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 06, 1965 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1965-11-06

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

v

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, MICH.
Truth Will prevail

NEWS PHONE: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions oft staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1965 NIGHT EDITOR: BRUCE WASSERSTEIN

U.S. Brutality in Viet Nam:
Private vs. Public Morality

STRANGE ARE THE FOLKWAYS of U.S.
military morality. The United States
feels that it is able to justify the most
brutal of acts in Viet Nam with the ex-
cuse that it is for the freedom and even-
tual good of the people and, furthermore,
that the Viet Cong have committed or
ultimately will commit acts of greater
brutality.
If the U.S. is acting for the good of
Viet Nam and feels its actions are jus-'
tified, why does the U.S. attempt to
conceal the methods that it employs
in the war in Viet Nam? Consider the
recent controversy at the University of
Pennsylvania.
Several weeks ago the University of
Pennsylvania Committee to End the War
in Viet Nam discovered that the Insti-
tute for Cooperative Research on the
Penn campus was conducting investiga-
tions and development work on the feas-
ibility of aerosol poisoning of basic food
crops, specifically rice and specifically in
the area of Southeast Asia. The work
was classified and was supported by funds
from the U.S. Army.
The president of the University made
a statement condemning "research of
which the results may not be revealed"
and the faculty senate at Pennsylvania
passed a resolution with the same word-
ing. However, no other action was taken.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE officials
at fidst refused to acknowledge that
any such plans were being considered.
They maintained that only at the request
'of the South Vietnamese government
could chemical toxins be used, and that
these poisons were weed killers that would
stop the growth of the rice crops.
After all they said, it was their coun-
try and their war, and, if the South Viet-
namese wished to destroy their most im-
portant food supply to stop the Viet
Cong, the U.S. was obliged to supply the
planes and other equipment to do it.
Despite the protestations of innocence
from the Department of Defense, the edi-
tor of the Daily Pennsylvanian managed
to corner one high ranking department
official, who declined to be identified, at
a recent foreign policy conference in
Washington and deceived confirmation
from him that the U.S., on its own initia-

tive, was indeed using chemical toxins
in Viet Nam.
Most shocking is the nature of the
chemicals being used. The U.S. is spraying
rice crops with arsenic and cyanide com-
pounds which do not destroy the crops
themselves, but, rather, kill the people
who unknowingly eat them.
NOW, NO EXPEDIENCE of war can pos-
sibly justify, except at the most in-
human level of reasoning, the use of poi-
sons to kill; indiscriminately a civilian
population, even if there is some hope
that the enemy soldiers are being sig-
nificantly affected. Use of such poisons
is inconsistent-unless the United States
is willing to admit that the real object
of the war is the destruction of the civil-
ian population of Viet Nam.
This is where the difference between
U.S. public morality and U.S. private acts
becomes apparent. The U.S. has declared
that its intention in Viet ;Nam is to in-
sure the freedom and self-determination
of the Vietnamese people, but does this
noble aim justify its methods of insur-
ing this freedom and independence,
especially when the U.S. considers it
necessary to conceal the exact nature of
those methods?
Perhaps to soothe the outraged moral-
ity of those at the University of Penn-
sylvania and elsewhere the U.S. could stop
the use of agricultural poisons that kill
so indiscriminately. But it would then be
left with only saturation bombing, na-
palm, tear gas, and village-burning.
Perhaps the U.S. could even halt the
use of these methods, which have, ac-
cording to Bernard Fall's recent article in
the New Republic, killed at least one
quarter of a million Vietnamese since
1961, but then it might lose the war and
above all, above the killing and the tor-
ture, the U.S. believes that it cannot af-
ford to lose this war.
S0 THE U.S. will probably continue to
murder indiscriminately, by striking
out at an enemy that it cannot see, un-
til it has made the Vietnamese people
free-even if it has to kill every last one
of them.
-CHARLOTTE WOLTER

TolT
CHRISTOPHER JENCKS, edu-
cation editor of the New Re-
public and principal author of the
Byrne Report on the University
of California, has challenged the
academic profession, in two mag-
azine articles reprinted earlier this
week in The Daily (on Wednes-
day and Thursday), to justify its
traditional role as guardian of
American learning and teaching
beyond high school.
Some questions are in order
for this university's faculty, and
they deserve some response.
The passage last spring of the
Elementary and Secondary Educa-
tion Act has already assured the
89th Congress of a place in the
history of American education.
The act was drafted in such a
way as to encourage local districts
to narrow the gap between rich
and poor ... and bring new kinds
of teachers and new ideas about
teaching into their classrooms.
1) What has this university's
faculty, presumably expert in han-
dling knowledge, now the U.S.'s
most valuable commodity, done so
that this knowledge isn't distrib-
uted exclusively to one segment
of the population to the preju-
dice of another? Isn't this as im-
portant a responsibility as that
discovered by the atomic scien-
tists following the dropping of the
bomb-responsibility for both the
intended and unintended effects of
one's actions?
2) What has this university's
faculty, again presumably expert
in handling knowledge, done to
bring "new kinds of teachers and
new ideas about teaching into
their classrooms" for the diverse
new kinds of people they are now

Tuedi

Making of the President, 1964

By CLARENCE FANTO
T HIS WEEK'S off-year mayoral
and gubernatorial elections
have revived Republican hopes for
a gradual resurgence from the
abysmal defeats of 1964.
Rep. John V. Lindsay's stunning
triumph in the New York. City
mayoral contest was exciting news
for moderate-liberal Republicans
across the country. The election
demonstrated that even in a city
with a 7-2 preponderance of
Democratic voters and the dis-
traction of a strong third-ticket
campaign by an ultra-conservative
candidate, an attractive, middle-
of-the-road Republican with pro-
gressive programs designed to
ease typical urban problems can
achieve a significant victory.
Lindsay's 136,000-vote margin
over Democratic contender Abra-
ham Beame was all the more sur-
prising because of Beame's strong
support among the city's Jewish
voters, who constitute one-third
of the electorate. Oliver Quayle, a
political analyst for NBC, reported
that Beame received about 60 per
cent of the Jewish vote through-
out the city. However, Lindsay
picked up unexpected strength in
the city's Catholic, Irish and
Italian areas.
A breakdown of the returns in-
dicates that Lindsay ran strongest
in the boroughs of Manhattan and
Queens, where he defeated Beame
by margains of 90,000 and 101,000
votes respectively. Beame achieved
slight margin victories in the
Bronx and Brooklyn.
It was clear that Lindsay's sup-
port cut through all economic
classes and ethnic minorities. He
picked up more support among
Jewish voters than any candidate
could have expected, running
against a Democratic, Jewish op-
ponent. Jewish voters in the city
are registered Democrats by a
9-1 margin.
Lindsay also picked up strong
support from four newspapers (in-
cluding the New York Times), the
local CBS television outlet and
Life Magazine. Even the Jewish
Daily Forward, a newspaper print-
ed in Yiddish, declared its sup-
port of Lindsay.
IT MUST BE admitted that
Lindsay did not set out to pub-
licize his affiliation with the Re-
publican party. He did not ask
for any help from party leaders
or organizations, nor did he re-
ceive any. He conducted a non-
partisan campaign, reserving his
harshest attacks not for his Dem-
ocratic opponent, but for Conser-

finding there and the diverse new
things they are responsible for
teaching?
Residential colleges, pilot pro-
grams and honors programs not-
withstanding, isn't it true that
99 per cent of the teaching, grad-
ing and credit hour system the
undergraduate comes in contact
with is exactly as it was 40 or 50
years ago, and much of it the
same as it was hundreds of years
ago?
Is this task to be left to the
federal government while faculties
hold committee meetings ad naus-
eum?
For research purposes the uni-
versity has been turned into a
federation of independent entre-
preneurs, regulated by panels of
academicians who meet regularly
in Washington to give out money.
My judgment is that the same
thing ought to be done in teach-
ing. In other words, professors
ought to be given the same free-
dom to plan and execute a pro-
gram of instruction that they now
have of research.
Again, are not faculty, who pi-i
ously proclaim autonomy and free-
dom, just leaving the real job to
the federal government while they
sit on yellowed lecture notes?
On virtually every major uni-
versity campus in America there
are professors who want to de-
velop an interdisciplinary science.
program for non-scientists . . . or
whatever. Often they are vetoed by
the rest of the faculty, or by one
or another faculty committee.
Is this the faculty version of
freedom, responsibility and auton-
omy? No one but the collective+
group has sufficient intelligence
and responsibility to undertake a
new project or a new departure?
*zy'~s Vo te
vative candidate William F. Buck-
ley, the urbane, 39-year-old editor
of the National Review, who gain-
ed 13 per cent of the total vote.
Lindsay pounced on Buckley's
suggestion that welfare recipients
be sent out of the city to "re-
habilitation centers" and that nar-
cotic addicts be quarantined on
an island "where no one can see
them." In turn, Buckley accused
Lindsay of attempting to win over
Jewish voters by creating a Nazi-
like fear of the Conservative can-
didate.
The New York Times printed a
letter from Buckley asking the
paper to explain its statement that
he was appealing to "brutish in-
stincts." The paper responded
with a scathing denunciation of
Buckley's proposals and campaign
tactics.
Buckley's final vote total was
about 4 per cent short of what
political analysts and pollsters
had predicted.
LINDSAY'S MOST effective
campaign strategem was his ap-
peal to the independent and the
nonpartisan Democratic or Repub-
lican voter. Reviving the image of
Fiorello H. La Guardia, the city's
last Republican mayor who was
elected 25 years ago on a fusion
ticket, Lindsay won the endorse-
ment of the state's Liberal party,
a labor-oriented organization
which can play a decisive role in
city or closely contested state-
wide elections.
Any interpretation of the sig-
nificance of Lindsay's victory upon
the Republican party must be
tempered by the realization that
he ran as a maverick Republican
and not because of his party af-
filiation but in spite of it.
Goldwater-style politicians, who
still control the party at the grass-
roots level in most areas, are
likely to stress Lindsay's refusal
to endorse the 1964 Presidential
ticket, his liberal voting record

during his years in Congress, and
his reluctance to wear his party's
mantle during the campaign.
They may point to an advertise-
ment placed in the city's news-
papers by Democrats shortly be-
fore election day, the purpose of
which was allegedly "to remind
the voters that Lindsay actually
was a member of the Republican
Party."
On the other hand, Buckley's
failure to take away enough votes
from Lindsay to stop his bid for
control of City Hall has been a
blow to the ultraconservatives.
Liberal-moderate leaders such as

Michigan MAD
By ROBERT JOHNSTON
Undergraduate education has
more important functions than the
sorting and screening of potential
PhD's.
Are faculty fulfilling, or even
trying to fulfill, their responsibil-
ities toward the undergraduate?
"If nobody now on the faculty
wants to teach illiterate freshmen,
new kinds of faculty should be
hired who do."
Would the "meaning of the BA"
be diluted?
What does the BA mean now.
1800 lectures? 64 exams? A year
or two in a quad? A year or two
in a fraternity or sorority or apart-
ment? Memorized texts and lec-
ture notes? 32 courses that teach
neither scholarship, sensitivity,
humanity nor wisdom?
Despite rhetoric about "train-
ing leaders," the better colleges
are organized on the assumption
that the good life is in fact the
academic life. They offer few ex-
periences outside the classroom, no
future except graduate school, and
no adult models except scholars.
The librarian, confronted with
an exponential increase in demand
for his materials (and a similar
increase in the flow of material
to him for inclusion in his sanc-
tuary), has been redesigning his
libraries to cope with this. The'
Undergraduate Library has been
called by one researcher "the most
efficient purveyor of information
in the world."
Doesn't it behoove faculty to

hose Behind the Barricades

redesign their systems a little so
that students might learn what to
do with this vastly increased flow
of knowledge, how to judge it mor-
ally and intellectually, how to sort
it and catalog it mentally so that
it is of some use to those students
in search of a good and full life,
however they would define it?
The sociologist studies humans
through charts and graphs and
chi squares; the English professor
through the sensitivity to human
life found in great literature; the
historian sees what humans have
been about for thousands of years;
the psychologist studies them one
at a time; the doctor and lawyer
are constantly in contact with
human suffering and degradation,
both physical and mental.
Yet it is the federal government,
spurred by an aware and probing
younger generation that has rec-
ognized and tackled the problems
of poverty as it apparently never
occurred to any of our faculty to
do.
Might not faculty take a lesson
from their students and learn
about involvement, about a feel-
ing of responsibility for just a
few of the things that happen
in our world?
The disease which afflicts the
American university today is in
some respects analogous to the
one which gripped colleges in the
middle of the nineteenth century.
The academy was then dominat-
ed by a sterile classicism, which
disdained any contact with the
workaday world.
The concept of the academy is
similar to the concept of the col-
lege or the university, entities ded-
icated to meaning and study and
traditions but most of all dedi-
cated to preserving and nurturing

Vague Hopes for GOP

A YEAR AGO this week Lyndon Baines
Johnson was swept into the White
House by virtue of the largest margin of
victory ever attained by a United States
President.
Last week his 89th Congress adjourned
after completing one of the most pro-
gressive chapters in American legisla-
tive history.
Medicare made it, southern Negroes
got the right to vote and students from
kindergarten through graduate school
were voted financial aid. A department
of housing was established as were Re-
gional Medical Centers and a National
Arts Foundation. Immigration restrictions
were relaxed, and even excise taxes were
reduced.
But amid all the rejoicing the public
has ignored that selfless American who
made it all possible.
By virtue of his presidential campaign,
Barry Goldwater gave the Democrats the
votes of millions of moderate Americans.
Hence the Democrats enjoyed overwhelm-
ing congressional majorities. and were
able to pass desperately needed legisla-
tion.,
During the campaign there were those
who questioned whether or not Gold-
water knew what he was doing.
ONLY BY CONSIDERING the hereto-
fore undisclosed background of the
Goldwater campaign can one understand
the magnitude of his sacrifice.
After his nomination in San Francisco
Goldwater's advisors conducted a quick
nationwide poll testing out Goldwater's
views on voters. After analyzing the re-
r twAicIigaltu &ili

sults it was decided that the best cam-
paign strategy would be to send the
senator on a three month safari to Kenya
and let Eisenhower do all the campaign-
ing.
Goldwater refused to take the safari.
"But Barry," his advisors said, "if you go
out and spout your views you'll not only
get beat but you'll take all kinds of good
Republicans down to defeat with you."
The senator said, "this country is 30
years behind the times; we need more
federal aid for schools and medical care.
We need a voting rights bill for Negroes
and legislation to control pollution. The
only way to get these things is through a
huge Democratic victory, and that's what
I intend to create."
"BUT BARRY," his advisors screamed in
horror, "The Grand Old Party . . ."1
"Oh, fiddlesticks," retorted the senator,
"The Grand Old Party is decadent; we've
got to get this country on the move and
I intend to help the Democrats do it. I'd
rather be right than be president."
So out he went on the campaign trail,
preaching against Medicare to the elder-
ly in Florida, lashing out against the
TVA in Tennessee and blasting farm sub-
sidies in Iowa.
The man urged defoliation of Vietna-
mese trees, spoke out against Social Se-
curity and foreign aid. He recommended
sawing off the Eastern seaboard and let-
ting it float out to sea. Every step of
the way he swayed more and more voters
into the Democratic columns.
Finally on election night, two minutes
after the. polls had closed in Cornish,
New Hampshire, and the CBS computer
projected an overwhelming Democratic
victory, his dejected advisors told him,
"You selfish idealist, now look what you

qualities and standards of hu-
manity and beauty (whether in
math or in literature) in an oth-
erwise insane and ugly world.
Is that what this faculty is do-
ing? Or is it smugly defending,
behind a brick wall of tradition,
autonomy and collective respon-
sibility, qualities and standards
that are in fact indefensible when
faced squarely?
AM NOT TRYING to be an-
tagonistic or belligerent. It just
seems that some of the questions
that flow naturally from Jencks'
articles need to be strongly put.
It seems especially that his bas-
ic point, the inability of faculty
government to allow, let alone en-
courage, experimentation and in-
novation on the part of its mem-
bers interested in such activity
demands serious reconsideration of
the practice and assumptions of
faculty government as we now
know it.
Several weeks ago President
Hatcher handed out about $10,000
worth of annual awards for dis-
tinguished teaching. Every week
faculty receive about $1 million
worth of incentive for good re-
search directed to them by ex-
perts in their fields with distribu-
tion based on carefully prepared
presentations of new ideas and
new departures thought worthy
of support.
The academy, the college, -the
university, or whatever you want,
to call it, deserves as much mean-
ing, as much scope, as much rele-
vance to a difficult world as its
faculty can pump into it.
THERE SHOULD BE some re-
plies to the questions raised here.
We'll be glad to print them.

Gov. Mark Hatfield of Oregan,
Sen. Thomas Kuchel of California
and Sen. Clifford Case of New
Jersey have undoubtedly reaped
the rewards of increased prestige
and power because of Lindsay's
victory.
The victory of Arlen Specter (a
registered Democrat who ran on
the Republican ticket) in the
Philadelphia district attorney con-
test may also increase the strength
of GOP progressives. Specter's
candidacy was sponsored by lead-
ing state Republicans such as Sen.
Hugh Scott and Gov. William
Scranton. His victory was the first
by any Republican in Philadelphia
in 12 years and is likely to be
followed by a strong Republican
challenge to the Democrats' grip
on City Hall in the 1967 election.
REPUBLICANS SUFFERED de-
feats in several areas, however.
New Jersey Gov. Richard Hughes'
second-term victory margin over
Republican State Senator Wayne
Dumont was so large that the
Democrats gained control of both
houses of the legislature for the
first time in 52 years. It was the
worst Republican showing in New
Jersey's political history.
The only ether gubernatorial
contest .was in Virginia, where
Democrat Mills E. Godwin, a rela-
tively progressive Southern Dem-
ocrat, won handily over Republi-
can and Conservative party con-
tenders. Godwin's campaign
pledges and his support among
Negro, labor and urban groups
points to a closer relationship be-
tween Virginia Democrats and the
national party organization than
at any time in recent memory.
Repercussions of the most sig-
nificant contests were also felt
in Democratic party headquarters,
particularly in New York.
Lindsay's victory leaves Sen.
Robert F. Kennedy as the only
statewide Democratic office hold-
er of any national stature. With
New York Mayor Robert Wagner
stepping down in January after
12 years in the post, there is no
other figure to challenge Kennedy
at this time. Wagner, however,
may present a challenge at some
point in the future if he becomes
a candidate for the 1966 guberna-
torial contest. The Democrats are
conceded to have a good chance of
capturing the State House in Al-
bany next year because of the un-
popularity of Republican Gov. Nel-
son Rockefeller's state-wide sales
tax.
KENNEDY has close relations
with Democratic state chairman
John Burns. He has also establish-
ed himself as a nonfactional Dem-
ocrat by refusing to take sides
during the primary contest for
the mayoral nomination. However,
his endorsement of Beame did
antagonize some reform-minded
city Democrats who identified the
Beame ticket with party hacks
and machine politicians like Adam
Clayton Powell, Stanley Steingut
and Charles Buckley. Beame open-
ly accepted the support of these
old-line politicians as well as
other "bosses."
The only politician who might
eventually challenge Kennedy's

4

Rockefeller, who is expected to
run for re-election.
As for Lindsay's own political
'ambitions, he told newsmen who.
asked him about speculation re-
garding his Presidential possibili-
ties: "Thank you for the compli-
ment, but it is out of the question.
As far as I'm concerned, I want
to be mayor of New York and
nothing else."
It is an old political tradition
never to admit to interest in a
Presidential nomination while
holding another important politi-
cal post, particularly on the day
after election to that position.
LINDSAY'S political future will
to a large extent depend upon his
performance in the nation's sec-
ond most demanding political po-
sition. He faces staggering prob-
lems, including a growing budget
deficit, a worsening water short-
age, the worst narcotics problem in
the nation, a soaring crime rate,
inadequate city transportation, air
and water pollution, and festering
Negro and Puerto Rican ghettoes
with some of the worst slums of
any city in the country.
Furthermore, his running mates
for City Council president and
Controller were defeated because
of heavy ticket splitting. Demo-
crats control the City. Council,
30-7 and the Board of Estimates,
16-6.
However, President Johnson, in
a telegram of congratulations to
Lindsay, pledged federal aid to the
city as well as cooperation "with-
out regard to party affiliation."
The bipartisan nature of Lindsay's
campaign proposals may ease his
problems of working with long-
time Democratic politicians.
However, Lindsay will be unable
to perform any miracles unless he
takes steps to halt the city's deep-
est problem: the steady exodus of
middle-class families to the su-
burbs which leaves the stark con-
trast of expanding lower-class
slum areas surrounding an upper
and upper-middle class enclave on
the East Side and a few middle-
class districts outside Manhattan.
During the last ten years, nearly
one million white, mostly middle-

class New Yorkers have moved to
the suburbs. They have been re-
placed by poor, often unskilled
Negro and Puerto Rican laborers
and their families.
THE CITY'S JOB market has
been insufficient to cope with the
demands for service, unskilled and
semi-skilled jobs, with the result
that nearly 500,000 residents are
on relief, an increase of 40 per
cent since late 1962. A deteriorat-
ing public school system and ever-
increasing tax rates have also forc-
ed many families to flee the cities.
At the same time, a growing num-
ber of businesses are relocating in
the suburbs, where most of their
employes live.
Thus, Lindsay faces a monu-
mental; task in attempting to
strengthen the city's middle class
by making city life more pleasant,
less expensive and safer. How he
intends to accomplish. all this
without massive federal aid, which
may not be forthcoming, is still
an unanswered question. But he
does have the dedication, energy
and perservence to make a val-
iant effort.
In spite of a mixed patter na-
tionally, the luster of Lindsay's
victory cannot fail to engender
renewed optimism among progres-
sive Republicans as well as those
independents and Democrats who
have voiced concern over recent
Republican weakness and the con-
sequent threat to a healthy two-
party system.
IF THE 43-year-old Mayor-elect
can succeed where so many others
have failed, his Presidential cre-
dentials will be greatly strength-
ened. Lindsay may choose to take
the long road to the pinnacle of
political power in this country,
however. Two terms as mayor,
followed by 'a term as governor of
New York might constitute just
the kind of political training Lind-
say wants.
In 1976, he will be 54 years old,
and the country may be ripe for
a progressive Republican candi-
date whose political style and
speaking voice are reminiscent of
the late President John F. Ken-
nedy.

1*

"Goodness,

I Must Have Been Walking
In My Sleep"

Schutze s Corner:
The $64 Question

LEE HORNBERGER, '66, has
convinced Student Government
Council to hold a referendum next
November 17. Students will be able
to express their opinions of Pres-
ident Johnson's Vietnamese poli-
cy by voting yes or no.
The question is a meaty one.
Should we have a Viet Nam or
shouldn't we? A no vote would

one-armed piano player position
would be patently irresponsible.
THE NEXT QUESTION is per-
haps the most perplexing of all.
Where is Viet Nam? And why? If
Viet Nam is not in Michigan as
several reliable sources have in-
dicated, why are Michigan stu-
dents voting on Vietnamese poli-

4
I

'lz
" y , 'y'1(pl
' H4NV

' .

IFITM"'I

I

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan