1h-wstejvfeaiizalone -.iii (juiet desjwratioii


Tlle sidyigan Daily
Seventy-nine years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students of the University of Michigan

Prague, USA


420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich.

News Phone: 7

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

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1969

NIGHT EDITOR: STUART,

An acceptable alternative

HE UNIVERSITY'S Regents are once
again confronted by the opportunity
to resolve the controversial bookstore is-
sue. And it would be no exaggeration to
report that the Regents are as eager as
students and faculty to dispose of the
whole thing.
'[HE PROPOSAL at hand is hardly radi-
cal and comes before the Regents highly
recommended. The Senate Advisory Com-
mittee on University Affairs, student gov-
ernment leaders and administrative re-
presentatives together hammered out the
final draft. The proposal provides for re-
sponsible control of the store by students
and faculty, with the advice of an admin-
istrative representative. It calls for an
equitable means of funding through an
assessment which the students and fa-
culty consumers might redeem. It estab-
lishes the store as an independent cor-
poration which would be ultimately re-
sponsible to the Regents, but which would
be forced to develop internal controls to
dodge financial hazards, as every cor-
poration does. And since the corporation
would ultimately serve student interests
and be responsible to the duly-elected
board, it will probably qualify for the
sales tax exemption needed.
If passed - and it should be passed -
the proposal will aid in the creation of a

sorely needed student bookstor
pus,
BUT THE resolution of the c
will have more significant
tions. It proves that the Rege
are reasonable men who will coi
who will be pressured, but wh
be coerced.
A student-faculty coalition
moral force in handling disput
the community. Faculty, who
mained disturbingly neutral on
tion, were able to help break the
on the negotiations once they d
to become actively involved.
meanwhile, were able to mak(
more effective bookstore pr(
once they enlisted faculty bac
NOW IT REMAINS for the R
endorse the bookstore in th
of the new plan. Certainly th
should not be afraid of losing f
cepting a proposal which repres
bined and conscientious effort
segments of the community.
objections to the bookstore ar
they are not overwhelming. T1
worth a try.
--HENRI
Editor

764-0552 LAST WEDNESDAY, as the American
people came together in opposition to
the war in Vietnam, Alexander Dubcek
rs was replaced as chairman of Czechoslo-
vakia's Federal Assembly-thus marking
another official defeat for the people of
GA NN ES Czechoslovakia.
Sitting in the chilly stadium the other
night with 30,000 spirited and cheering
people, my thoughts inescapably return-
ed to the last time I was part of such a
* * * spectacle. That was in Prague in August
of 1968.
The occasion was the visit of Yugoslav-
e on cam- ia's Marshall Tito. Tito, a thriving maver-
ick forced out of the Stalin block in 1948,
came to Prague to symbolize the Dubcek
ontroversy regime's intentions of pursuing a national
ramifica- course outside the Russian fold.
'nts really Tito's visit came while the surging spirit
ntsreally of the Czechoslovak people was at its peak.
mpromise, They lined the route to Hradcany castle
o will not and cheered wildly at the sight of Dub-
cek and Tito. It was impossible to be un-
has great affected by their euphoria as they cheered
tes within the leaders who had defied the Russian
> had re- demand that they return to the iron-
the ques- fisted orthodoxy of the Novotony regime.
te es-k stAfter the crowds had gone onehCzech
e deadlock student told me he did not think that the
etermined Russians would allow that sort of thing
Students, to continue. He was right. Weeks later the
e a much Russian tanks swept in.

after a visit to the White House that Nixon
was on the "right path's to peace and urg-
ed public support for the President.
We should not be to surprised, for Hum-
phrey was never any peace candidate and
never really broke away from his role as
Lyndon's valet. Unfortunately, many poli-
tical soothsayers are telling us that 1972
promises to be another Humphrey-Nixon
boat race. And if there were any real
promise in the Democratic Party, this
would be cause for concern.
BUT THE ALTERNATIVES are bleak.
Ed Muskie proved himself to be a nice
guy during the last campaign but that he
outshown three fools does not necessarily
make him the right man for the job.
George McGovern, who favors immediate
withdrawal from Vietnam and who is pos-
sibly the most desirable candidate, stands
little chance of securing the nomination.
That leaves Teddy. Perhaps Kennedy's
career will recover from Chappaquidick,
but let's not hold our breath. Kennedy is
about as much a peace candidate as Hum-
phrey. On Wednesday he expressed his
hopes that we could withdraw ground com-
bat troops within a year and the air and
support forces by the end of 1972. There
are Republican senators who are doing bet-
ter than that.
Witl Congressional leadership in t h e
hands of people like Kennedy, it should be
perfectly obvious that the Democrats are
in no position to lead us out of this na-
tional disaster, which they had the great-
est hand in creating.
A SATISFACTORY solution to the war
must be sought by people acting outside
the existing power structure. It is not a
question of getting the truth through to
the folks in Washington: it is a question
of taking the power away from them. As
the struggle in Czechoslovakia demonstrat-
es, this is a task which shows little prom-
ise of immediate victory.
Nevertheless, we must try. If the sheer
spectacle and constant r e p e t i t i o n of
Wednesday's moratorium fail to m o v e
Richard Nixon, then more decisive action
will be necessary.

esentation
king.
egents to
e outlines
e Regents
ace in ac-
ents com-
s of large
Although
e several,
he plan is
Y GRIX

SO IT IS HERE. The antiwar movement
swells every day and generates what little
amount of national spirit that exists. The
spirit of the movement has filled for many
the vacuum created by their estrangement
from their leaders. They arIe becoming
more alienated from the Richard M. Nov-
otonys and are coming together in t h e
streets.
But the question now confronting t h e
antiwar movement is how to make the
moratorium binding on an intransigent
administration. The Nixon regime has
made clear it will continue on the course
of token withdrawal and public pacifica-
tion. What can be done when the channels
between the people and their leaders are
hopelessly closed?,
It looks like the momentum of the mora-

torium can be sustained through Novem-
ber's marches and even through Decem-
ber. One wonders, though, how long people
will stay in the streets as the weather gets
colder and Nixon grows more obdurate.
CAN WE believe that "legitimat?" chan-
nels will open up? It is clear that Nixon
affords us almost no hope, but what about
the loyal opposition, the Democratic Party
that controls Congress? I am afraid that a

look at some of the Party's luminaries
during the past week shows it is foolishly
naive to think things would be much better
had they captured the White House, or
that things will be significantly better if
they win in 1972.
The party's leader - and By God,
Hubert, you are tha party's leader - de-
monstrated last week that he still is not
his own man. Humphrey, perhaps dazzled
by once-familiar surroundings, announced

Bureaucrats of all shades



THE VIETNAMESE people brought this
war on themselves.
It's true. Eisenhower, Kennedy, John-
son, Nixon - did they w ant war? Of
course not. All they wanted was to safe-
guard in Asia a system which exists
peacefully throughout most of the rest of
the world. That is, they simply wished to
run the affairs of one nation from the
capital of another. But the Vietnamese
preferred self-determination to s u c h a
Pax Americana, and thus chose war.
The point is that "peace at any price"
is unacceptable. The primary goal is free-
dom and self-determination; the calm of
the prison is no ideal.
Wednesday's events blurred that point.
Two examples should explain.
Among the speakers involved in the af-
fair was Mr. Douglas Fraser. Doug Fras-
er is a Vice President of the United Auto
Workers. Last April the workers at Chrys-
ler's Sterling Plant called a wildcat strike
against dangerous working conditions
and the arbitrary firing of fellow -work-
ers who protested. Workers and manage-
ment stood fast for weeks, not because
of the specific grievance, but because'
both recognized the more basic yearning
for self-management which 1 a y behind
the wildcat. But the official UAW did not
support the strike.
On the contrary. The strike, by its very
plosive content, threatened t h e UAW's
iron grip over its members. To preserve
peace at Reuther's price, a troubleshooter
was sent to Sterling. He suspended the lo-

cal's officers, froze their treasury, a n d
used the power of the UAW International
to break the workers' wildcat. The name
of this gentleman - t h i s champion of
freedom and self-determination - was
Doug Fraser.
VICTOR PERLO was featured Wednes-
day, too, at Hill Auditorium. He spoke
for the Communist Party of the USA. Like
Fraser, it too has an interesting record.
In 1956 the people of Hungary went into
open revolt against an oppressive, bur-
eaucratic regime. Workers, students, and
soldiers formed councils which seized
control of the nation and its institutions,
turning power back to the people from
the ruling elite. And as Khrushchev pour-
ed tanks and infantry over the Hungar-
ian border to squelch the revolution, the
American Communist Party nodded its
approval.
In 1968 a reformist Czech government
- under mounting pressure f r o m stu-
dents, workers, and intellectuals - began
a modest campaign to loosen the bureau-
cratic reins and open up the media to
dissenting opinion. And once again, Rus-
sian troops marched in. And once again,
the American CP smiled benignly.
POLITICS makes strange bedfellows,
they say, and opportunist politics even
stranger. The base of the anti-war move-
ment is growing, of course, but clearly at
t h e expense of its principles. Somehow
the banner of the Vietnamese struggle is
misplaced. And self-determination is for-
gotten.
-BRUCE LEVINE

I't
K{/ ,, )'

I .

-' t ,
f . .
+In
\\ t (WIY, VIrl
\1 ,fir ir .w.wr
i i
+.
1 f F
.S } f
'fir; 7Y i
y@ {
i1

I

J
"4
-Irk
" ,,,w, .

O pti mistic69
B1ORN IN the minds of a small group of dedicated men and women
the Oct. 15 moratorium captured the spirit and imagination of a
significant segment of American society, while others ran for cover
behind automobile headlights and the guarded gates of the White
House.
That students at this University would shun classes to do anything
at all-let alone anything politically worthwhile - marks Oct. 15 as
perhaps the most dramatic day for the campus community. This
single action stands as a striking symbol of the success of the mobiliza-
tion organizers in regenerating the anti-war movement.
Already, if only in small ways, the moratorium is having its effect.
Even some former members of the Johnson administration are now
saying the war must be ended quickly, and not necessarily "honorably."
Even Hubert Humphrey asserts that the war should be ended in a
year, not three years as President Nixon has suggested.
There can, of course, be no expression of gratefulness for this
kind of response. The war is not, as many have asserted. a "colossal
mistake;" rather it is the logical extension of the whole thrust of
American foreign policy for the past 15 years.
BUT THEIR response does let us know we have won. The most
significant aspect of the nationwide protest was the pervasive though
somewhat misleading feeling that the anti-war movement had turned
the corner, that the only remaining obstacle to forcing the U.S. gov-
ernment to end the war is finding enough buses, cars and airplanes to
take us all to Washington next month.
While just a month ago even freshmen and sophomores were
looking ominously toward graduation and their date with destiny,
the draft and death, now we know better: The war will end soon and
ultimately on our terms. We will have won the fight for peace.
For all that, the future beckons with a crusted finger. The war
has plunged the morality of the U.S. government - and with it, that
of the U.S. people - to the lowest level in history. But even "Peace
Now!" can be only as mall first step toward redemption.
Part of the problem and challenge of the future was expressed
amid the blasts of rhetoric at Wednesday's moratorium activities.
Ending the wear is not enough - the spending priorities of the U.S.
and the whole role of this rich country in world affairs must be dras-
tically reordered.
THE PROBLEMS of poverty in the ghettoes of Peking as well as
the ghettoes of U.S. cities can be attacked objectively, technologically
and compassionately. The crisis in U.S. relations with other members
of the world community can be handled with a sensitivity to the rights
of foreign peoples to choose their own governments in their own
ways. Even if we are not quite a majority, these goals still remain with-
in our grasp.
This, then, is the revolution. It will come peacefully and soon.
But if history can be taken at least as a rough guide, the revolu-
tion will bear the hidden seeds of its own demise. The great victory of
the anti-war movement lies in its success in convincing people that
the war is wrong and that national priorities are sadly askew of the
needs of the nation and the world.
But while there has been considerable convincing, there has been
little teaching apd even less learning. Though the problems of the
world will change, the solutions will be little altered from the course
we are charting today. The "majority" - those who oppose the war
-- are no better prepared for the unforseen than they ever have
been.
FOR A LONG time I have felt that the greatest and only hope
for the ultimate vindication of radical analysis of society rests with
the young people - the elementary school students and those who will
follow them.
And as absurd as it may seem to a generation of students that
went through public school with escape from public school as the
only goal, the upcoming crop has recently undergone dramatic politic-
ization.
The transformation of the high schools is, of course, well known.
But even some student in junior high school and elementary school

"And when the ransom of 25,000 aircraft and 500 A-bombs
.iloI.
has been delivered, we will release your soliers. . .

Le ters:

Vietnam - an ode

to

Tricky

To the Editor:
Said
Richard M. Nixon to
All of the people, "Your
Grand Moratorium
I shall ignore.
'Street legislation' is
Undemocratic, so
I'll judge how many shall
Die in this war."
-Dave McBride, '70
Oct. 16
Unsigned
To the Editor:
ISN'T IT ABOUT time that the
silent majority of University stu-
dents stands up and be counted
in support of President Fleming?
How about an ovation for him
from the student section at the
next football game? And how
about loading all thosen smon-
strating non-students into busces
and dump them in the middle of

applications from black students
in 1968-69 "before they even
reached the selection committee."
A list of all black applicants was
given to each committee member
and brought up to date weekly.
Members of t h e committee in-
formed me what candidates they
wished to consider, using a rough
statistical yardstick.
When the committee adjourned,
a number of students had not been
accepted, although many of them
had been considered. I then ad-
vised these applicants t h a t we
were unable to offer them places.
-Matthew P. McCauley
Assistant Dean
Law School
Oct. 13
For the workers
To the Editor:
I WONDER WHY, in reference
to the October 15 moratorium,

able movement, students a n d
workers must organize each other
for humanitarian goals, including
better wages as well as an end to
war and racism.
ONCE A TRUE worker-student
movement is organized. there can
be no greater power on the cam-
pus. From this basis we can take
the city, the state and the nation
by force. Long live the successful
alliance, but let's get started?
-Roger Forman, '70
Oct. 14
Ind(igna(tionl
To the Editor:
IN THE OCTOBER 7th issue of
the Ann Arbor News. Mr. Mare
Van Der Hout is quoted as saying,
at Monday's rally on the Diag,
". . lot of people before the
bookstore issue thought Robben
Fleming was a God, but we have

'Dick
breakdowvn in negotiations for fear
that the bookstore issue might be
settled satisfactorily without fur-
ther confrontation? Was Mr. Van
Der Hout's obviously inflammatory
statement. "I think the Regents
will be on their knees," intended
to offend that body in order to
preclude the possibility of Regent-
ial approval of a compromise?
In short, I cannot help wonder-
ing whether the SGC executive
vice-president is more interested
in securing a student-faculty run
bookstore which would be in the
interests of al of us or in ad-
vancing the interests of his own
small group. Or can it be that he
is really afraid that "peace might
break out" on this campus?
-Prof. Edward Stasheff
Oct. 8
lb w?
To th- Editor:
mfLT " nCI..tTLim . C *t. , . fl.4 .Ihni.-.. onf