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