We find it immaterial,nalthough one of the abovementionednoeuvres on hot tubsnby a certain Leon Elder, an apparentnexpert on tubology (HotnTubs, published by VintagenBooks/Random House, Inc.), includesna chart that enumeratesnthe degrees of intensity of health,nsex, sociability, voyeurism andnsadomasochism as related to hottubbing.nAfter all, pagan aestheticsnand mores did not necessarilynmean the ultimate in evil in recordednhistory. The hot-tub fansnfirmly claim that their practicesnare sources of endless benefits tonmankind—from robust physicalitiesnto serene and happy psyches.nHeart trouble, varicose veins andnhigh blood pressure are cured;nwholesome, sunny personalitiesnare developed. These may benboons that we gain through hottubbingnand communal frolics innthe buff. But somewhere aroundnthe pleistocene era, homo erectusnnnliterature. After two decades of intenselynpreaching the superiority of socialnconscience over free economy (at thensame time reaping all possible profitsnfrom its capitalistic operations). Timenis understandably reluctant to informnits readers that someone else was right. DnWisdom & MerrimentnA Gannett “family” newspaper recentlynreviewed a current movie, andnthe methodology of criticism is worthnnoticing. Here is how it works:nDescription: “The plot contains thenbasics of your normal daytime-TVndrama: lechery, wife-swapping, Seductionnand other suburban sports.”nMoral evaluation: “The rating is Rnwith semi-nudity, a comic orgy scenenand some of the roughest language you’llnhear outside the locker room.”nJudgment: “Serial… is a deliciousnsocial comedy that is loaded with wisdom,ninsanity and bellylaughs.” Dndiscovered a simple principle:nyou win one, you lose one. Vaccines,nan obvious gain, gave usnoverpopulation; the steam machine,na great step forward, gavenus air pollution, and on and on.nThus, hot tubs and concomitantnnudity may give us greatnfeelings of relaxation, but theynannihilate the sense of physicalnshame. And the sense of physicalnshame is the great conditioner ofnall moral emotions. The Biblendoes not relate the story of thenfig leaf just to boost the “Fruitnof the Loom” sales; there’s a littlenmore depth to the problem.nNot to mention that physical lovenand its spiritual consequencesnare unthinkable without and inseparablenfrom the notions ofnexceptionality, intimacy, privacy,ndiscretion, etc. But to thencitizens of Santa Barbara and itsnbooming industry of hygienic innocencenthis may seem both foolishnand reactionary. Chacun anson gout in his Cannibal Soup.n