r r11 iMIYlII; IIr I IIgYIr IgiYpIqI 4 I Ir 11NOrl I rrrllrl III r1111W r"11 I . I I Ilrrr M

"Slums are for you cops to go into"

& e £frIphian Dai1g
Seventy-eight years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students of the University of Michigan
under authority of Board in Control of Student Publications

420 Maynord St., Ann Arbor, Mich.

News Phone: 764-0552'

4..
4 _. 1

r
';:,; :::
s

,.YO4
NO, V'
r
KOV

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

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 24, 1968

NIGHT EDITOR: PHILIP BLOCK

VP Newell must respect
SGC autonomy

THE DECISION by Acting Vice Presi-
dent for Student Affairs Barbara New-
ell to b 1o c k appropriation of funds to
Student Government Council represents
an unwarranted violation of the princi-
ple of and precedent for SGC autonomy.
For the past several years, despite often
serious disagreements, administrators
have respected the financial and legisla-
tive independence of SGC.
The University accepted through the
Reed Report (1962), the Knauss Report
(1966) and the Hatcher Commission Re-
port (1968) the right of students to dem-
ocratically make decisions which affect
their non-academic lives.
It is essential to this principle, that a
student government be independent of
administration control.
The precedent for a financially inde-
pendent student government has been
strong. In 1965, the Regents rejected a
petition signed by 15,000 students asking
for the establishment of a discount stu-'
dent bookstore. However, SGC went ahead
and appropriated $1,000 for the project
and no move was made to prevent the re-
lease of funds.
FOR WHILE THE POWER of the vice
president to v e t o SGC expenditures
has existed for as long as student govern-
ment, this is the; first instance in recent
memory where legitimate funds h a v e
been blocked by the administration.
Even under the heavy hand of Newell's
predecessor the sancity of an independent
student government was respected, at
least to the degree of recognizing its right
to spend money as it pleased.
But Miss Newell insists, "SGC is just
like any other unit in the University" and
must clear even budgeted expenditures
through the appropriate administration
officials.
She claims SGC revenue is derived from
state funds and therefore must be specif-
ically scrutinized by the Regents.
Furthermore, she points to an archaic
Regental bylaw to back up her right to
block SGC appropriations.'
BOTH ASSUMPTIONS by the vice pres-
ident are totally incorrect.
First, SGC funds do not come f r o m
state appropriations., Twenty-five cents

per student per semester is set aside from
student fees as a fixed appropriation to
student government. This has been the
practice through the terms of three vice
presidents.
Secondly, the Regental bylaw Mrs. New-
ell has used to justify her action is gen-
erally accepted as antiquated.
For the past six months a committee
has spent hundreds of hours rewriting
the bylaws relating to student affairs, in-
cluding the musty old stature Mrs. Newell
used to justify the blocking of SGC funds.
A more fastidious administrator would
have at least taken the minimal time nec-
essary to review the background of the
issue.
T h i s unfortunate misunderstanding
could have been easily avoided by appro-
priate consultation on the part of Mrs.
Newell. But her student advisory commit-
tee was not informed until after the fact,
and even when that committee unanim-
ously condemned her action, the v i c e
president refused to budge.
Mrs. Newell has violated the tacit rec-
ognition of SGC's financial autonomy
which preceding administrations accept-
ed. This unfortunate action comes at a
time when cooperation between the ad-
ministration and student government is,
essential in accomplishing badly needed
reforms in the Office of Student Affairs.;
ASSUMING AN HONEST mistake w as
made by Mrs, Newell a n d President
Fleming in misunderstanding the prece-
dent for and principle of SGC autonomy,
one would have expected a swift reversal
of their position.
Their continued refusal could b r i n g
very' serious consequences. The issue is
much broader than an administration-
student government fund over a $100 ap-
propriation to incorporate. Rather, it is
most obviously a refusal to recognize
SGC's autonomy.
Mrs. Newell has refused to re-examine
her action, admitting she is "stalling for
time until President Fleming returns to
Ann Arbor."
The time for stalling has ended. Mrs.
Newell must recognize the financial and
legislative independence of SGC. Unless
a reversal of her decision is forthcoming,
a sit-in is entirely justified.
-STEVE NISSEN

t

" "
Theuniversity
"&
without students
(EDITOR'S NOTE: The following statements by David B. Trunian, vice
president of Columbia University and a Trustee of Amherst College, are
taken from an interview by Allan Webber of Amherst College. The exchange
was printed in the Oct. 3 issue of the "Choragos," the student newspaper at
Mount Holyoke College.)
"The strikers last spring were a somewhat mixed group as they
were by no means unanimous in their view. They may well have been
thinking about using the university for certain extra-university purposes
of a political character-some thought of this as the spearhead of some
kind of a major national or social revolution. And for them, this was
a perfectly logical position to take.
"It was' not an illogical position for the remainder, but you see
what happened in the strike committee last spring was a real division
between those who were concerned about making changes in the uni-
versity and those who were primarily concerned with using the uni-
versity and forcing the university into positions of their own external
objectives.
"And as for the former, the ones who were looking toward the
university itself, and were committed to it, even if one didn't necessarily
agree with what they were after--I think it was among those that
the idea of giving the new president a chance to make changes with
the trustees and faculty and the students is strong.
"NO FORMAL CHANGES have been made (in the university) and
it would have been unreasonable to anticipate that there would be by
this time. These things can't be done overnight. A lot of these organiza-
tions-both official and semi-official of students and faculty and
others have been set up or set themselves up for purposes of proposing
change.
"A good deal of study has gone into it this summer. The naxt step
will be the circulation and hopefully some kind of coordinated hearing
procedure and discussion procedure with the various proposals hope-
fully to iron out as many as possible of the differences among them
prior to the time when they might be submitted to both the university
community and to the trustees for purposes of action.'But it will take
the better part of this semester before that can be done.
"Whether or not one accepts that the university is or can be a
democracy-and I don't--that does not mean that there are not a
variety of ways and avenues in which student influence in particular
can be and should be perhaps more active than it has been in the past.
Now, I said I didn't think it could or should be a democracy.
"LET ME JUST TAKE the most obvious point about a university
or college, for that matter, and I might say in this connection that I
think it is terribly dangerdus if one brings in analogies from another
part of the society and attempts to sort of use them as measures for an
institution that almost inevitably is sui generis. I mean that the college
or university is a type of institution that deserves to be measured by
is own standards.
"The fact of the matter is, the most crucial determination that
goes on in a college or university is the selection of faculty, which is
done by seniors to juniors. It is not democratic and can't be-that
doesn't mean that there can't be other voices than the voices of' senior
people plus the administration in the designations, say, of the people
who hold tenure positions; that doesn't mean that the judgments of
students about the quality of the man's teaching shouldn't be taken
into account in the determination.
"But the fundamental point is that the senior professors almost
inevitably-I don't see how else it can be done-have to choose whom
among their juniors or whom amopg others outside the institution they
will invite into the company of those in tenure positions.

Berkeley 's ironic death

By FRANK BROWNING
Once again t h e University of
Californila appears headed toward
a splintering demise amidst the
rocks of Reagan, Rafferty, a n d
radical politics. If that shipwreck
occurs it will be precisely because
neither the right nor the left in
Berkeley have understood the uni-,
versity as an educational -- not a
political -- institution.
Ironically, it is the combination
of the California grape boycott is-
sue with the abridgement of aca-
demic freedom which may at last
unite the disparate radical forces
at Berkeley and cause the closing
of the university.
It is ironic because the v e r y
ideals for which students are and
ought to be fighting in support of
the right to take Cleaver's course
for credit are at the same time
being totally negated in the ar-
gument for university support of
t h e grape boycott. It seems a
classic case in contradictory logic.
There are three primary func-
tions for which the university ex-
ists: T h e creation, preservation
and transmission of knowledge.
THE VALIDITY OF CLEAVER'S
course or the support of the grape
boycott can be examined in light
of these functions alone.
The personal and political back-
ground which Cleaver brings to
his class, just as m u c h as the
specific content of his course, can
only be evaluated from the stand-

point of whether it meets the con-
sistant pedagogical objectives the
university has set for itself. Other-
wise, learning is left victim to the
breezes and tempest of monetary'
popular and political favor.
THE CASE OF Eldridge Cleaver
in fact offers classic testimony to
the evils of political intervention
which has precluded pedagogical
examination. For by adniission of
the principals - Rafferty, Rea-
gan, and the trustees - Cleaver
is adjudged unfit specifically be-
cause of his political position: his
opposition and criticism to t h e
ruling government of the state, the
forms of action he advocates and
the social analysis he advances.
That is, the state has chosen to
eliminate from intellectual con-
sideration those whom it chooses
to persecute.
However, when Mexican Ameri-
can students insist that the uni-
versity as a matter of policy sup-
port the California grape boycott
they are committing the s a m e
kind of demand that Reagan and
company made in denying the uni-
versity the right to determine its
own academic offerings.
They are demanding that the
university as an institution com-
mit itself to political acts, for the
support of the boycott can only
be interpreted as a political act
in support of the Mexican Ameri-
can position.

That does not say that support
of the boycott lacks moral validity
as a political position. It says only
the university's mission is not po-
litical, and if it is to maintain its
position as the free transmitter
of knowledge, it cannot be a po-
litical advocate.
It is no more the function of an
educational institution to advo-
cate through its; operation or "Its
teaching the cause of the organ-
ized grape picker than it is to pro-
hibit the investigation of the pre-
mises and actions of Black Pan-
ther programs. A fully legitimate
alternative for the students and
faculty might be to offer credit
in a variety of manners to stu-
dents who worked as organizers
of the boycott or who committed
a large portion of their time liv-
ing and working in the communi-
ties of the migrant grape pickers.
BUT AGAIN, granting credit to
that, work should be based solely
on the pedagogical criteria which
the University institutes for learn-
ing and teaching.
So it is that the ultimate irony
of the fall of the world's greatest
university - If at 1 a s t its fall
should come - should lie in the
union of antithetical, self-contra-
dictory aims which would at the
same time free the university of
political impingement and render
it3 political advocate.

l
1

"MUCH MIGHT BE SAID about the trustees, although there are
elements of what one might call democratic processes of selection that
do go on-they are more developed in some places than others; But
after all, Amherst, as you well know, a large fraction-a fairly large
fraction-of the trustees are elected by open and full ballot of the
alumni, and I shouldn't criticize that, having been, if it is so,. a bene-
ficiary of that process.
"I think, in other words, there are all kinds of ways in which voices
can be made stronger and more effective in this business, but I don't
think it would be helpful to talk about whether it eoforms to some
kind of town meeting process as is mythologically conceived particular-
ly. The point is, is it an effective/set of proceesses for accomplishing the
kinds of processes and functions that the institution was set up. to
accomplish? That is the test.
"A university could exist without its students, it couldn't exist
without its faculty."

Wa'

Gettingy down to,. earth

DEFENDERS OF the massive U.S. in-
vestment in manned space flights are
fond of arguing that even if the race to
the moon against the Soviet Union is a
little silly, the "fallout" from the pro-
gram has made it all worthwhile.
By the t i m e an American astronaut
sets foot on the moon, possibly some time
next year, we will have spent more than
$30 billion to get him there. For t h a t
money, we have received, in terms of tan-
gible fallout, transistors, weather satte-
lites, communications sattelites, naviga-
tion sattelites, freeze-dried foods, f u e 1
cells and some scientific knowledge about
the region of space surrounding the
earth.-
It is highly questionable whether these
benefits are justified either in terms of
their cost, in terms of their priority vis-a-
vis other needs of American society and
in terms of the disproportinate benefits
received by several major U.S. corpora-
tions.
Of the direct benefits derived from the
space program, probably only transistors
and communications sattelites have had
even the most peripheral effect on the
lives of the people who paid for them.
'HIS IS NOT to underestimate the tech-
nological Importance of semiconductor
circuitry, but it seems that transistors
and their supersophisticated sucessors
could have been developed at a cost con-
siderably less than $30 billion.
It is in the area of priorities where the
crunch really starts to hurt. We may have
the finest space program, but the world's
richest nation has the world's 18th lowest
rate of infant morality. Freeze-dried
foods are an interesting novelty, but they
are of precious little use to someone who
is slowly starving to death, as thousands
of people in this country are. Communi-
....4:. e. e-- -4---- ..-----------ar. nel'4J. a- 7I.

The transistor, the sine qua non of
aerospace technology, was developed by
Bell Telephone Laboratories. Bell L a b s
was also instrumental in developing the
technologies of communications sattelites
for the government.
SEEMINGLY AS A reward, Congress cre-
ated the Communications Sattelite
Corp. and gave a controlling interest in
Comsat to AT&T. The Communications
Sattelite Act g a v e Comsat an absolute
monoply over communications sattelites,
thereby effectively extending the B e 11
Systems domestic monoply I n t o outer
space.
f That the benefits of the space program
in the communications field have been
limited to a select recipient was demon-
strated recently when the American
Broadcasting Co. sought Federal Com-
munications Commission permission to
launch its own series of communications
sattelites for domestic transmissions. ABC
had charged that the rates charged by
the Bell System for microwave television
transmission were exhorbitant.
The FCC ruled that under the Com-
munications Sattelite Act, only Comsat
could launch such sattelites.
O t h e r major recipients of financial
benefits from the space program include
General Electric, IBM, General Dynamics,
Boeing, Chrysler Corp, and other concerns
which are all equally in need of govern-
ment subsidies.
THERE IS NO denying that the space
program has produced s o m e major
technological innovations. But it is also
clear that these developments could have
been produced at considerably less cost to
the government if we had set about to
produce transistors, rather than accept

Letters: Language

To the Editor:
RON LANDSMAN'S report and
subsequent editorial on the
Language Requirement were, I
think, of an intelligence and a
quality rarely achieved when any-
one talks of this very sore point.
Neverthleess. there remains much
to be said-both by students and
by language departments - to
themselves and to each other.
But, unfortunately, those of us
from the Department of Romance
Languages who teach the elemen-
tary courses are only now at the
stage of meeting to discuss what
we might say to the Senior Faculty
when we tell them of our experi-
ences in teaching at a meeting
planned fo rthe last. day of Oc-
tober-while the battle rages that
threatens our very existence. So,
without a united front, I speak
more or less for myself.
First, to discuss the problem at
all, we. both teachers and students,
must go beyond certain attitudes
which block all possible lucidity:
"Well, my students got a lot out
of my course" and "This is my
tenth semester of language and I
still can't learn the stupid gram-
mar." N e i t h e r self-protective
teachers nor frustrated and em-
bittered students can evaluate the
requirement very intelligently.
EVEN IF I wanted to congratu-
late myself or compliment my su-
periors for making the "learning
experience" in language more than
bearable (as many of colleagues
seem to be doing at this time), I
couldn't honestly say that in most
cases I have injected a love of
language per se into my students'
nervous systems. Frankly, for the

Is this sufficient reason to abol-
ish the Language Requirement?-
for its infliction of unnecessary
suffering upon people who, either
because of incapacity or negative
mentality or objection to the dull
mechanics of grammar, can see
no valid educational reason for
studying a foreign language?
Landsman, for.one amongimany,
thinks that it is. From his investi-
gation of the matter he has de-
cided that the linguistic methods
used in American schools are sim-
ply not intellectually stimulating.
for 18 year olds and do not con-
stitute a significant and genuine
"experience of learning" (as has
been reasserted in the 1957 Cur-
riculum Committee Report on the
Foreign Language Requirement).
Thus he seems to conclude that,
until major changes are made in
the language program, students
should not be coerced (if they ever
should be at all) into suffering
somewhat meaningless courses.
And he suggests that the Univer-
sity has no business making in-
authentic claims as to. the value
of the education it distributes in
cans to its so-called "well-rounded
men and women." Personally, I
feel that Lansman is right.
NEVERTHELESS, there is one
doubt that still haunts me. It
springs from discussions I have
had with those people most vio-
lently opposed to the idea of a
language requirement. "We want
to study only the things that are
meaningful to us." Everything else
is imposition by the "repressive
military-industrial complex" (alias
the University).
Yet if we look closely at this

more closes its mind off
rest of the world, whos
travel and bluntly exp
people to speak their
American language, whl
and more turns the re
world into its own com:
is truly ironic that its
resisters from within
against one of the mean,
America up once again V
man's verbal means of
and another man's identi
ed in this means of think
Not that learning a for
guage will save the we
certainly one can learn a
better in Cuba, in Mex
Spain, than in the Frie;
ing. Certainly some peop
can never be opened, n
their own experience, no
suasion, nor by force.
those of us here, presu
make possible in Ameri
cation some kind of vib
ience which might wake
rather sacred human in
other peoples, their cultu
ways of thinking ande
themselves, where do we'
THE DEMANDS of au
convince us that the]
Requirement, for its pr
adequacies, should be I
Yet how long will it ti
that before American
realizethat learning a la
whether, Spanish, Chi
Swahill - can contrib
greater awareness of th
the world, on its own ter
own tongues.
So, perhaps neither toi
tion of the language pr
Michigan, nor, on the ot

instructor
from the the teachers of foreign languages, tair
e citizens who will be honest enough, or last
ect other gracious enough, to bow out. ent
lucrative -Justin Vitiello nan
iich more October 21 I
st of the H
modity, it Little things li t
strongest an
struggle To the Editor: "bi
is to open (N FRIDAY afternoon through gat
o another l the courtesy, of Anderson gt
thinking House, "the Action House of East nat
ity reveal- Quad," printed sheets of the
king. words of the Michigan alma ma- evi
reign lan- ter, "The Yellow and Blue" were ion
orld. And distributed on the Diag. One of suf
Slanguage the most frequent observations of an
:ico or in'black nationalists is the presence sch
ze Build- of a basic indoctrination of white 1%
le's minds values throughout all phases of twe
either by American life. tist
)r by per- They cite such examples as the sera
But for whiteness of angels, "flesh-color- fac
imably to ed" crayons, the "white tornado," att
can Edu- whiteness signifying purity in the is t
tal exper- bridal ceremony, etc. Just such an of 1
up to the injustice is located within the lib- As
tegrity of eral U. of M.'s dear alma mater. wei
ures, their "Here's to the maid of the gold- pec
expressing en hair, ? - - ron
begin? And the eyes that are brimming pro
with blue!
thenticity - It is my guess that there are
Language many students on campus who he
resent in- prefer not to "sing with pride" a nh
iquidated. song paying tribute to blue-eyed Wv
ake after blondes. This may seem to some i
students an insignificant issue not worthy is "
anguage- of mention. It is, however, a most i
inese or minute and easily rectifiable partwi
ute to a of the essential, complex problem and
ie rest of of race relations in this country.n tern
rms, in its Perhaps the m e n of "Action sen.
House" or some other concerned C
tal aboli- group might like to rewrite this un
ogram at stanza. How much easier it would has
r a be to "sing with pride" and "cheer con
Cher hand, wh vigor"Mf this neesr a n

ning and sometimes good, but
Sunday (Oct. 20, 1968) you
ered a new category: Repug-
nce.
am referring, of course, to Jim
ck's irresponsible,' slanderous
Le article in which he refers to
anthropology instructor as a
got" and a "pathological segre-
ionist." Is it the Daily's policy
publish such unfoungded dam-
ions without the benefit of any
dence? Is the incredible opin-
of one "hung-up" individual
ficient grounds for publishing
otherwise unacceptable high
ool social studies theme?
Mr. Heck's neat dichotomy be-
en human beings and scien-
s is so incredible that it de-
yes no further comment. In
t the entire article deserves no
ention at all, but to say nothing
to implicitly condone this type
totally irresponsible journalism.
if the groundless accusations
re not indicative enough of his
uliar mentality, Mr. Heck's er-
eous examples offer yet more
)of.
WHERE, FOR INSTANCE, did
get the idea that skin color
olves dominant inheritance?
hat is an "AB-blood allele?" It
no real surprise that Mr. Heck
'awfully scared;" walking about
th all 'ofn this misinformatio4~
d unfounded fears is enough to
rify - even a person of normal
sibilities
Constructive criticism, or even
constructive criticism, when itl-
a factual base, can improve
rmunication, but wild ravings
d urnfonderd na~me-calling are

role

04

*
*