Seventy-Sixth Year EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS Where Opinions Are Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, Micn. NEWS HONE: 764-0552 Truth Will Prevail 4 Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1965 NIGHT EDITOR: PETER SARASOHN The Flint Controversy Develops Simple Solutions Won't End the War in Viet Nam HEUNIVERSITY'S teach-in movement (call them anti - administration) amounts to no more than a high school debating club and its opposition (call them pro-administration) is no better. The anti-administration group tries to prove that we are not wanted in Viet Na, that our foreign policy in Viet Nam is bad and that we should get out even at great cost. The pro-administra- ion group argues we should stay in Viet Nam and fight-even if the consequences are very severe. The arguments always seem vaguely similar to the neutral bystander as both groups feed their vocal barrels with tons of historical data accompanied by a de- *tailed account bf sources. Both opinions seem sound as ,the groups argue on poll- What Knd Of Education?, HICAGO-Too much emphasis on sex education and insufficient training in other modes of life are making American girls unfit for marriage, says a court psy- chologist whose job is saving marriages. "They're brought up to think all they need is their femaleness, which often turns out to be helplessness, hesitancy and indecisiveness," Dr. I. A. Burch, di- rector of the divorce conciliation services for Illinois Circuit Court, said in an in- terview recently. Dr. Burch has directed the service since its founding about a year ago. He coun- sels couples seeking divorces whose mar- riages the court believes might be saved with psychological help. Many divorces, he said, can be blamed on wives who have "been brought up to feel they have the right to expect a man to, guarantee them an easy life' simply because they're female." HOW DO THEY GET this notion? "Too much stress on sex education and not enough stress on personal education," said Dr. Burch. "All the emphasis is on their being sex- ual partners," he said. The obsessive concern with sex edu- cation, he said, gives girls a bizarre out- look. "They believe that sex is love. This is absurd. An obvious condition of love is that one be deserving of it. And this comes from self-realization in other areas than sex," he said. "The crucial question for a girl, he said, "is 'can I take care of myself and perhaps even take care of someone else'?" Many girls cannot answer the question affirmatively, he said, because "they have been prepared only to bargain with their femininity for bed and board." DR; BURCH'S REMEDY: "Stop stress- ing sex education and start stressing personal education, the development of inner resources, the discovery of self from which love for others is born." -MARGARET SCHERF Associated Press Writer Published at 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Michigan. Owner-Board in Control of Student Publications, 420 Mraynard St.. Ann Arbor. Bod or stockholders-none. Average press run-8,100. Editorial Staff ROBERT JOHNSTON, Editor LAURENCE KIRSHBAUM JEFFREY GOODMAN Managing Editor Editorial Director JUDITH FIELDS................Personnel Director LAUREN BAHR..........Associate Managing Editor JUDITH WARREN........ Assistant Managing Editor ROBERT HIPPLER.....Associate Editorial Director GAIL BLUMBERG...........Magazine Editor LLOYD GRAFF...............Acting Sports Editor NIGHT EDITORS: Susan Collins, John Meredith, Leonard Pratt, Peter Sarasohn, Bruce Wasserstein. DAY EDITORS: Robert Carney, Clarence Fanto, Mark Killingsworth, Harvey Wasserman, Dick Wingfield. ASSISTANT NIGHT EDITORS: Alice Bloch, Mere- dith Eiker, Merle Jacob, Carole Kaplan, Robert Klivans, Roger Rapoport, Neil Shister, Katherine Teich, Joyce Winslow, Charlotte Wolter. SPORTS NIGHT EDITORS: Rick--Feferman, Jim La- Sovage, Bob McFarland, Gl Samberg, Dale Sielaff, Rick Stern, Jim Tindall, Chuck vetzner., Business Staff CY WELLMAN, Business Manager ALAN GLUECKMAN . ... ...Advertising Manager JOYCE FEINBERG...............Finance Manager SUSAN CRAWFORD .....Associate Business Manager MANAGERS: Harry Bloch, Bruce Hlman, Marline tical, moral and ideal and to a small ex- tent, practical grounds. That's the problem-both debating teams .have sound arguments. But they ignore completely the importance of a solution being practical on both politi- cal and economic grounds. Further, both groups ignore the real cause of our problem in Viet Nam and in other foreign countries-our economic foreign aid is badly handled (this is ad- mitted by many from both sides). In addition, they ignore how their solutions could remedy this situation satisfactor- ily. FIRST, the anti-group ignores the poli- tical implications of its "get out" doc- trine. The United States will certainly lose face if it gives up and goes home leaving Viet Nam to the "Vietnamese." This is simple, but very important for future U.S. relations with both demo- cratic and non-democratic countries. The U.S. would not have the bargain- ing power in any future economic or poli- tical crisis that it does now. Also, many democratic governments gain much con- fjdence and stability from the stature of the U.S. in the world. They sometimes use this, to suppress revolutions, but it is naive to think that every revolution is a just and national one. The pro-group isn't any better, for it refuses to consider any economic solu- tion except the familiar but idiotic "Just let the Viet Cong stop fighting and then we'll negotiate." It forgets the implica- tions of a U.S. law which protects unions by guaranteeing bargaining in good faith. This means that both sides must be on an equal basis at the bargaining table, and the principle should apply to all bar- gaining situations. By no measure are the Viet Cong now on an equal basis with the Americans. For all many of them know they are still fighting the French. North and South Viet Nam are bombed continually, new airstrips are being built ad thousands of American soldiers keep arriving. By fighting and leaving the Viet Cong no room to bargain, the U.S. may win the war, but what will it have won in the end? Arthur Miller gave an indication recently: "a graveyard." THE FOREIGN economic aid the U.S. has extended Viet Nam has had bas- ically good intentions but has generally failed to reach the people. Both solu- tions-get out and stay in-are mean- ingless when one remembers that the main objective of the pro- and anti- groups is to help the Vietnamese people. If it left completely, the U.S. couldn't disperse foreign aid effectively. It must be recognized that much of the recent aid has been a personalized, to-the-peas- ant, Peace Corps sort, as was indicated in the movie "The Agony of Viet Nam," as opposed to straight support of indus- try and governmental interests which formerly dominated. Dispersal of such aid cannot be achieved under a completely hostile government. U.S. personnel ob- viously need a degree of safety for their work to be effective. The U.S. can't fight with bombs a peo- ple who value their cows more than their own lives-a man is dispensable but a cow feeds the entire family. This is an economic as well as a political battlefield and should be treated as such. THE ONLY WAY to win this battle is to stop the war to give American for- eign aid a chance to do some peacetime good. The fact that U.S. aid has failed in many respects in the past is no reason to curtail it now-it is in fact' a reason to learn from the mistakes of the past and administer an improved program. The bombing must stop and if an act of faith is necessary to spark, negotia- tions, then some American military per- sonnel must be withdrawn. The Vietna- mese have a basic hatred for the for- eigner, whether he be French, American or Chinese. This must be alleviated at first if later it is to be completely re- moved. The pseudo-American nationalists who are screaming that this would amount to losing the war must realize that it, would really be just changing the battle- field1 to nna morea dvantaveaus for the EDITOR'S NOTE: Several months ago, the University's plans to expand its -two-year Flint branch by adding fresh- man and sophomore classes ran head-on into adamant opposi- tion. The question still has not been settled and now is threat- ening to again cause trouble for the University.This article is the second in a three-part series outlining the issues in- volved in the Flint controversy and explaining their relevance to the total picture of higher education in Michigan. Yester- day, the development of Flint College was traced from its opening in 1956 to the Univer- sity's decision to expand it early last year. By JOHN MEREDITH y1964the children of the postwar ;baby boom were try- ing to get into college, and higher education in Michigan was reel- ing. After a decade of discussion about the need to plan expansion, the influx of students caught Michigan unprepared. The talk' had been interesting, but well coordinated long-range planning had 'not been done; Michigan's ten state colleges and universities were flooded with applications, and each was going about ex- pansion in its own way. The transformation of Flint College from a two-;year senior division school to a four-year branch institution was part of the University's expansion plans. But, for a number of reasons directly related, to the broader picture of higher education in Michigan, these plans have not worked out well. SEVERAL FACTORS which had been developing over a period of time finally entered the picture. For one thing the constitutional convention of 1963 included a pro- vision in the new state constitu- tion for a State Board of Educa- tion to coordinate and direct Michigan's educational system. The board was elected last Novem- ber and took office in January. Also in 1963, Gov. George Rom- ney named a special "blue ribbon" Citizens' Committee for Higher Education; the committee made its findings public last March in a document which emphasized the need for over-all planning and condemned branch expansion. Fi- nally, an ad hoc group appointed by the Michigan Coordinating Council for Public Higher Edu- THE MOTT MEMORIAL Building is the major classroom facility for the University's Flint College branch. This peaceful scene has been the center of controversy over educational policies. ;, '; cation to study branch expansion joined the chorus opposing branches and explicitly criticized Flint College., In combination with a number of intangibles, these specifics add- ed up to the emergence of a new attitude toward higher education. When, the student boom was simply a threat on the horizon, discussion had been enough for the sages in Lansing; last spring the crisis itself, had been with them for more than a year, and everyone, from the 'governor on down, was in a mad rush to start planning and coordinating. Flint College expansion belong- ed to the older era of unilateral action. With the governor, the Legislature, the new state board and most educators taking coordi- nation seriously and looking more closely at, such things as inde- pendent , study reports opposing branches, the University's plans for Flint no longer fit into the picture. THE IDEA of Flint expansion was first brought up in December 1962. General discussions proceed- ed for almost two years, and when the 1965-66 appropriation request was announced last fall, it in- cluded money for a freshman class :at Flint College. Plans called for a second freshman class to enter in 1966, and hence the transition from a two- to a four- year college would be accomplished in two years. These plans, however, exploded in the University's face. In Feb- ruary, Romney delivered his bud- get message to the Legislature and explicitly excluded money for Flint expansion in his Irecommen- dation for the University's appro- priation. Pointing to the condem- nation of branch expansion in the Russell and Davis reports, the governor argued that the Univer- sity should await formulation of a master plan before deciding on whether to increase its commit- ment in Flint.' President Harlan Hatcher im- mediately blasted Romney's posi- tion, He said that the governor had been fuly aware of the Uni- versity's expansion plans for some time and that his unexpected move at that late date could only prove harmful to the Flint community. Flint citizens and Sen. Garland Lane (D-Flint) joined Hatcher in, opposing the Romney position. Lane called on the State Board of Education to issue a, recom- mendation on the Flint question. In April, the board came out against Flint expansion, conced- ing only that the University could admit freshmen at the branch this fall because it was then too late to change plans for the 1965-66 academic year. The board further recommended that a new,indepen- dent tax-supported college super- cede the branch as soon as pos- sible. THE UNIVERSITY'S budget ap- propriation was approved at the end of June, with funds for a freshmgan class at Flint Included. Aproval didn't come, however, until the question of Flint ex- pansion had contributed to an- other minor crisis.. Before the House passed the University bud- get, a group of dissident Demo- crats attempted to cut the ap- propriation by $6.2 million. A 'var- iety of factors were behind their action, including a little anti- University sentiment-and that this predisposition against the University was aggravated by the Flint controversy was apparent from statements by some of "the' men involved. Passage of the budget eased the tension surrounding Flint College, but it did not settle the issue. Rather it simply put into effect the one part of the state board's ruling that corresponded to pre- vious University plans. TODAY 'the University is pub- licly committed to a four-year branch in Flint until such time as a master plan for higher educa- tion should dictate otherwise- and a master plan will not be forthcoming for some time. The board appears equally committed to keeping the branch as a two- year institution, and this only until the independent school can be established. Flint citizens-or, at least, the groups involved in the education system-want a University branch, now and forever. Romney general- ly supports the state board, and the position of the Legislature de- pends on which legislator is being considered. The Flint College issue has been relatively quiet for the past sev- eral months, but within the next week the University wil be sending its 1966-67 budget request to Lan- sing. It is almost inevitable that the section of the request marked for increased enrollment 'will include sufficient funds to support an- other freshman class at the Flint branch. TOMORROW: The future of Flint College: what will prob- ably happen, what should hap- pen and why. enU.S.andSovietInterst By WALTER LIPPMANN LAST WEEK the world had a fleeting but tantalizing glimpse of what might become possible if the cold war subsided. The USSR and the U.S.A., acting on their parallel interests in averting a war between Pakistan and India, made it possible for the United Nations to order a, cease-fire. This show of unanimity discouraged the Chinese from intervening in the quarrel. Parallelism is a long way short of positive cooperation, and there is no assurance that a settlement of the quarrel is in sight or seven that the underlying hostility will not smoulder on for a very long time. Nevertheless, the events of last week were a spectacular demon- stration of how all hope and pros- pect of a reasonably peaceable world is tied up with an improve- ment in Soviet-American rela- tions. IS AN IMPROVEMENT pos- sible? What is there between us that now sets us against each other? It is, quite plainly, the conflict of ideology and interest, of emotion and of prejudice, over the revolutionary condition of the so-called third world-the world of the underdeveloped and emerg- ing nations of the Southern Hemisphere-in Asia, Africa and Latin America. The revolutionary condition is an objective historical fact of this century, and it will continue to exist no matter what the Russians or we say or do about it. The Soviet-American conflict is about this revolutionary condition. Thus, the conflict is no longer, as, it was a generation = ago, about what kind of social order is to xist in the highly-developed coun- tries of Europe and North Amer- ica. AS A MATTER of fact, in this whole area, which includes Euro- pean Russia itself, the old argu- ment between the Marxists and the laissez-faire capitalists has been by-passed by events., For example, the economic phi- Sen. Goldwater in America is as losophy of Gen. Eisenhower and dead as the economic philosophy of Marx is among the European socialists. In the whole developed, progressive, industrial world, the prevailing economic order is a mixture in varying degrees of planning and the incentive of profit, of fiscal management and social regulation. It is in regard to the turbulence of this third, world-which was not foreseen a generation ago- that the Soviet Union and the United States find themselves locked into what has the appear- ance of an irreconcilable conflict. IN ITS OFFICIAL ideology, the Soviet Union is committed to the support of the revolutionaries, to the incitement and supplying of "wars of national liberation." In the American ideology, we are not absolutely opposed to wars of national liberation, provided they are not inspired or supported by Communists. We are very much; disposed to feel, however, that all revolutions will be captured by the Communists who invariably participate in them. Thus, Russia and America find themselves in a vicious circle. The Russians are disposed to intervene wherever there is a rebellion and the United States is inclined to intervene to oppose as aggression the Communist intervention. In the Soviet Union there exists a prejudice in favor of rebellion as such. The Soviet Union is the product of a fairly recent revolu- tion. THE IMPROVEMENT of Soviet- American relations, which is pre- requisite to an accomodation be- tween the West and China, re- quires the breakup of this vicious circle. How? Essentially, I believe, by fostering the ascendancy of national interests over global ideology, by the reassertion in both countries of prudence and calcula- tion against semi-religious fana- ticism and frenzy. We had a glimpse last week of how this can happen. The hostili- ties in Kashmir began with an infiltration of guerrilla troops, re- cruited as a matter of fact from the Pakistan army though they wore different uniforms. The, pur- pose of the guerrillas was to arouse the population and to liberate Moslem Kashmir from Hindu rule. Here was a war of national lib- eration which the Soviet Union, according to its theoretical doc- trine, was bound to support. HOWEVER, the fact of the matter is that it did not suit the Soviet Union that Pakistan, in cahoots with Red 'China, should defeat India, which is a tacit ally of the Soviet Union. So the Soviet Union acted in favor of peace, which is its real interest, rather than on behalf of an ideological prejudice. At the same time, the United States, having learned something in recent months, resisted the temptation to take a lofty position against aggression, and instead, reticently and prudently, chose to work quietly and behind the scenes. This is the way that Soviet- American relations can be im- proved-by encouraging the pru- dent and the practical to pre- dominate over the ideological and the hot. In this country, at least, the process will require the re- sumption of public debate-the kind of debate which Sen. Ful- bright has once again opened up. FOR 'THE ISSUE which he has posed in his remarkable speech is the essential issue in our at- titude and policy toward the rev- olutionary condition of our time. The question he posed is how to tolerate rebellion, which is often necessary and desirable, without surrendering the control of the rebellion to the Communists who will always be part of it. There is no rule of thumb for answering this question. But there' has to be some kind of accommo- dation, such as the Soviet Union made about the Kashmir freedom "We Agree To Stop In The Interest Of "International Peace" I IA*4. ".,1 , ," I I. , , ,.,. /Pl , ~ * 1*. x A4 LocalTick-ses: Schutze's Corner: Trials of Fame By JOYCE WINSLOW "HEY MAN, did you see the Kingston Trio?" "No.". "What's the matter with you- anti-folk or something?" "No." "Were you afraid of the heat, or the crowds, or couldn't you get a date?" "No nothing like that. I just couldn'tnget tickets, that's all." :6WF.T.,HV ddn' vnngi~m - people and only 3100 tickets were held for block .sales even through there were 4200 requests for block tickets. You could have been one of the lucky thousand who got in- dividual tickets." "DID YOU see the lines?" "No, I was participating in Rush. What lines?" "The lines that stretched in front of Hill at 8 a.m. Monday morning for tickets. I went at 8:00 and skipped my 9 o'clock even Y'NAME in print! I rushed proudly over to the SNCC desk in the Fishbowl, a copy of The Daily clutched with boyish pride in one hand. "Jeez," I exclaimed breathless- "Wanna sign the petition, Jack?" "But ... here! Read this, damn it!" I thrust my copy of The Daily under her nose and pointed out my column. She read it, and I steeled myself for an explosion.