100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

November 04, 1965 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1965-11-04

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

I I

Seventy-Sixth Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

Education

ere Opinions Are Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MiCH.
Truth Will Prevail

NEws PHONE: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 4,1965 NIGHT EDITOR: MARK R. KILLINGSWORTH
Laws on Conscientious Objection:
Change Is Imperative, Historic

rfHINGS CHANGE - not just some
things, but all. It might be said, as it
has often been (so many times!), that
this is "life's only constant." Yet, how-
ever over-used the phrase, it must merit
repetition, for there are still those who
refuse to yield to the future and who, in
cherishing past notions, cause the cor-
rosion of American society from within.
They lay the blame at the feet of those
attempting to expedite change, failing
to see the mud on their own outworn
shoes. The reaction to recent anti-draft
demonstrations belies such a predicament
in America today.
Today's controversy over conscientious
objection could be said to have begun
in the 1929 Supreme Court case of the
United - States v. Schwimmer. Rosika
Schwimmer, a 49-year-old Hungarian
woman, was denied citizenship because
she was a pacifist. Two similar cases fol-
lowed in 1931, both yielding the same re-
sult. No alien could be naturalized unless
he consented to bear arms for the United
States.
Federal endorsement of such a viola-
tion of the professed American "liberty
of conscience" was undoubtedly applaud-
ed by the majority of those who had
knowledge of this case at the time. The
next decade, however, saw a drastic
change in the entire complexion of the
Supreme Court.
The Vietnamese
Battle Must
Stay Limited
MAJ. GEN. LEWIS W. WALT, command-
er of the 30,000-man Third Marine
Division stationed in Da Nang, said open-
ly Tuesday what a few senior United
States officials in Saigon and some Re-
publican politicians in Washington have
been saying privately for some time: that
the United States will soon have to de-
cide "whether or not we are going all the
way in order to win this conflict" and
that the U.S. and the free world will be
making a "great mistake if they don't
carry this through to the end, regardless
of cost."
The purpose behind such statements
clearly seems to be to build up pressure
for attacks on Hanoi and other North
Vietnamese population centers, or possi-
bly for an invasion of North Viet Nam
and attacks against Communist China.
It expresses opposition to any settlement
in Viet Nam which would not insure a
staunchly pro-American Saigon govern-
ment.
But the United States is not in Viet
Nam, contrary to the views of such mal-
contents, to dominate the country for-
ever. It is there simply to prevent the
country from being dominated by others.
THE RECENT HISTORY of Yugoslavia
is an excellent example of how coun-
tries with political and economic systems
vastly different from our own, but en-
joying political self-determination, need
not disrupt world peace or world diver-
sity. American foreign policy is based on
that fact.
Statements such as Gen. Walt's, sug-
gesting that the United States, rather
than protect diversity, can and should en-
force its own hegemony in the world, do
not reflect United States policy. The ad-
ministration should emphasize this clear-

ly once more-both to other countries and
to Gen. Walt.
--MARK R. KILLINGSWORTH
Editorial Staff
ROBERT JOHNSTON, Editor
LAURENCE KIRSHBAUM JEFFREY GOODMAN
Managing Editor Editorial Director
JUDITH FIELDS ............... Personnel Director
LAUREN BAHR ........... Associate Managing Editor
;UDITH WARREN.......Assistant Managing Editor
ROBERT HIPPLER.....Associate Editorial Director
UAIL BLUMBERG..............Magazine Editor
LLOYD GRAFF.............Acting Sports Editor
SHELDON DAVIS. .....Acting Photo Editor
NIGHfT EDI ~TORRbrTA~ thnCp,4 v. C larence Fa nto.

THE SUPREME COURT became, in the
1940's, the fountainhead of, not what
is or was, but of what ought to be. Pre-
viously, the Supreme Court had rather
faithfully reflected the predominant
ideals and sentiments of American so-
ciety, evaluating issues more upon con-
text than content. The World War II
era, however, saw the emergence of a
more "supreme" Supreme Court in that
it began to set examples rather than
follow precedents; it concerned itself
more with "perfect justice" and "right
reason" than with consensus and exped-
ience. In 1946, in Girouard v. United
States, the Supreme Court decided that
an alien could be naturalized, even though
a conscientious objector, if he agreed to
serve the military as a non-combatant.
Yet the altered function of the Su-
preme Court, while establishing its moral
and legal autonomy, did not provide it
with any power to effect the changes it
proposed. Thus, during World War II,
about 6000 CO's were put in jail and, as
a result, were deprived of many of their
allegedly protected rights. Those respon-
sible for convicting these 6000 were not
"fascist"; they were flesh and blood
Americans, resisting change, resisting
progress, resisting, in fact, democracy.
In 1946, the Supreme Court initiated
the only action of which it was capable
in order to ensure liberty of conscience
to the citizens of the United States. Then
as now, it rests with the U.S. citizenry
to institute into practice what the Su-
preme Court has invoked in theory.
EVERY PIECE of draft legislation since
the first in 1917 has provided for the
exemption of those who, believing in a
Supreme Being, cannot in good con-
science serve with the active military.
In the 1964 Seeger case, however, the
Supreme Court struck down belief in di-
vinity as a prerequisite for classification
as a conscitntious objector. The decision
to abandon religion as the basis of CO
classification certainly reflected the im-
partial justice to which the court is com-
mitted, for discriminatory practices are
undemocratic, whether directed against
those within or without religion. ,
As of yet, however, the Supreme Court
has not finished with the evolution of the
CO status. As far as the law is concern-
ed, any person who desires this classifica-
tion must object to all war, in any place,
at any time, for any reason. The law
says that objection to the aims or results
of a war is not grounds for refusal to
serve in the active military.- Until the
ultimate priority of the individual con-
science has been established, the Supreme
Court will be periodically confronted with
this issue, for change is today's most in-
sistent aggressor.
The evolution of the Supreme Court
toward greater concern for the protec-
tion of individual rights has been closely
paralleled and recently anticipated by
that of minority groups concerned about
the expedition of meaningful change.
This concurrent stream of thought is
eloquently illustrated in the CO contro-
versy.
Perhaps the greatest concept within
the United States' liberal democracy is
that of "majority rule-minority rights."
With the inrease of this country's in-
terests and responsibilities outside its
boundaries, the rights of the minority,
and, more especially, those of the indi-
vidual, must be as effectually protected
as they are contractually guaranteed. The
people of the United States must be con-
stantly on their guard against the loss of
these rights to international power strug-
gles or the inclination towards exped-

ience.
STUDENTS for a Democratic Society is
one example of an organization con-
cerned with securing the right of any
citizen to refuse military service be-
cause he is averse to the ideological ram-
ifications of the war. In this respect, SDS
is a foresign of what must ultimately
concern the Supreme Court.
The ideological and constitutional
grounds for limitations on freedom of
conscience are being challenged, by politi-
cal climate, public opinion, and time.

EDITOR'S NOTE: The following
article, "Education: What Next?
Where We Stand and Where We're
Going," is reprinted by permission
of The New Republic. The author
is education editor of that maga-
zine and was also largely respon-
sible for California's Byrne Report.
(First of a Two Part Series)
By CHRISTOPHER JENCKS
THE PASSAGE last spring of
the Elementary and Second-
ary Education Act has already as-
sured the 89th Congress of a place
in the history of American educa-
tion.
This 1.3 billion dollars a year
Act established a mechanism for
siphoning potentially unlimited
amounts of federal money to
needy school districts. The Act
was drafted in such a way as to
encourageglocal districts to nar-
row the gap between rich and
poor, damp down tension between
Catholic and non-Catholic par-
ents, and bring new kinds of
teachers and new ideas about
teaching into their classrooms.
It is still too early to tell wheth-
er any of these objectives will be
reached through federal legisla-
tion. After husling the Johnson
proposals through in record time
last spring, Congress waited until
September to apropriate funds
with which to make the new laws
operative. As a result, the legisla-
tion has had almost no impact on
school programs for this year.
Nor is it easy to be optimistic even
about next year.
The new Act calls for a major
shakeup in local school systems.
Instead of designing the system
for middle-class students and
then offering a cut-rate, watered
down version of it -to the poor,
schoolmen are being asked to de-
sign a system specifically for the
poor and spend more on it than
they do on the middle classes.
Only a dunce could suppose
that the majority of local schools
will undertake this shake-up
spontaneously. They would move
only if the reformers offered them
a wel-designed plan, and if the
U.S. Office of Education made it
clear that nothing less would suf-
fice to pry loose federal funds. So
far, neither condition is being
fulfilled.
THE PROBLEM of transform-
ing poor schools is closely analo-
gous to that which confronts the

Office of Economic Opportunity
in trying to promote "commun-
ity action" against poverty. The
roots of poverty, like the roots of
slum schools, and very deep. It
would take a major social upheav-
al to eliminate either, and the
idea that such an upheaval could
be sponsored by the federal gov-
ernment is somewhat question-
able.
But at least the strategists of
the poverty program recognized
the difficulties and girded them-
selves for battle. To begin with,
they campaigned for and obtained
legislation which gave them enor-
mous power, both to stimulate and
help formulate nominally "local"
proposals, and to withhold money
when proposals failed to live up to
the standards and ideals of the
Act.
But when it was suggested that
education reformers would need
similar powers, the Office of Edu-
cation took the "realistic" view
that Congress and the National
Education Association would never
stand for it. They sought and ob-
tained legistlation which left init-
iative at the local level and the
power to veto largely with the
states.
EVEN IN THOSE areas where
the Office has a free hand, it has
refrained from using it. The Of-
fice has, for example. money for
"research a n d demonstration"
projects. In other government
agencies such "free money" is seen
as a heavenly opportunity. Agen-
cy officials beat the bushes for
potential grantees who are willing
to "demonstrate" ideas which the
agency itself thinks likely to be
bolli effective and contagious.
The Office of Education init-
iates almost nothing. Most of its
"R & D" money goes to projects
designed not so much to solve the
problems of the public schools
(e.g., better vocational training)
as to answer the questions which
now head the agenda of the disci-
pline in which the applicant has
made, or hopes to make, a reputa-
tion (e.g., studies in occupational
sociology). Sometimes the con-
cerns of the academicians prove
relevant to the schools, but often
not.
MY OWN GUESS is that the
Office of Education will admin-
ister the Elementary and Secon-

and
dary Education Act in much the
same spirit as the anti-discrim-
ination section of the 1964 Civil
Rights Act has been administered
-very cautiously. USOE officials
do believe in both innovation and
integration. But they do not be-
lieve that either is indispensible.
They do not even believe them
important enough to risk one's
political life for. So when it comes
to a choice between letting the
local system do what the local
balance of political power dictates
or cutting off federal money, the
Office of Education can be ex-
pected to get along by going along
(witness the Office's recent de-
cision to withhold federal funds
from Chicago, followed by its
backing down as soon as Mayor
Daley called the White House).
That is undoubtedly Just what
Congress intended. The defenders
of localism ought therefore to be
pleased..
When one turns from elemen-
tary and secondary to higher edu-
cation, the horizon looks rather
different. President Johnson's
higher education bill is now in a
Senate-House conference, and
barring unforeseen mishaps should
be signed into law within a couple
of weeks.
On its face, it is a far less ex-
citing piece of legislation than
the . Elementary-Secondary Act.
But it includes two new depar-
tures which might turn out to be
highly significant. The first of
these is undergraduate scholar-
ships for the poor, the second is
the National Teacher Corps.
Government in
Higher Education
ACTUALLY, the Teacher Corps
is designed to help the elementary
and secondary schools, not the
colleges, and the reasons for its
inclusion in the Higher Educa-
tion bill are of some interest. Pro-
posals for a National Teacher
Corps have been floating around
for more than a year. The idea
was to create a federally spon-
sored Corps which would make
teams of specially trained teachers
available on invitation to poor
schools throughout the country.
Each team was to consist of an
experienced "master teacher" who
would be a career employe of the
Corps, and three or four "ap-

prentice teachers," who would be
recent college graduates appoint-
ed for two years. The proposal
was designed to achieve a variety
of related objectives. It would be
the nucleus of a kind of Educa-
tional Extension Service, for the
teachers would be trained under
federal auspices, would be up on
the latest educational ideas, and
would be able to introduce these
ideas into the schools they served
in.
By using teaching teams with
four or five members the Corps
.ould ensure that innovators in
bad schools were not so isolated
or overwhelmed that they simply
gave up. At the same time, the
teams would provide a completely
new kind' of teacher training, one
emphasizing apprenticeship and
supervised teaching instead of the
accumulation of credits in educa-
tion.
Having the imprimatur, of the
federal government, and the pres-
tige and visibility which went with
participation in the Corps, ap-
prentices might after a couple of
years be able to land regular
teaching jobs and get certifica-
tion without the usual nonsense
about courses in audio-visual aids.
Finally, the creation of a fed-
eral career service for "master
teachers" would do a great deal
to solve one of the pressing prob-
lems of education, namely the rec-
ognition and reward of unusual
teaching talent. The idea was to
provide gifted teachers, especially
men, with a way to earn a good
living without becoming admin-
istrators.
WHEN EFFORTS were made to
sell the idea to the Office of
Education for inclusion in the
Eelementary-Secondary Act, the
idea was vetoed. The Office didn't
want to revive the church-state
controversy, upset its uneasy truce
with the NEA, or seem to confirm
conservative fears of a "federal
takeover."
Its advocates persisted, how-
ever, and last spring, after the
Elementary-Secondary Act w a s
already passed. Sen. Gaylord Nel-
son (D-Wis) became interested
in the Teacher Corps idea. So
did Edward Kennedy (D-Mass).
In due course, the Nelson and
Kennedy staffs worked out a joint

proposal which, while eliminating
some of the potentially contro-
versial features of the scheme,
still promises to serve a number
of useful purposes.
Their plan won the support of
Wayne Morse, the chairman of the
Subcommittee which was dealing
with education legislation, and
Morse made it clear to the Ad-
ministration that he would tack
some version of the Teacher Corps
onto the Higher Education bill.
AT THIS POINT President
Johnson announced that he would
propose a National Teacher Corps
to Congress. Unfortunately that
bill, drawn up by the Office of
Education and the Bureau of the
Budget and sent to Congress, left
the Commissioner virtually no
control over the Corps, except re-
cruitment. It handed training over
the the very schools of education
which the original proposal was
trying to escape. It eliminated
the hope of lively recruiting by
requiring every volunteer to prom-
ise to remain in teaching for five
years. It allowed the local schools
to take individuals rather than
teams. It eliminated the career
service for master teachers.
Most serious of all, it provided
that the salaries of Corpsmen
would be paid not by the federal
government but by local school
districts, reducing to almost zero
their incentive to apply.
Fortunately, the Senate has
stuck to the Nelson-Kennedy ver-
sion, and as this is written the
best guess is that the House will
accept this version in conference.
The Office of Education continues
to promote the weaker version,
however, and there is still a
chance that the House Conferees
will insist on postponing the whole
issue until next year.
Federal Scholarships
THE federal scholarship pro-
gram in the bill nearing passage
has such a strict means test that
it will affect higher education
only marginally. The great ma-
jority of financially eligible stu-
dents never even graduate from
secondary school, and therefore
cannot be gotten into college by
any conceivable scholarship pro-
gram.

Wash ington:

*
e
*
4,
4

How the 'U' Prepared for War in 1917

By PHILIP SUTIN
Daily Guest Writer
AN ALL-CAMPUS VOTE, 3,369-
335, called for compulsory mili-
tary training of all male Uni-
versity students. But the Re-
gents the next day adopted only
a limited program and appropri-
ated $2500 to cover war mobiliza-
tion costs.
Thus the University prepared to
enter World War I in late March,
1917, as battle with Germany be-
came a certainty. A week later
Congress declared war.
Soon University students will
again be requested to support their
country's policy in a war, al-
though they will not be asked to
train for it. If a referendum pe-
tition receives the necessary 1,-
000 signatures, students will vote
Nov. 17 on whether they agree
with their government's Viet Nam
policy.
In 1917 the issue was more im-
mediate. The vote came as Ger-
many declared unconditional sub-
marine warfare against all ship-
ping around the British Isles. The
United States had broken diplo-
matic relations with Germany and
a clash seemed imminent.
THE REGENTS had asked stu-
dents March 27 to vote on com-
pulsory training. The army would
provide uniforms and supplies to
the training unit and an officer
to teach it.
Engineering and medical stu-
dents declared themselves ready
to fight. The chemical and civil
engineering faculties offered their
services to the ordnance and mili-
tary engineering branches of the
army.
Some 2500 students, out of a
student body of more than 5200,
marched from State St. to the
center of Ann Arbor at Main and
Huron Streets and then to Regent
Junius E. Beal's home. A hastily-
formed band led the parade, play-
ing patriotic songs. "Michigan for
Am rica," a banner said.
"the crisis has united Michi-
gan Just as it is uniting the coun-
try," the Daily commented editor-
ially on the vote. "Michigan is
prepared to do its duty, but it is
not prepared for war . . . Michi-
gan is for America-a prepared
America."
THE REGENTS praised the stu-
dents' "patriotism of the highest
order," but said, "we have not the
facilities to install compulsory
training."
In addition to expanding the

Beta Theta Pi, Sigma Chi, Acacia,
Delta Kappa Epsilon and Psi Up-
silon-drilled daily at noon on
State St.
"STATE ST. presents quite a
patriotic sight to the persons
walking past this group of houses
for practically every Greek letter
lodge is flying a great American
flag," the Ann Arbor Daily Times
News reported.
A giant Hill Aud. rally, spon-
sored by the National Security
League, brought this patriotic fer-
vor to a peak.
"Never in the history of Ann 4r-
bor has there been such a patriot-
ic celebration aswas held yester-
day. . . From the time the im-
mense emblem of the United
States was unfurled from the top
of the building and hid the stage
by its massiveness until the dy-
ing notes of 'My Country 'Tis of
Thee,' Michigan men sat, bound
by patriotism," the Daily Times
News recalled glowingly.

Some 5500 persons-students,
the entire Naval Reserve Corps,
President Harry B. Hutchins,
University and local officials -
roared their approval to resolu-
tions calling for universal mili-
tary training and a declaration of
war.
Hill Aud. was draped with flags,
capped by the massive one that
covered the stage.
Students now marched on Corn-
wall Place and Washtenaw Ave. as
well as State St. Twelve hundred
were drilling instead of the hand-
ful at the beginning of the school
year.
PREPAREDNESS had been a
major issue in the presidential
campaign the previous fall. Twice
large Hill Aud. rally crowds ap-
proved resolutions calling for
"protection against possible in-.
vasion either of our territory or
our rights" through increased de-
fense efforts.
Deans Victor Vaughn of the

Medical School and Mortimer
Cooley of the engineering college
particularly pushed the military
effort.
"Don't be afraid you will be
called away from college," Cooley,
a Naval Academy graduate, told
newly-sworn in naval reservists.
"If you are called, you won't be
the only ones. Thousands will go
with you, but you will be pre-
pared.
"Universities don't go on in time
of wardas they do in peace," he
concluded.
DISSENTERS found Cooley's
remarks particularly true. Speak-
ing at the prewar mass rally,
prominent New York lawyer Fred-
eric R. Coudert told students:
"In a few hours more there will
be two classes in this country -
those who are loyal to the Ameri-
can flag and American princi-
ples, and those others who are
pacifists. Call them pacificts, pro-

German, or what you will, they-
are traitors."
Charles A. Peters, ..Jr., execu-
tive director of a forum held above
Calkin's Drug Store on State St.
where controversial issues were de-
bated, had to defend his forum
against charges it was the home
of anarchists and traitors.
Rowena Bastin, a coed junior,
had at the forum urged women
not to work in hospitals and not
to marry men who believe in war.
If these sacrifices are made, she
said, "the name of women will be
written in the book of time as
the symbol of peace."
AT AN ALL-CAMPUS mass
meeting before the military train-
ing vote, Prof. C. E. Wilson call-
ed non-students passing out anti-
training pamphlets "anarchists."
"Students were anxious to have
the outsiders thrown out, but were
dissuaded," the Daily Times News
reported.

Cities--Ignored in U.S. Political Debate

ONE OF THE most significant
things about the municipal
elections, especially in New York,
is what didn't happen. It is like
the story in which Sherlock
Holmes solved the mystery by
noting that in the night the dog
had not barked
The country has just seen a
tremendous legislative program
enacted by Congress designed to
begin the construction of what is
called the Great Society. Yet very
little, almost nothing, has been
said by the national leaders of
either party about the factthat,
while the Great Society can be
authorized and in part financed in
Washington, it will have to be
worked out and paid for and ad-
ministered and enforced in the
greateurban conglomerations
where an increasing majority of
our people live.
The Goldwater Republicans can
be excused here because, as a
matter of fact, they do not believe
in the Great Society. The other
Republicans may be allowed to
plead that they cannot be ex-
pected to line up as Lyndon John-
son Democrats.
BUT WHAT of the Democrats?
They will have passed through the
campaign acting as if the para-
mount issue in New York were

Today
anid
Tomorrow
By WALTER LIPPMANN
Yet the connection is at the
very heart of the problem. Under
the President's leadership the 89th
Congress has enacted a most im-
pressive and most promising batch
of legislation. But legislation is no
more than a batch of architect's
plans and a few holes in the
ground. The edifice of the Great
Society will have to be built, if it
is to be built at all, in the great
cities which are now the focal
point of the new American way
of living.
HOWEVER promising and im-
pressive the legislation enacted by
Congress, it is a mere beginning
and much the easiest part of the
whole undertaking. The hard nub
of the matter is the political back-
wardness of local government-
state, county, municipal.
This backwardness is not only
in the archaic legal structure of
local government-which comes
down from an earlier America-
but in the political habits of the

The problem of governing a
great city like New York is by all
odds the most important, the most
pressing and the most unavoid-
able domestic problem that we
have to face.
THIS GAP, this void, this dog
that has not barked is enough to
make one ask how deeply the
problem of creating a Great So-
ciety is appreciated by those who
have made the legislative blue-
prints.
Last summer Richard Goodwin,
in his memorable valedictory
speech on resigning from the
White House staff, said that it is
necessary "to reshape the his-
toric relationships of our federal
structure. Today's problems ignore
the traditional boundaries of city,
state and nation. We are not wise
enough to solve them from the

top, nor are there resources
enough to solve them from the
bottom."
In the light of its attitude to-
ward the municipal elections this
year, it is impossible not to won-
der whether the administration
has taken these truths to heart.
That may well be the reason
why the dog did not bark. The
ideas which the administration
needs are ideas of how to get the
Great Society constructed upon
the foundations which the 89th
Congress has authorized.
The absence of any urgent in-
terest in the local elections this
year suggests that the Adminis-
tration has been too busy and too
preoccupied to grapple with the
truth that legislation is only the
frame, not the actual substance
and structure, of great changes
in human society.
(c) 1965, The Washington Post Co.

Schutze 's Corner:
Period of Silence?

0

A RECENT Detroit News edi-
torial announced that it is
now "time to shut up."
"The plurality of students," the

a spirit of vicious or acerbic irony,
but was published as a sincere and
valiant effort to praise college
students.

I

Back to Top

© 2017 Regents of the University of Michigan