Seventy-nine years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students of the University of Michigan
in search of mad dragons
A bribe in the hand
by
mart'
radtke
420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich.
News Phone: 764-0552
Editorials printed in The Michigan Doily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 1969 F
NIGHT EDITOR: MARTIN A. HIRSCHMAN1
Another romp on the moon
IrHE BOYS are back from the second
romp on the moon and the hoopla
hasn't died down yet.
Days before the mission, the glut of
media outpouring began. Pictures of the
astronauts and dull personality stories
filled the press. There were detailed
accounts of the scientific tasks to be
accomplished and interviews with the
wives.
Of course, it wasn't quite the attention
given to the first landing on the moon
nor even the continuous television cover-
age given the early space missions, but
the coverage was ample, to say the very
least.
Impossibly blurred pictures transmit-
ted from the capsule straight to the front
pages of newspapers across the country
gave constant testimony on the ongoing
realization of the great American dream.
Less blurry but more noxious, the bar-
rage of pictures of the astronauts wives
served as reminder of just how all-Ameri-
can the whole thing is.
SOME WILL call the media treatment
of moon landings an insult to the
good taste of the American public, but
it isn't. Hard as it is to admit it, landing
men on the moon is important. It is im-
portant because we make it that way.
We spentdmillions of dollars tolaunch,
monitor and bring back those three men.
And we have plans to spend millions
more. The national consciousness is con-
cerned, understandably and rightly, about
the outcome of such a mission.
But should it be important? Probably
not. Of course sending men to the moon
has unquestionable scientific value. Both
of the moon missions have set up experi-
ments on the moon's surface which will
yield scientifically valuable results. Sam-
ples of moon rocks brought back from
both landings may give insights into the
origin of the moon and possibly of the
earth as well.
Some have argued that the experiments
now performed on the moon by men could
better be turned over to mechanical
devices, yielding almost equal scientific
results for a substantially lowered cost.
BUT THAT argument seems to miss the
mark. Should this country invest its
national concern, as well as its economic
priorities, in sending anything to the
moon-or anywhere else for that matter?
The scientists can wait for the stuff to
full new textbooks. The nation's longings
for vicarious glory can turn back to
football.
If a similar outpouring of money and
concern can be invested to build a world
of equals no longer living in fear of
instantaneous death, perhaps then it will
be justifiable to travel to the moon again.
--CHRIS STEELE
Editorial Page Editor
ONCE, I ATE in a restaurant where the
waiter, no doubt mistaking me for a
run-away heiress, bowed over my chair and
stationed himself doggedly at my elbow,
where he presided over everything from
the soup to the tip.
Once, also, when I was very young. I
had my tonsils out and discovered for the
first time how very agreeable it is to be
the beneficiary of complete familial serv-
ility.
But never have I been treated with such
deference, such solicitude, such eagerness
to please as my landlord has displayed
since he perceived his head on the block
and the baleful shadow of the rent strike
looming above him.
ALTHOUGH HE has always professed
benevolent and helpful intentions over the
telephone, the basis of any working rela-
tionship with him was assumption that if
the apartment was flooding, he wouldn't
contribute so much as the bucket to bail it
out.
Although the situation in our apartment
hasn't quite reached flood proportions,
there is an over-abundance of extraneous
water, proceeding from the Leak in our
bedroom ceiling.
This Leak has been handed down
through at least three generations of ten-
ants and has become something of a cause
celebre. The landlord has been sympathet-
ically promising to fix it for almost two
years, but still we are lulled to sleep by
the gentle sound of dripping water.
Before we signed the lease, previous ten-
ants had urged us to learn to live with
our Leak. Repairing it, they said, would
be both expensive, since it would require
tearing up all the ceilings in the building,
and inconvenient, because the cycle of
twelve-month leases keeps the apartment
continuously occupied.
Alas, poor landlord. How could he pos-
sibly fix our leak, trapped as he was by
Lettei
ledger books and twelve-month leases? We
understood his plight full well-we thought
Tenant Union and signed the lease.
ALL THROUGH September our com-
plaints brought much commiseration and
few results. A number of small things were
repaired, like the lock on the front door,
and the filth in our carpet was dutifully
watered.
But in October, our rent went into the
Tenants Union escrow fund, and suddenly
the landlord snapped into action. "I notice
you haven't paid your rent. Could anything
possibly be wrong?"
So we told him about the filthy carpet
and the moldy shower curtain, the broken
furniture and the freezer, door that kept
falling off, the missing storm windows and
door knobs. And last of all we told him,
with dramatic detail and three-part har-
mony, about the Leak.
He looked wounded. Sympathizing pro-
fusely, he replaced the shower curtain, the
door knobs, and the storm windows. He
agonized over the carpet, but recognizing
that some things are out of mortal hands,
offered to clean the drapes instead. And
turning bountifully toward our broken
chair, he promised to replace it.
His offer was well-intentioned, but tac-
tically unsound. He failed to notice that
broken or not, that chair was newly re-
covered; we had made it beautiful, and he
wanted to replace it. This insensitivity to
his tenants esthetic pursuits did nothing
to improve diplomatic relations.
Sensing hostility, he tried a different
tack, "I think we can take care of that
leak right now." The repair game had ob-
viously entered a critical phase. We were
depending on that Leak to be an indestruc-
tible and unanswerable grievance, suitable
for use in court. We wanted it functional.
Fortunately, our landlord underestimated
his adversary. He limited himself to a con-
tainment policy that simply involved re-
placing a few warped ceiling tiles without
approaching the source of the Leak. As
soon as he left, the water show began
again. Right on, Leak !
AND SO WE won that round, but the
moral crisis it precipitated remains un-
resolved. For how can one rent strike when
his slightest wish is not only granted, but
anticipated. And how can one not rent
strike knowing that this utopian relation-
ship exists only because of the Tenants
Union.
Until this year, Ann Arbor's major land-
lords have not been noted for being partic-
ularly handy around the apartment. There
really was no reason for them to be. After
all, students will rent almost any thing
with four walls and a roof, and some are
not even too particular about the con-
dition of their roof.
And even when a landlord actually lets
his property degenerate to the point where
it violates the city housing code, chances
are the housing inspector will be satisfied
to simply slap his naughty hands.
But then, into this comfortable nest of
entrenched privilege, came the Tenants
Union. It explained that state law gives a
tenant the right to withhold rent even
for alleged grievances and then backed
up its pitch by taking some of these
"alleged grievances" to court and winning
an encouraging number of cases.
Suddenly the perceived value of apart-
ment maintenance skyrocketed. As my
roommate commented, "Those fascist capi-
talists are trying to bribe us."'The land-
lords hope to smother incipient rebellion
by hastily transforming themselves into
benevolent despots.-
They rush cheerfully to make repairs,
promising large things and delivering small
ones, all the while waiting hopefully for
next month's rent. It seems to most tenants
like a pretty good system.
BUT IT IS A system which depends
totally on the strength of the Tenants
Union. The super-service offered by land-
lords is a ploy to placate tenants and dis-
courage them from joining the rent strike.'
It will continue only as long as the Tenants
Union is perceived as a significant threat.
Therefore, it is in the best interests of
apartment dwellers to keep the Tenants
Union strong, and the only wdy to do that
is by participating, in the rent strike.
Rent money placed in the Tenants
Union escrow fund is money that is not
earning interest or providing working capi-
tal for landlords, a liability which they
apparently feel deeply.
Furthermore, rent strikers cost their
landlord about $200 a week in legal fees.
And the greater the number of rent strik-
ers, the greater the number of weeks which
will be required to dispense with them.
The financial pressure which the rent
strike brings to bear on the landlords is
intended ultimately to force them to rec-
ognize the bargaining authority of the Ten-
ants Union, which means basically its
authority to negotiate leases on behalf
of the tenants who will be signing them.
Thus the landlord's new-found concern
for the welfare of his tenants springs
from ancient instincts for self-preservation.
He wants to eliminate the economic pres-
sures before they force him up against
the bargaining table.
It seems much more to his advantage
to embark on a short campaign of instal-
ling door knobs, repairing refrigerators,
and plugging leaks than to allow a tenant
voice in the drafting of his leases.
Hopefully, tenants will understand this
and base their decision of whether lx not
to rent strike on some factor more viable
than their landlord's professed or evinced
willingness to serve.
For the price he asks for his service
is too high.
Honor and extradition
Here come the Commies
THE WIFE OF Attorney General John
N. Mitchell says t h a t her husband
compared last Saturday's antiwar dem-
onstration here to the Russian revolu-
tion.
Mrs. Mitchell, interviewed on the Co-
lumbia Broadcasting System's morning
news by Marya McLaughlin, said that she
herself had not witnessed the demonstra-
tion.
"I will tell you," she went on, "my hus-
band made the comment to me, looking
out the Justice Department it looked like
the Russian revolution going on."
The Attorney General was presumably
referring to the point in the demonstra-
tion during which a group of extremists
was dispersed by tear gas at the Justice
Department.
The massive demonstration against the
Nixon Administration's policy in Vietnam
attracted a crowd estimated at 250,000 to
the capital, making it the largest ever
held there.
Mrs. Mitchell said that h e r husband
"has said many times, some of the lib-
erals in this country, he'd like to take
them and change them for the Russian
Communists."
The interview, the second segment of
a two-part program, took place in t he
Editorial Staff
HENRY GRIX, Editor
STEVE NISSEN RON LANDSMAN
City Editor Managing Editor
ANTE LIPPINCOrT ... Assocate Managing Editor
JENNY STILLER ........ Editorial Page Editor
LESLIE WAYNE ......................... Arts Editor
JOHN GRAY ......................... Literary Editor
MARY RADTKE................Contributing Editor
LAWRENCE ROBBINS.................Photo Editor
WALTER SHAPIRO.. Daily Washington Correspondent
Sports Staff
JOEL BLOCK, Sports Editor
ANDY BARBAS, Executive Sports Editor
BILL CUSUJMANO ............ Associate Sports Editor
JIM FORRESTER .............Associate Sports Editor
ROBIN WRIGHT ........ Associate Sports Editor
JOE MARKER .................. Contributing Editor
Mitchells' home in the WatergateApart-
ments. Afterward, Mrs. Mitchell could not
be reached for comment and the Attor-
ney General would not comment on the
interview.
REGARDING THE demonstrations, Mrs.
Mitchell said: "I think this is just too,
too bad for the nation's capital to have
anything like this."
The blond, outspoken wife of the At-
torney General attributed t h e demon-
strations to "liberal Communists" and in-
dicated there was concern that the city
might be destroyed by the demonstrators.
"I don't think the average Americans
realize h6w desperate it iswhen a group
of demonstrators, not peaceful demon-
strators, but the very liberal Commun-
ists move into Washington," Mrs. Mitch-
ell said.
"This place could become a complete
fortress," she continued. "You could have
every building in Washington burned
down. It could be a great, great catas-
trophe.
"AND THIS IS the thing I worried about
way before I came to Washington,
knowing the liberal element in this coun-
try is so, so against us. As my husband
has said many times, some of the liberals
in this country, he'ct like to take them
and change them for the Russian Com-
munists."
Mrs. Mitchell acknowledged t h a t the
demonstrations had bothered the Admin-
istration.
Asked whether she thought that the
demonstrations had h a d any effect on
the President, his Administration and
Mr. Mitchell, she replied: "It is a very
crucial time for all of them."
To the Editor:
An open letter to Governor Wil-
liam Milliken:
I AM WRITING to you as a
historian, as a concerned citizen
of the State of Michigan, and as a
close student of and participant
in the struggle for equality in this
country for the past 25 years. You
have decided, on strictly legal
grounds, to turn Robert F. Wil-
liams over to the authorities of
the State of North Carolina.
I believe you are making a tra-
gic mistake which I am confident
you will correct once you become
better informed, and better ad-
vised of who Robert F. Williams
is, and of the transcendant con-
sequences of this act.
It would be pleasant to believe
that Robert F. Williams can ex-
pect to enjoy the protection of the
laws of the State of North Caro-
lina. Unfortunately, this is not the
case, because Robert F. Williams
is black. Beginning with slavery,
blacks in the South have not en-
joyed the protection of the law.
Blacks were slaves, not o n 1 y to
their masters but to every white
person. A black who s t r u c k a
white, even in self-defense, incur-
red the death penalty.
And regardless of what the law
has said since slavery was abol-
ished, in custom and legal prac-
tice, blacks in the South, especial-
ly in the rural south, have been
denied the right of self defense.
None of the efforts of the Federal
Government nor of the civil rights
organizations to bring a b o u t a
change in this situation through
legal and judicial means h a v e
been effective.
You may recall the long history
of lynching in the South. You may
recall the Emmett T1ill murder,
and the fact that the self-con-
fessed murderers of this 14 year
old boy became heroes in their
community and sold magazine and
movie rights to their story.
IN THE PROCESS of becoming
better informed aboutrthis case,
and about w h o Robert F. Wil-
liams is, you should read his book,
Negroes with Guns, and ask your-
self if you were a black man in the
rural South, and if you had the
vision and the courage, if y o u
would not have done just what
Robert F. Williams did.
The inestimable value of t h e
life and work of Robert F. Wil-
liams is that he single-handedly
defied the tradition which denied
to the black man the right of self
defense. He did this in word and
deed, and by his example, decis-
ively undermined the nightmare
of lynch law in the South. When
all the loud-mouthed shouters of
slogans are forgotten, Robert F.
Williams will be remembered.
He has honored this state, its
citizens, and its government by
placing enough confidence in us
to return here to ask for asylum.
I beg you not to risk his life. We
can survive the assassination of
John F. Kennedy, of Malcolm X,
of Martin Luther K i n g, Jr., of
Robert Kennedy. We cannot sur-
vive the assassination of Robert
F. Williams, because he repre-
sents much m o r e than all the
rest,
Honor our state, and reconcile
its citizens, by welcoming t h i s
great man.
Still trusting in the innate fair-
ness and good sense of some of the
people in positions of authority in
this nation, I remain,
-Gwendoyln Midlo Hall
Nov. 16
Truthful reporting
To the Editor:
AS HAS happened numerous
times in the past, The Michigan
Daily constantly mangles and
slants any views presented to it
without trying to understand what
is being said:sand because The
Daily is so closed minded, it has
twisted words and reasoned to a
point of maliciously insulting my
character.
Therefore, I demand that those
hypocrites who call themselves the
senior editors (otherwise known as
tre sly, slanderous seniors), re-
tract their deceitful statement in
the Nov. 9 edition of The Daily
stating that I support the Viet-
nam war, and begin reporting
what is truthfully being said.
I do in no way support the Viet-
nam war! It is true that I am a
moderate leaning towards con-
servatism in many of my views.
BUT IN THE case of the Viet-
nam war, I could not support an
immediate withdrawal of troops
unless I could be assured that the
economy would remain reasonably
stable.
There is nothing I would like
better than to get the hell out of
Vietnam and work on domestic
problems, but with the increased
unemployment rate that would re-
sult from the soldiers returning
and workers of the military-in-
dustrial complex being laid off for
lack of government contracts,
can at this time only support a
controlled withdrawal of troops
allowing the economy to be reg-
ulated and prevent a recession or
depression, and hope that the sol-
diers are back home as fast as pos-
sible, perhaps by the end of 1970.
-Archie Brown '73
Candidate for SGC
Nov. 11
'United We Stand'
To the Editor:
THE FOLLOWING letter was
sent to Mr. Frank Borman after
the TV show "United We Stand,"
.which appeared on Channel 2 at
9:30 p.m., Tuesday, Nov. 18.
TONIGHT WE happened to see
your half-hour TV special entitled
(for all practical purposes), "Shed
a Tear for the Brave Dead and
Trust the President." Contrary to
the hopes of the sponsor, Mr. H.
R. Perot, and his organization,
"United We Stand," we arenot
enclosing a check made out to
"America" in the sum of "100%
Support," as you so ardently re-
quested.
Wewere naturally touched by
the description and pictures of
three fine young men, all dead in
Vietnam, and how their families
desperately want to believe that
they did not die in vain.
But we deeply resent your play-
ing upon this sort of emotional-
ism and your own All-American
image to ask that we disengage
our brains when it comes to Viet-
nam.
WE KNOW that President Nix-
on distorted the nature of t h e
Vietnam conflict and the motives
of his opponents in his Nov. 3
speech. We know that our nation
made a serious mistake in Viet-
nam, and cannot really disengage
itself until that mistaketis square-
ly faced. These are facts.
We happen to believe in and
love our country. We will stand
with you and praise unity, salute
the flag, chant allegiance to it.
sing the national anthem and any
other song you would like.
But, Mr. Borman, we're not in
I
I
T"
,-
I
* . , or abridging the freedom of speech or the press, or the right of
the people peaceably to assemble'...'
-THE
Nov.
NEW YORK TIMES
21
you ask us (i. e, the rest of us, af-
ter Agnew's "rotten apples" have
been discarded) to keep very still
and follow wherever our President
leads.
COME ON, Mr. Borman. You
and the Administration don't
really want patriotic citizens. You
want obedient soldiers, both mili-
tary and civilian.
Well, we simply refuse to sub-
mit to that mindless demand, and
we refuse out of a deep sense of
patriotism,
Can you understand that? God
we hope so.
--Daniel and Janice Bays
Nov. 18
'Hideots crosses
To the Editor:
IN REPLY to Sylvia Taylor's
letter (Daily, Nov. 6):
No Sylvia, the crosses were not
"hideous and offensive." What is,
is the war, what it stands for, the
social dissension and neglect of
problems it has caused. The coun-
try needs more :5ymbolical crosses,
crosses springing up across the en-
tire land as did the fictional trif-
fids.
Nearly two thousand crosses
could not possibly show the enom-
ity of loss and the barbarism of
this (and all) war. There should
have been crosses for each of the
nearly forty thousand American
lives squandered and for those of
the several hundred thousand poor
bastards we called "enemy.,
THE CROSSES. you say, were
' disrespectful" to the President
This is not so, although this call-
ous, political harangue deserves
Viettam ref erenduni
To the Editor
VICE PRESIDENT Agnew cer-
tainly was sour apples on his radio
broadcast which I heard o v e r
WWJ radio, direct from D e s
Moines, Iowa, last week.
He noted that the TV notables
had tremendous influence but
were never on any ballot. Neither
are our postmasters and U.S. at-
torneys, and I do not like that
even a little bit.
President Nixon has had a year
to get us out of the Vietnam mess,
and our soldiers are still being
killed there. If Nixon and Agnew
are so sure U.S. citizens are so
strongly behind them, then let
them prove it to the country by a
national referendum!
But the joke is on all of you-
our Federal Constitution has no
provision whatever for such a fair
and democratic procedure! Prof.
Kauper of our University Legal
Research Dept. is my authority for
it. Not all states have a provision
for a referendum or the initiative
petition method of securing it,
either.
Our _3oard of Supervisors can
raise the salaries of Circuit Judg-
es as much as they wish, but we
citizens cannot by initiative peti-
tion or referendum, etc., lower
their salaries! What a bunch of
nonsense that is!
The Philippines are withdraw-
ing their soldiers from Vietnam
- if Agnew feels so many people
like his ideas then let him try to
7o--
'N
M6VIE$
A iF /
gal
IF w -6-0
N{OVIES -
(-vaOH
u ~ F~
7W
-
-fIT
I I I I1 I I I
11