4e I$Iir44gw DBUI33 Seventy-eight years of editorial freedom Edited and managed by students of the University of Michigan sieve anzalone .-i uquiet desperation The Brothers Smother 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich. News Phone: 164-0552 Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers or the editors. This must be noted in ao1 reprints. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9, 1969 NIGHT EDITOR: STUART GANNES . No more waiting on\ ROTC, THE LSA FACULTY failed to do any- thing about ROTC at Monday's meet- ing. The executive committee stymied an attempt by the curriculum committee to bring the issue before the faculty. All ac- tion on the issue has been stalled until at least next fall - possibly longer, The executive committee h a s twice forestalled curriculum committee action, first on reasonable grounds, now on ques- tionable grounds. The first report on ROTC, prepared late last semester, was returned to the cur- riculum committee by the executive com- mittee because it was poorly done and in- complete. That recommendation had call- ed for a reduction from twelve to four hours credit for the four year programs. The committee took the report b a c k and a subcommittee chaired by Prof. Locke Anderson undertook a more care- ful study. After a few weeks of studying the ma-, terials and the personnel in the program, they decided t h a t a reasonable choice would be no credit for ROTC. This rec- ommendation received committee approv- al without dissent. But the executive committee once again turned the recommendation aside. This time it was argued that ROTC was being challenged on wider grounds and academic credit was being used only as a front. The executive committee decided to send a report to the Senate Assembly asking for consideration of ROTC's rela- tion to the University. Unfortunately, the report forwarded to the Assembly was the one used at Stan- ford University, the weakest of a number of reports available. And at the same time, they asked tlat the faculty not act on ROTC credit, ex- cept for minor changes that the curricu- lum committee handled. BUT THE UNANSWERED question is why should LSA continue ROTC cred- it pending the wider consideration'? Such a report would not change the quality of ROTC, nor would it take away the right of the faculty to determine ROTC credit. While it might eliminate ROTC altogeth- er, or could conceivably strengthen Uni- versity-ROTC ties, none of these h a v e a n y direct bearing on literary college credit for ROTC granted in the interim. It is hard to understand why the execu- tive committee has gone to s u c h great pains to protect ROTC here, and the fac- ulty should not let it continue. They should choose to act at their next meet- ing. Prof. Stephen Tonsor a n d his fascist threats of reaction by the People of the State, of Michigan notwithstanding, the faculty should see that ROTC receives no credit while the Assembly considers, the broad implications of ROTC's rela- tionship to the University. -RON LANDSMAN Managing Editor THE AVERAGE television viewer prob- ably issued a sigh of remorse last week when Chet and Dave told him that the Soviet Union had imposed full censorship in Czechoslovakia. But his head quickly ducked back into the sand-or turned aside with chagrin- when CBS announced later in the week that it was cancelling the Smothers Broth- ers Comedy Hour. The similarity between the two acts of censorship will probably go unnoticed. The Smothers Brothers was once one of the most popular weekly programs. B u t when they returned to the air last- fall. wearing moustaches and seeming a little more irreverant, they w e r e headed for trouble. The adult audience soon dropped off and the brothers oriented their variety show more and more to the college viewer. As their ratings dropped to 24, CBS be- came more intolerant of their mild political asides. The three year feed between the genial brothers and the network's censor- ship policies came to a climax when Joan Baez tried to dedicate a song to her hus- band, who is about to go to prison for re- sisting the draft. t THE SMOTHERS Brothers reflected ari- other opinion than that of American in- dustry, who finance the nation's hypnosis - the boob tube. Their political sermon- ettes were harmless, but because they posed even a small threat, they had to go. Television is a way for the American in- dustrial establishment to re-inforce t h e nation's stupidity while pandering to its racist and fascist tastes. At the same time, it sells its merchandise. ligent programs like Omnibus, Slattery's People, and That Was The Week That Was pretty much indicate that the public prefers the monotonous drivel of soap operas and quiz programs. Tuie average American TV watcher does not want to be stimulated toward thought after he comes home from 'work. The "best" programs are ones that keep his mind placidly occupied in the hours before he goes to bed. HE IS BASICALLY CONFUSED and frightened by the rapid changes going on around him that challenge his accepted political notions and preconceived moral values. Television is best for him when it does not challenge the status tuo or make him think about a world that he really does not understand. That's why censorship does not need to be =imposed by the government from above. It is done effectively by local au- thorities, by sponsors, television networks, and book publishers at tle public's bid- ding. It is, then, still possible to pay hom- age to the idol of free speech and at: the same time restrict it in the "public in- terest." BUT ALL THIS DOES not help the col- lege student who found the Smothers Brothers to be the only bright spot in an otherwise drab week of television. There were many college students who watched only that show during the week; now they can just as well sell their televisloil sets. It seems to be of little solace that Smoth- ers Brothers' guest star attractions like Judy Collins, Donovan, and Joan Baez will now be inherited by that great friend of youth-Ed Sullivan. 4 A There are several ways the networks ac- complish this. One way is the abundance of the intellectually-sterile situation com- edies aimed at the ten-year old imbecile. These are the comfortably "Unthought- provoking" shows of t h e "Flying Nun" genre.. More dangerous are the "sophisticated" shows designed to program viewers with the "Vietnam mentality." These are shows of the "Man from UNCLE" genre. Invar- iably, they show hip-styled Americans be- * ing called in to straighten out the domestic affairs of foreign countries. YET IT WOULD BE A mistake to -con- sider the public as innocent victims 'in a conspiracy to ruin their minds. The networks can easily point to the Smothers Brothers' rapid decline in pop- ularity as part of the reason why the show. was cancelled. It is probably true !that the philistine television audience loathed Tom- my Smother's politics as much as his sponsor apparently does. The eventual failure of relatively intel- 1 1~ Giving RC flexibility MURRAY KEMPTON Getting mfortable O YOU, TOO, COMMENCE to feel the faint embariassment of be- coming comfortable with Richard Nixon? As he contemplates the Vietnam war and the anti-ballistic missile there are the usual alarms about his doing the wrong thing. Yet was it not his weakness as a politician in 1960, 1962 and even 1968, that, when in doubt, he did nothing at all; might he not then be the immobile man whom the times so plainly demand? Immobility in Vietnam means not responding in kind to the Viet Cong offensive. - We can hope for no more from him,/and it is just what we need. The military services show signs at last of losing the only war they >:< . have waged ever victoriously for 24 years, the conquest and occupation of the Congress of the U.S. The massive intervention of the President is the only reinforcement that might now carry them through. MR. NIXON CONFRONTS, then, a radical shift in the public view of the military services he has been trained from youth to appease. Lyndon Johnson believed the Joint Chiefs until fewer and fewer per- sons believed him any longer; with Mr. Johnson departed the distrust that was so unfortunately his has now been transferred with consider- ably more justice to the generals, the admirals and the air marshals. We are a people who have to blame somebody; and, now at last, it is their turn. Before long it will take a very brave politician indeed to announce that he will not turn his back on the Commander-in-Chief of the Pacific Fleet. Mr. Nixon is personally brave; but we are blessed by the succession of personal disasters which taught him not to be bold. He is a man who has learned to respect an obstacle when he sees one. And, if the ABM cannot be salvaged in the Congress except by a desperate and uncer- tain personal fight, Mr. Nixon might be trusted not to try and salvage QTUDENTS AND faculty in the Residen- tial College vote today on a refer- endum which calls into question the very nature of the two-year old experimental college. The referendum centers on last week's decision by the Representative Assembly - RC's student-faculty decision-making body - to implement a student-run, stu- dent-taught course as an alternative to one of two courses now required of first term freshmen - Logic and Language and Freshman Seminar. Although the idea for the course has clearly found favor with the vast ma-. pority of the RC community, the As- sembly's premature decision to f ul11y implement the course has not. Prof. Charles Maurer, chairman of the RC German department, immediately re- signed his seat on both the Assembly and the RC curriculum committee. Prof. Carl Cohen of the philosophy department de- clared he would not teach Logic and Language if the student option were of- fered. He claimed the effectiveness of his course would be undermined. IRONICALLY, HOWEVER, the b i g g e s t optery came from the students, whose representatives had beer primarily re- sponsible for Assembly's action. Their dis- satisfaction is manifested in today's re- ferendum, which could force the As- sembly to reconsider its decision. The referendum lists three proposals suggesting means of implementing a stu- dent-taught option into the core curri- culum\courses. Clearly, the core curriculum must be open to change, because each of its re- quired courses are themselves experi- ments. By definition, therefore, the courses are not to be considered as ab- solute pre-requisites to a "liberal edu- cation," as some of the RC founders often imply. On the contrary, a 1 a r g e number of college students have already claimed the required courses do not come near being the valuable educational ex- perienes they were supposed to h a v e been. Their perception of the situation typifies the. clear fact' that no course can be deemed educationally rewarding for all students. THE PROPOSED student-run course -- "Communications" - appears to have the potential of providing an atmosphere of learning for students who are dissatis- fied with Logic and Language and Freshman Seminar. The backers of the course feel that the "enthusiasm a n d unmatched energy" of the student- teachers would more than balance a n y deficiency they may have in experience or breadth of knowledge. Furthermore, they argue that the ability to learn and the desire to learn can be successfully passed on by fellow undergraduates, whereas present faculty members are un- able to do this. The course clearly has great potential, and it must be evaluated so that the pos- sibility of heightening a student's learn- ing experience is not passed by. However, whether the course will in- deed have this effect is something which can only be learned from experience. The first proposal on the referendum seems to deny this self-evident fact. THE PROPOSAL - identical to Assemb- ly's decision - asks that the course be implemented in Fall, 1970, without any prior evaluation; to allow 100 freshmen, about half the incoming class, to opt out of either of the two normally required courses, and take instead, "Communica- tions" - a type of course whose nature is not even clear to its student planners. If the course fails, half the freshmen class will have passed, through their first requirements without gaining anything. t The possibility of this occurring can- not be brushed aside lightly. It is a major drawback to the first proposal and pre- vents it from being a tenable method of implementing the student-taught course. THE SECOND proposal asks that the student-taught course be first insti- tuted as an experimental elective. This completely avoids the major issue - the necessity of establishing sound options within the core curriculum. Supposedly, the results of the experi- ment will provide a basis for evaluatjng the real validity of such a studenit-taught course as an option to required courses. But to be a valid experiment, the course must be an option to the courses in the present core curriculum - not just an elective. THE THIRD proposal offers a solution that does not have the drawbacks of the first two proposals. It asks that the student-taught course be implemented next fall, with an enrollment wisely lim- ited to 24 students ppting out of either Freshman Seminar or Logic and Lang- uake. The proposal provides for a valid ex- periment from which it can then be de- termined whether to implement the course in the core curriculum. At the same time, should the course fail, on 1 y those 24 students who chos to nartici- Letters to the Editor Reply to Fleming To the Editor: I WRITE THIS letter in response'" to President Fleming's open letter of March 28, 1969, because I feel that the questions he raises about the representativeness of SGC serve only to obscure the real issues at stake. First of all, a question of fact. President Fleming is quite right in calling the turnout in the SGC presidential runoff low. However, the unusual circumstances sur- rounding that election make it the exception rather than the rule. The normal percentage turnout in SGC elections compares very favorably with, for instance, the percentage attendance at LSA faculty meetings. Yet I have heard few administration voices raised against the legitimacy of recent votes and decisions at these meet- ings. It is easy to question the im- partiality of people who do not quibble at the retention of Ian- guaee requirement by a vote of eight per cent of the faculty but reject the election of SGC council members by twenty per cent of the stlirents as unreorecentativo. Could itbeb that the president wvould be told to mind his own busin-ss if he Drobed too deeolv into the fsculty's internal affairs? ,erhans I could offer a similar suopestion from the students but let that pass. FROM THE RUNOFF election. figures. President Fleming makes the deduction that SGC is not representative of its constituents. What does he propose to alleviate this problem? He would have SGC composed of delegates from the governing student groups in the schools and colleges, since they effort to pack the student govern- ment with administration and fac- ulty appointees. Perhaps this is not the president's desire; I sin- cerely hope not. For the present, there is little evidence of facui Ly willingness to tolerate really ef- fective student governments. Until this situation changes, and democratic student groups do or- ganize in all the schools and col- leges, selecting SGC members by schools is a fraud. THE ABOVE DISCUSSION only skirts the main problem, however, which President Fleming com- pletely ignored in his letter. Most students have little interest in SGC because SGC is fundamental- ly irrelevant to them, not because of a sinister plot to deny them representation. As long as substantially all authority and decision-making power remains in the hands of the administration and the faculty. the representatives of the students can do very little to significantly improve living conditions or aca- demic life. When SOC is powerless to effect much of anything for students' most pressing needs, it is not sur- prising that students' devotion to it is not exactly passionate. Lack of interest will not be cured by any electoral or structural gim- mick, especially one as ill-con- sidered as that proposed by Prfesi- dent Fleming. The only solution is to allow SGC enough authority, enough of a financial base, and enough room to maneuver to let it get sa~me- thing accomplished. The more in- fluence that SGC can exert in favor of its constituents, the more interest will be developed among therR in setting the goals toward which action is directed ,iid in participating in achieving those goals. Considering that only in the last PRESIDENT FLEMING'S letter is but another example of the continuing refusal of those in du- thority in the University to face the hard fact that they must share that authority with students, not on condition that we be good little boys and girls; butsunconditional- ly; for it is necessary for ius as human beings to assume the pri- mary responsibility for our' own lives, and .our own futures. -Marty McLaughlin, '71 President, Student Government Council April 8 it. After four years of his exercise of that -caution one suspects in him, we may be ready again for bemusement by a Democrat who wants this country to get moving again. In the meanwhile, let us enjoy the respite while we can. IT IS THE COMFORT FROM Mr. Nixon that, despite certain rhe- torical flurries in this direction, he inspires few of us with the illusioh that represents for this nation the means of grace and the hope of glory. Eric Goldman held out for Mr. Johnson the image of the President as "'the steward' of the needs and aspirations of the general popula- tion, the symbol of the national interest." "If people want a sense of purpose," Harold Macmillan once told Henry Fairlie, "they should get it from their archbishops." With that definition of the decent limit of politicians at last imprinted in our minds by the memory of Mr. Johnson, there is genuine comfort in the suspicion that Mr. Nixon is. at bottom, so purposeless. Doris Fleeson said once that the one thing about Vice President Nixon she could not forgive was that he was unable to leave a bad sit- uation alone. But perhaps his disasters have taught him that; if so, there is nothing he cannot be forgiven. (C) New York Post 4 :M ._- ",:o