100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

October 08, 1967 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1967-10-08

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.


Sezenty-Seven Years of Editorial Freedom
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AU THORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

The Trials of a Conscientious Objector

."-"

Where Opinions Are Free, 420 MAYNARD Sr., ANN ARBOR, MICH.
Truth Will Prevail

NEWS PHONE: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express, the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

SUNDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1967

NIGHT EDITOR: DAVID KNOKE

Federal Pressure on NSA
Perpetuates the Quagmire

By RICHARD ANTHONY
Collegiate Press Service
"Nothing contained in this
title shall be construed to re-
quire any person to be subject
to combatant training and
service in the armed forces of
the United States who, by rea-
son of religious training and
belief, is conscientiously op-
posed to participation in war in
any form." (Selective Service
Act of 1948: Title I, Section
6 (j).
JOHN McAULIFF is opposed to
certain kinds of wars, but not
to war "in any form."
As he wrote in the statement
he prepared for his draft board,
he does not object to "interna-
tional police actions," nor to de-
fensive wars.
He also wrote that "although
I think just policies earlier would
have prevented the second World
War, I would have fought Ger-
many and Japan."
He is totally opposed to nuclear
war, and to "any war or 'peace-
keeping action' which involves the
nationals of one country inter-

vening in another and which does
not receive the backing of the
broadest-based international or-
ganization."
McAuliff is not a "selective
C.O." in the purest sense-that
is, he did not apply for conscien-
tious objector status solely be-
cause he opposes the Vietnam war
-but by almost any other meas-
ure he is a selective C.O.
In spite of his beliefs about
war, however, his state Selective
Service Appeals Board (in In-
diana) has granted him C.O.
status. He is to serve two years
doing alternative service.
McAuliff does not know why
his state board decided to approve
his C.O. application. He had not
expected them to do so, and was
preparing for further appeals
and court action.
"I thought I'd probably fight
the case through the courts for
a couple of years," he said, "and
then eventually be faced with
jail."
Under the old draft law (since
amended, but applicable when
McAuliff's case was being consid-
ered), his appeal could have been

forwarded to the Justice Depart-
ment by his state board if there
was any question about it. The
department would then have held
a hearing to decide his case.
As far as he knows, the appeal
was never forwarded to Washing-
ton. No Justice Department hear-
ing was held.
McAuliff, a graduate of Carle-
ton College and a Peace. Corps
veteran, now lives in Washington.
THE DECISION by the Indiana
Appeals Board in McAuliff's case
has no legal standing, and can-
not be employed as a legal pre-
cedent by other applicants for
C.O. status. There are only two
legal decisions that bear on the
selective C.O. question, both in-
volving Jehovah's Witnesses.
In Sicurella v. U.S., which
came before the Supreme Court
in 1955, the court ruled that a
Witness could be granted C.O.
status even though he was will-
ing to kill in defense of his broth-
ers and his home, or at the com-
mand of Jehovah.
According to a spokesman for
the American Civil Liberties Un-

ion, there are a number of selec-
tive C.O. cases that will be reach-
ing the courts within the next
year. Only one case, however,
that of Air Force Capt. Dale
Noyd, is currently on appeal to
the Supreme Court.
CAPT. NOYD objects specifi-
cally to serving in Vietnam or
aiding in the war effort there,
and has applied for C.O. status
on the basis of that objection.
According to one of his attor-
neys, Marvin Karpatkin, the Su-
preme Court is supposed to be de-
ciding whether or not to hear the
case within a month and a half,
but it may never get to do so.
Karpatkin says that Noyd has
been assigned duty as it flight in-
structor. "As soon as he is order-
ed to train a pilot who is going
to Vietnatn, he'll have to dis-
obey," says the attorney.
If that occurs, .Noyd will be
probably court-martialled, and
his military trial will take pre-
cedence over his appeal to the
Supreme Court.
There is little likelihood, there-
fore, that a "selective C.O." case

will reach the Supreme Court in
the near future. Others who ap-
ply for C.O. status under circum-
stances like McAuliff's may be
successful, but if they are, it will
be because their local or state
boards construe the phrase "war
in any form" as his state board
did. There is not yet a legal pre-
cedent that will support C.O. ap-
plicants who object to the Viet-
nam war in particular, or to wars
of intervention generally.
McAuliff h i m s e 1 f, although
aware that his case will not pro-
vide legal support for other se-
lective C.O.'s, nevertheless hopes
that as many potential draftees
as possible will apply for C.O.
status even if they are not
thorough-going pacifists.
"They might be favorably sur-
prised, as I was," says McAuliff,
"but if not, each of them will be
adding to the pressure for
changes in the present unjust
system.
"If enough pressure builds up,"
he adds, "then some day we may
have the kind of system that
recognizes the legitimacy of all
conscientious objections."

THE REPORT ON FRIDAY that the Na-
tional Student Association was pres-
sured by the Office of Economic Oppor-
tunity to cancel its scheduled August 24
Vietnam protest march on Washington
illuminates the quagmire of government
control in which NSA has found itself.
Despite the abolition of the CIA yoke,
NSA is still the progeny of the Establish-
ment and is dominated by the funds and
favors of the federal government, and not
by the interests/ of the students whose
governments they represent.
NSA, while it is nominally a lobby-like
organization for student interests, has
actually been a vehicle through which
the federal government administers -sev-
eral programs. During the CIA domina-
tion of NSA, the organization was used
not only to influence international stu-
dent conferences, but in their dealings
with students from Communist coun-
tries, members of the international
branch of NSA promised to forward all
communications to the CIA, an item
which led to the ultimate schism be-
tween the two organizations.
THE STORY in the Wayne State Uni-'
versity's student paper on OEO influ-
ence in NSA leaves some doubt as to the
story's charges, but regardless there is
some pressure placed on NSA from OEO.
While OEO's motives for funding NSA
are, of less dubious character, OEO is
not acting merely to perpetuate NSA as
a representative of student interests. The
$244,000 grant from OEO was to be used
exclusively in setting up and administer-
ing the tutorial project. While this proj-
ect does have its merits, it is significant
that the funds are not undesignated,

they are not for projects that are ini-
tiated by and benefit NSA, but rather
are fo'r projects that supplement gov-
ernmental programs.
THUS, THE NSA serves the OEO which
in turn serves President Johnson,
whose primary concern is not whom he
serves, but quieting the chorus of oppo-
sition to the war in Vietnam.
Even the thought of NSA cancelling
the scheduled August 24 march is evi-
dence that NSA leaders see it more fit-
ting to serve the federal government
than their student constituents.
Programs such as the tutorial proj-
ect could certainly be financed through
other organizations or directly through
the OEO. If NSA's being allowed to ad-
minister these programs means it must
prostitute itself politically and refuse
to espouse the interests of its true con-
stituents, then the tutorial program
must be administered through , other
sources. As long ,as NSA takes in govern-
ment funds for whatever purposes, they
will be liable to such forms of federal
blackmail.
PERHAPS OTHER SCHOOLS will realize
this and follow the noteworthy lead
of the University's SGC by withdrawing
from NSA. This will not destroy NSA,
however, for its power comes not from
below, from the students, but from the
federal government. What can be hoped
for is that out of the discontent of these
schools can come a lobby that repre-
sents the students in both name and fact,
-RONALD KLEMPNER
Associate Editorial Director

a

..... .... ........r ....................:...... ............. ........:1::::.:;5. ...:.... ....... .. Y .......tV; Yv:::......... . .. . ; ..., ,. ....r ...........r...... ....... ......... .............................."....1.. ... ..M1. t.t,. V tY554
.. YV. is '.::V:.:::: V ........ .............. r.............. ,. .............::::...... }1.V:nV.V. ............ .... .;....... :.. .... t.. YtY : t 55^s, r::. . ' ...:
................ .............. ... ......., ........"....., .......... . ............ .. ... . t ... ".......
.......... ................. . . . .............. ............., "...4..t............. ..........1" :" . .. .................. .... . ........ ....... ............. ...5... . ....51.1.... ..r1.1,. fi 1. ...5.
. . ... .......................................t.....5.............5..t...Y,......,..5..5.4.....r1r............P.....:5..r.:.iSVrSil. ttV1:1:::.'J.i:'i:1."::::::5':}:: t5: .'::.: t5..11 }}i.5:1i1ii:li.V" tt .: :. ',55 r.Y r}..t... ". ::. . ,:. 1 .. w. .. ... i .',11\\/'

Letters: The True Voices of Civilization

To the Editor:
MR. SHISTERS'S "VOICES of
Two Civilizations" expresses
the relative irrelevancy of the
civilization of Acheson, Reichauser,
and compatriots as opposed to the
world in which Lynd, Gerassi, Og-
lesby and others would like to see
created. But, then, one only has to
look at which speakers were in-
vited by whom to realize the effect
of the establishment. The Univer-
sity brought you the former 'sec-
retary of state, former ambassador
to Japan, government economist,
unconcerned Negro novelist, phys-
icist, and other noncontraversial
figures of the sciences.
Make no mistake about it, the
Wednesday night teach-in was in
no way sponsored by the "U."
Rather, SGC, Graduate Assembly,
U-M Young Democrats, U-M
Young Republicans, Friends of
Vietnam Fall, and sponsors
brought you revolution advocates,
dissenters as well as resisters, ac-
tivists, local leaders-people not
talink about some obscure polit-
ical theories of the past, but about
issues that face this generation:
Wurfel, observer of recent Vietnam
elections, on "Vietnam: A Way
Out?"; Boggs and Cleague, Detroit
Negro organizers and leaders, dis-
cussing the racial-economic ques-
tions; professors arguing with stu-
dents at three in the morning on
subjects ranging from "Electoral
Tactics for '68" to "The 'Rise of
the Hippies."
Yes, the University is a part
of the "other generation." We are
told it is not politically feasible
for he nstitution to sponsor speak-
ers who poke and prevoke. The
University being what you make of
it, I think organizations such as
the ones which gave us this teach-
in for making it a bit better.
--Deo Shapiro '69
Other Voices
To the Editor:
IN HIS COLUMN of Oct. 6, Neil
Shister made several points on
which I would like to comment.
Taking first his statement that
Dean Acheson is not a reaction-
ary, I reject this notion. Granted
that the author of America's
China Policy is the liberal par

excellence, it is precisely this
which makes him reactionary.
You see the two terms are not
opposites. He is reactionary be-
cause he advocates the suppres-
sion of the very revolutionary
movements that not only happen
to be with the: tide of history, but
are exactly what the "third
world" and the rest of us need if
we are to become civilized.
The point is not that Acheson
and company are still talking in
the late sixties as they were in
the late forties and through the
fifties; it is not that they are old-
fashioned. The basic point to un-
derstand is that they were wrong
even then. To be against the rev-
olution in Asia, Africa, Latin
America and Detroit, Watts, Har-
lem - Mississippi, today -- or to
have been so in 1949 is to have
been and continues to be in dia-
metric opposition to the only ve-
hicle for attainment of freedom
and self-determination that the
exploited peoples of four conti-
nents have open to them.
WITHIN MY system of priori-
ties Mr. Acheson figures as a
very uncivilized man, For while
he speaks softly and supports fr'ee
speech within our borders, he acts
with tanks and napalm against
people seeking to rid themselves
of repressive. local regimes which
function underathe auspicesUof
American liberal support. U.S.
domination is the hated enemy
because it means no widespread
redistribution of land, natural re-
sources or the general wealth in
countries where people are liter-
ally starving. It means that the
bulk of the inhabitants of Latin
America languish under oligarchic
governments who, continue to
exist only because of the U.S.
supplies the f u n d s, military
hardware and green or purple
berets which are necessary to
prop them up. Mr. Acheson as a
respected liberal, is the active
architect of programs designed
to perpetuate this status quo all
around the world.
The word liberal is in disrepute
and rightly so because under its
imprimatur, whether or not with
good intentions, acts of syste-

matic oppression have been an
continue to be perpetrated agains
the "have-nots." What must b+
reemphasized is that they have
not because we have; and tha
what we have is to an enormou
extent what we took from them.
In judging men such as Dear
Acheson, Hubert Humphrey, Johr
Kennedy or his heir apparent
Bobby, it is misleading and even
mischievous to focus their per.
sonal attributes in the contex
of socio-political systems. Yes
John F. Kennedy and Bobby ar
charming men, but their allianc
for progress in Latin America
was an effort to nip the South
American revolution in the bud
And it was John Kennedy wh
first escalated American inter
vention in Vietnam. The logica
progression of the same policie
can be witnessed today in Viet-
nam, Bolivia, Peru, Guaterhala
etc., under a far less witty, hum
orous, or likeable but still liberal
Lyndon B. Johnson.
Finally, the question is erone-
ously posed when it asks "are you
on the side of Staughton Lynd
or Dean Acheson?" The questiort
is are you on the side of the op-
pressed or the oppressor?
-Rose Hochman
SG(
To the Editor:
AS A NEWCOMER to this cam
pus, I have been quite im-
presed by the degree to which stu.
dents participate in the Univer-
sity's policy-making and decision-
making processes. My undergrad-
uate experience in student gov-
ernment (at a private university of
6,000 located in the South) wa,
often one of suspicion and lack of
communication between student
and the faculty and administra-
tion; thus, the rapport apparen
here is a welcome change. Th
presence of student representa-
tives om important boards and
committees demonstrate the ad-
ministration's respect for studen
opinion and suggests the responsi-
ble and creative nature of student
government at Michigan.
Consequently, I am dismayed
to learn that an SGS representa-
tive has refused to sit on the Uni-

Me
Et
:t
S
1.
E1

"This Is An Emergency - We've Got
To Use Tihe Ax"
s X/
pf
6 *1
t,-
-
-0
-A , -
-
1v6

Social Comment in a London Fog

PERHAPS SOME THINKER at London
Fog heard the news about Central In-
telligence Agency dollars lining the pock-
ets of the National Student Association.
The -revelation, however, doesn't have
much advertising potential. But the folks
who make "Maincoats" (rain coat is
anathema at London Fog) came through
with the following related tale which ap-
peared in recent issues of magazines
widely read on campus:
"ONCE UPON A CAMPUS," the ad re-
lates, "a mean old gangster disguis-
ed himself as a house mother in order
to kidnaps a wealthy coed. After noticing
how big his ears, nose and teeth were,
she commented on his nifty shoulders.
The better to kidnap you with,' he said,
stuffing her into a laundry bag.
"Shrieking for all she was worth -
about 300 thou-she attracted the at-
tention of The Fog, who happened to be
on campus ferreting out a Communist
cell in the Biology Department.
"Moral: Sometimes a little red riding
can catch a hood.
LONDON FOG WINS on two points: Its
moral is a profound analgam of sear-
ing wit and civic-mindedness in an age
of the anti-hero. And, its portrayal of a
campus populated by at least one weal-

thy coed shows an insight into the so-
cial structure of some of today's univer-
sities: rich, white (the coed in the ad
photo is indeed blonde), middle-class.
But there are flaws in the narrative
skein: A depiction of a gangster with
prominent features indicates a latent
ethnic bias. Furthermore, the last major
Communist ("cell" is a terrible pun) in
a biology department was probably Stal-
in's man Lyhenko. Ad writers may un-
forgivably have had in mind biological
mathematicians such as Prof. Anatol
Rapoport, but such persons oppose the
Vietnam war in the best traditions of
true American morality. Thus "red rid-
ing" reflects the hawkish venom at Lon-
don Fog.
FINALLY, THE STORY line is implaus-
ible: The Fog should, for example,
have noticed the kidnapping as he drove
to campus in a Volkswagen that his agen-
cy planned to donate to the campus stu-
dent government.
Thus, The Fog misses the tradition of
suspense of sleuths like Sherlock Holmes.
And, because of its obvious ideological
bent, London Fog should best spend its
efforts making trench coats for CIA
agents.
-NEAL BRUSS

Housing the Urban Poor

IN THE AREA of public housing, every
effort should be made to avoid the
"buck-passing" effects of red tape, and
the creation of huge, monotonous, tomb-
like boxes of apartment houses which
neighbors can point to, or (what is more
likely) move away from.
Ann Arbor's planned public housing
program fails on both counts. Under the
program, $3.6 million in federal funds
will be used to create 200 units, tenta-
tively to be distributed over only six
sites. The federal government must be
involved in all steps of the construction,
including approval of sites, options and
even architects. This means public in-
vestigations, not to mention an interm-
inable delay. And distribution of the
units over only six sites will foreseeably
cause gross inequities in racial and eco-
nomic distribution in the city's schools.
FURTHERM4ORE, public welfare does

uals should be a private contract be-
tween the recipient and the distributing
agency to avoid the indignity of a public
"dole."
An ideal solution to public housing
would be the federal rent supplement
program presently mired in joint com-
mittee. Under such a program individ-
uals would privately receive the finan-
cial aid to move into decent housing in
any area of a city.
Equally beneficial would be a public
housing program such as the ones Flint
and Mount Clemens operate. Under these
programs individual contractors turn
over to the city the keys to finished
units-single-family dwelling or apart-
ments-in exchange for reimbursement
out of federal funds. No federal inves-
tigations are involved, and the units are
widely distributed throughout the city.

v
F '
? '
m,:a
;.
R
" r
;"
.
.. _--
,_ 1 L
t ; ,
,, , ,:
T
k
f , 1 +r 1
_ rY
'
+,':
;j
',I .
: .;
l,; ;.:
s11, , ,
.
r'_
,;
C. ' ' 6 ', ,
. , f {
f.r

I'..k ..Ii~' r

- versity Senate Committee on Com-
munications (Daily, Oct. 4), ,and
f even more concerned that SGC
s chose to void its representation
f rather than participate in closed
s meetings. This policy, is overdoing
democracy. Certainly the repre-
t sentative and the Council were en-
e titled to the opinion that all ses-
sions of the committee should be
d open, but when the majority of
the members, by an equally valid'
t function of democracy, voted to
hold closed meetings, the student
t organization should have com-
plied with that majority will.
Two questions are relevant here.
First, where is the line to be drawn
between the SGC's responsibility
(and privilege) to represent and
its fidelity to principle? If Miss
Greenberg felt it ideologically im-
possible to participate in closed
meetings, she could resign for.
reasons that 'would seem justified.,
But does SGS have the right to
deny students representation on
this commtitee (and perhaps oth-
er's) because meetings are not pub-
lic? I believe the line is not drawn
between open and closed doors.
THE SECOND QUESTION ap-
plies to the specific situation: Must
the meetings of this committee be
closed for it to completely explore
its topic? Although the SGC rep-
resentative thought not; four of
the members, at least three of
whom were faculty, believed- so.
Thus, in terms of majority dem-
ocracy and majority judgment,
the committee stated that the ses-
sions should be private to accom-
plish their pur-pose.
The most important implication ,
of SGC's withdrwal from this com-
mittee, however, is not the lack of
cooperation or the loss of rep-
resentation. Rather, this policy
reflects a blurred perspective of
SGC's conception of its role, its
power, and its responsibilities. And
what concerns me most about this
policy is that such steadfast re-
fusal to cooperate with a commit-
tee on which it has only one seat
could undermine the significant
progress student government has
made at Michigan. First, strict ad-
herence to the recent decision
could completother studentsrep-
resentatives to forfeit seats on
committees which desire confiden-
tial proceedings. Second, SGC
could lose contact with issues im-

concept. But an argunent over
principle when pragmatism is the
necessity does not make policy,
decisions-or sense.
-Jeremy Joan Hewes, Grad
Parking Space
To the Editor:
I WAS VERY much surprised to
learn from Miss Eiker's Sept.
28 article, "Whence Cometh the
Funds," that in the past five and
a half years I have paid out about
$80 to the Michigan 'Union for
student, services. She noted that
at the women's rate, she would
have gotten off well at $1 for each
admission to the League; for me,
$10 would have bee ncheap.
Thereason I am writing is to
inquire of you and your readers
exactly why the Union and the
League should be maintained at
all? I . understand that these
buildings are owned'in some way
outside the University, legally,
and are run by non-University
employes, but I wonder if you
could clarify the exact status of
the Union and the League, legal-
ly, for your readers.
Offhand, it seems like they
would be of more value to the
students if they were converted
into classroom space, or even
parking structures perlaps. If
there is some vital aspect of these
institutions which I have over-
looked in the past years, I would
appreciate an informative lecture
on their values.
-John H. Lossing '70Med
Spare Us
to the Editor:
PLEASE SPARE us another edi-
torial such as Anne Buesser's
on "Sororities and Grade-Points."
For triteness and trivia we have
Time magazine and LBJ - must
we look to The Daily for the
same?
"Nobody here is mediocre," she
proclaims. We must demonstrate
the worth of this system by
"swinging the balance back to-
ward academic excellence," "mo-
tivating to do more than the
minimum," "pushing scholarship,"
that is, requiring a 2.2 instead of
a 2.0. "Grades tell much about
the individual'shorientation into
the university, her assumption of
responsibility and her self-re-
spect." These qualities go unde-
fined-responsibility to what, and

I

i

Back to Top

© 2017 Regents of the University of Michigan