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

A Modest Proposal for Studying Us

0

Where Opinions Are Free. 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN APBoR, Micii.
Truth Will Preval

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.
SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1966 NIGHT EDITOR: LAURENCE KIRSHBAUM-
Ngr Vote Is Crulal
For Republican Party

(First of a Two-Part Series)
By MICHAEL HEFFER
PERHAPS the major difference
between human beings and
animals is the close personal re-
lationships which the former de-
velops through the workings of
society. Any human who has de-
cided to be a part of society, even
one who tries to be as remote as
possible, must come into close con-
tact with fellow beings.
Most likely the overwhelming
number of incidents of contact
with fellow men are discounted
as "everyday," "minor," "insig-
nificant," or "unrevealing." Yet
an observant human, with some
insight as to what it means to
be human, can deduce impressive
biographies of minor acquaint-
ences or even strangers.
Maybe this is too "Sherlockian"
for most people. Maybe they have
realized that their fellows are not
shallow strangers but sensitive
people like themselves, and this
has caused them to abandon hope
of "figuring" their fellows out.
Maybe people are just too lazy, or
uninterested, or lacking in imag-
ination or just too stupid to at-
tempt, let alone to succeed in un-
locking the secrets that are "that
other fellow."

IDEALLY, the studies of our
universities - histo'y, sociology,
psychology, even English, and
others - should aid us in placing
ourselves next to men within a
context that enables us to see
what men have done, why they
acted, or what rationales they
used, how they viewed their con-
temporaries and what they knew
about each other. A history of
man, based on these general areas,
seems to be basically what I want
most to know. It thus seems to
me to be the basic stuff of a
liberal education.
I would divide liberal education
into the above, the natural
sciences, and miscellania like lan-
guages. Actually, any social science
or humanities courses shold take
me ("transport" if you like) into
another area in which I can view
men from a different time, or
from a different angle. One thing
about this university is that even
on the basic level it must make
you question.
Questioning one's society is not
a process that should ever end,
but I think that for most of us,
this questioning, even when it
begins on an individual level, does
not attempt to discover how the
individual works. What I have in
mind here may be something you
categorize under psychology, or

something I am just not up to in
my studies, or something one is
supposed to do on one's own, or
maybe just something that goes
under experience, but I seem to
feel that if it is not taught it
should be, and if it is, the instruc-
tion is insufficient.
I don't suppose (now with
tongue in cheek) that I am won-
dering anything new, but since it
is something I have never put
down before, well, it's all pretty
much news to me.
LET US TAKE something
simple, the logical, most immedi-
ate consequence of what I con-
sider tonbe widespread ignorance
about one's fellow, and how close
we actually are to each other, and
see where it leads us.
TACT. Tell me why some people
have it, and some don't? Tact.
"Sensitive mental perception, dis-
cernment." Where do they teach
it?
SENSITIVITY. If I thought
men lacked sensitivity through
dullness, I might give up and
emigrate to Tonga. If I thought
they lacked it through selfishness
I might also give up, but this is
closer to the truth. I am not going

to charge my fellow beings with
dullness, stupidity, selfishness,
lazyness or anything else as the
factor that causes men not to un-
derstand men-but they help.
I brought up tact because I
have a feeling that there must be
something behind the perception
involved. I wish to find it because
I wish to know if it can be taught.
Actually I am sure it cannot be
taught, but it can be utilized if
men do want to know each other.
What I want is some way of put-
ting people in other people's
places, much as if one were Sher-
lock and wished to discover the
criminal involved. My course
would be a seminar, and it would
take about two years.
First, the beginning of the
course is like a lab, People are
taught to analyze other people.
This is done basically by teaching
students what to look for in per-
sonal meetings. One learns what
one can tell about a person before
he speaks, i.e. if his eyes are black
and his nose crooked, he is a thief.
However, if he is also short and
bald he is a censor. One learns
what the fellow actually means

when he says something. Then one
learns how to fit background ma-
terial into the picture of the per-
son, and most importantly what
to say to him and how he will
react to what you say.
AFTER ONE LEARNS how to
communicate through knowiedge
to the individual, one learns about
groups, then bringing this material
to analyze individuals of groups.
The ultimate aim of this program
is the understanding of everything
in the world except what the world
is and what the individual is. This
I have not discovered yet.
Perhaps you are still not con-
vincedy In that case I will let
you in on my secret-I have been
taking the course. I tachmyself.
At this very moment I am pre-
pared to show what I have learned
about understanding the stranger
about whom almost nothing is
known by delivering of myself
Tuesday a perceptive editorial, to
which the above has been merely
the preface, on "Why George
Romney should not (and hopefully
will not) be President"-much to
his surprise and chagrin.

THE GOLDWATER FIASCO of 1964 has
touched off a great reevaluation of the
Republican party. This weekend's Young
Republican civil rights conference serves
to illuminate the dilemma facing the par-
ty today,
The dlemna is simply this: the Re-
publicans must either broaden their base
of support by wooing such traditional
"out groups" as the Negro population
at the risk of losing some of their
staunchest past supporters, or they must
seek to shore up the present crumbling
rural-small town conservative coalition
at the risk of permanent enfeeblement.
The crux of the dilemma is illustrated
in a publicity letter sent out by the con-
ference organizers. "In the fall elections
of 1964," it states, "more than 95 per cent
of the American Negro population chose
to cast their votes against the Republi-
can party."
Implicit in that statement is the fact
that in the last campaign, the party ap-
peared to make a decision to write off
the Negro vote in order to entice South-
ern segregationists and try to garner the
illusory "white backlash."
THE GOP has thus become a political
anachronism. The attempt to build a
Inormation Dept.
FOR THE BEST illustration of adminis-
tration-in-action this month, we nom-
inate Temple University's bureaucracy for
its diligent and conscientious view of the
arrest of two Temple students on narcot-
ics charges:
Temple President Gladfelter referred
all calls to Dean of Men Carl M. Grip. Dr.
Grip referred all calls to Albert Carlisle,
Temple's director of public information.
Carlisle said, "The university will not
make any statement about the situation
until more is known about the whole
case."
-M. R. KILLINGSWORTH
Editorial Staff
ROBERT JOHNSTON, Editor
LAURENCE KIRSHBAUM, Managing Editor
JUDITH FIELDS ...... Personnel Director
LAUREN BAHR ... Associate Managing Editor
JUDITH WARREN........Assistant Managing Editor
'AIL BLUMBERG ................. Magazine Editor
TOM WEINBERG ...................... Sports Editor
LLOYD GRAFF..............Associate Sports Editor
PETER SARASOHNC............ontributing Editor
NIGHT EDITORS: Robert Carney. Clarence Fanto,
Mark Kiiingswnrth, John Meredith. Leonard Pratt.
Har% ey Wasserman, Bruce Wasserstein, Charlotte
Wolter.
DAY EDITORS: Babette Cohn, Michael Heffer, Merle
Jacob, Robert Moore, Roger Rapoport, Dick Wing-
field-
ASSISTANT NIGHT EDTTORS: Alice Bloch, Deborah
Bluin, Neal Bruss, Gall Jnrgenson, Robert Kivans,
Laurence Medow, Nell Shister, Joyce Winslow
ASSISTANT DAY EDITORS: Richard Charin, Jane
Dreyfuss Susan Elan, Shirley Rosick, Robert Shiler,
Alan valuse.
Business Staff
CY WELLMAN. Business Manager
ALAN OLUECKMAN .......Advertising Manager
SUSAN CRAWFORD ..Associate Business Manager
JOYCE FEINBERG. ...............Finance Manager
MANAGERS: Harry Bloch, Bruce Hillman, Marline
Kuelthau, Jeffrey Leeds, Gail Levin, Susan Perl-
stadt, vic Ptasznik Elizabeth Rhein, Ruth Segall,
Jill Tozer, Elizabeth Wieman.
Subscription rate $4.50 semester ny carrier ($5 by
mail): $8 yearly by carrier $9 by ail
second class postage paid at Ann Arbor, Mich.

two-party system in the South on the
basis of segregation is a futile task, for
beneath the surface of massive resist-
ance, the old South is disappearing. It is
no longer an underdeveloped region with-
in the United States, for the industriali-
zation of Dixie is causing great pressures
to be exerted on the caste system. Atti-
tudes of segregation are slowly being
stamped out by the productive demands
of a modern economy.
If the election returns of 1964 were not
enough, results last fall in Cleveland
(where a Negro was very nearly elected
mayor) and in Detroit (where Common
Council candidates branded as anti-Ne-
gro ran very poorly)rshould lay the ghost
of white backlash forever.
To heighten Republican woes, the num-
ber of Americans who profess belief in
the traditional conservative dogmas, and
who have thus always been the buttress
of Republicanism, are shrinking. A large
proportion of today's electorate grew up
during the depression, and despite affili-
ation with the Republican party it re-
members with some fondness the New
Deal's welfare measures.
Emotional appeals to "creeping welfar-
ism" are likely to be as unsuccessful as
racism, for polls have shown that the vast
majority of the voters are in favor of
such programs as medicare.
IT IS CLEAR that in order to have any
sort of future at all, the Republican
party will have to broaden its base of
support. The myth of the hidden mil-
lions of disenfranchised conservative vot-
ers has been dispelled, and the party can
obviously not gain power by moving fur-
ther to the right.
It is not inconceivable for the Repub-
lican party to pick up much Negro sup-
port. There has been increasing aliena-
tion of Negro leadership and the Demo-
cratic party. As one leader, who is orga-
nizing Negroes in Chicago for the South-
ern Christian Leadership Conference,
said: "What we need is a party outside of
the Democratic party that will deal with
the real issues." He added, however, that
the Republican party has not yet provid-
ed a viable alternative.
This is not to say that gaining Negro
support will begin to solve all the prob-
lems facing the GOP. If every Negro voter
in the country had voted for Barry Gold-
water in 1964, Johnson still would have
been elected president. Nevertheless, a
step towards the active recruiting of Ne-
gro votes could be the beginning of a Re-
publican comeback.
THE TASK will be painful and difficult.
Many Negroes have developed a deep
and probably justified animosity to-
wards the GOP. In seeking to woo Negro
support, the party will have to sacrifice
some of the precious little backing it cur-
rently enjoys.
However, faced as it is by a dilemma,
the Republican party must tackle the
horn which will bring it the most satis-
factory support in the long run. The con-
tinued insistence of the party to ignore
the needs and desires of 20 million Amer-
icans poses a threat that neither the Re-
publicans nor the two party system can
afford.
-STEVE WILDSTROM

What Is a Conservative?

By BOB AULER
Collegiate Press Service
THE TIME is 11:30 p.m. We're
sitting in the third booth along
the wall, and the waitress hasn't
been around to refill the coffee
cups for 20 minutes, and it's easy
to infer a subtle hint to leave and
make way for somebody else.
But the conversation has grown
too animated to allow such a
thing.
"But you're a Conservative,
aren't you?" she says. "Why
aren't you for freedom of associa-
tion? Why shouldn't a private or-
ganization like a fraternity or a
sorority have a right to choose its
members on any basis the mem-
bers wish?"
So there it is again.
THE SAME OLD question that
keeps confronting those on cam-
pus who consider themselves con-
servatives, but who fail to find in
their conservatism an excuse for
bigotry.
Perhaps the best way to handle
the query would be to do what a
professor teaching an introduc-
tory philosophy course had done
long ago with another presuppos-
ing inquiry, and simply say, "Your
question is wrong." Then just sit
and watch the conversation stop
for a second or two.
BtT A REAL answer would have
to begin by making it clear that
THIS conservative certainly does
believe in freedom, under the Con-
stitution: to form and participate
in any kind of a private group
which they wish.
True freedom cannot agree that
there is only one acceptable choice
to be made, and that any con-
trary exercise must be corrected
by the government.
Thus a private association must
have the rights to establish itself
upon a totally stupid basis if it
wishes, without fear of being
"corrected" by subtle govern-
mental pressure.
In other words, private groups
should have the right to be
wrong, but branches of the gov-
ernment should not.
When a private group dips into
the public till, even indirectly,
then the group ceases to be pri-
vate and becomes more or less of
an arm of the government. The
members of the private group
have surrendered their right to do
exactly as they please in return
for a dole. At this point, the
s t a n d a r d for their conduct
changes from what is permissible
for private groups and individ-

uals, to what is proper for a gov-
ernment to do to its citizens.
And that standard is a much
more rigid one. It clearly includes
the principle that preferring one
citizen over another for reasons
like race is improper. The basis
of the impropriety is the fact that
citizens of all races are called up-
on to pay taxes at the same rates,
and to shed blood for the same
national causes.
So how does the abstraction ap-
ply to fraternities and sororities?
SIMPLY BY the fact that they
are no longer private associations
in a meaningful sense. They have
surrendered their independence in
return for assistance by the gov-
ernment (the university), and
with the independence went the
right to be arbitrary in admission
policies.
One may argue strongly that
the university has no business re-
quiring people mature enough to
live on their own as telephone op-
erators and sheet metal workers
to reside in "approved" housing.

an institution, it bestows a con-
siderable financial advantage
over other private landlords.
Fraternities and sororities ray
have some mystical component,
but legally they are nothing more
than corporations in the business
of renting approved housing to
undergraduate students.
SINCE THEY are happy enough
to accept the benefits of govern-
mental approval (things like use
of university facilities, IBM ma-
chines, paid deans for the Greek
system, stunt shows and police
protection) they should not shrink
back into "private" arguments
when the governments demands
that a PUBLIC standard of con-
duct be obeyed.
If the fraternities and sororities
want to become truly private or-
ganizations once again, meeting in
somebody's house, and not accept-
ing public benefits like "approved"
privileges, then let them discrim-
inate as they please.
In the meanwhile, student X
should continue to have the right
to insist that they be considered
part of the government in regard
to discrimination.

"Speak Right Up-Just Pretend I'm Not Here"

i

But as long as the
does insist upon this
hangs the "approved"

university
when it
tag upon

Letters,
To the Editor:
OBVIOUSLY the editor of The
Daily felt that Mr. Living-
ston's letter suggesting we impress
persons of our penal institutions
for military duty in Viet Nam had
merit or he would not have print-
ed it.
Both Mr. Livingston and The
Daily staff, I feel, have failed to
understand the intent and nature
of our Selective Service.
The name "Selective Service"
implies that the defense comple-
ment is composed of individuals
selected for duty in our defense
units based upon our country's
needs and not a "collecting pot"
for the untalented and unemploy-
ed. The concept "citizenry obli-
gation" becomes particularly poig-
nant now that war is being thrust
more and more upon us, and now
is a very good time to review the
obligations of the citizen in times
of national crisis.
THERE WAS a time in this
country when one could purchase
another man to take his place in
the army. This practice has long
since been abandoned and Mr.
Livingston should ask himself
why. The prospects of going into
the army are not particularly

Two Views of the Draft

bright at the present time but the
answer is not shift the "hot pota-
to" but to stop looking for some-
one else to take his place.
This suggestion does not do
credit to the individual, the army,
or the penal institutions. To many
a suggestion that the individuals
that have benefited most in this
country in terms of health, econ-
omic status, cultural advantages,
and education, be the first to go
is not far fetched at all. We
should not confuse our reasoning
in times of war so that we ship
our convicts, mentally unstable,
and in other ways undesirable, to
the front lines. This is not the
aim of the Selective Service, and
of course would not be at all
democratic. A commander of any
front-line fighting unit selects the
best men he can for a particular
job.
If you were a commander, or a
private, on patrol in the jungle of
Viet Nam, would you want the
"point" man or the man behind
you to be a convict of a henious
crime or even a minor crime, or
would you want a healthy stable
person resigned to doing his job
who wasn't always complaining,
"Why do I have to be here?" The
suggestion sounds as if it were
written not with the needs of our
country, or the soldier in Viet
Nam in mind, but of a student
temporarily deferred from the
draft.
IT DOESN'T do much credit to
our penal institutions when our
penal institutions are trying to,
be rehabilitory in nature, and the
suggestion that we impress them
into combat sounds as if we were
trying to solve our problems and
not theirs. Elimination is not re-
habilitation.
I think we should up-grade our
concept of military obligation and
of our individual motives.
-Kent Williams, '68
Guilty of Wat?
To the Editor:
MOST COUNTRIES in the world
today have a curious legal
device for feeding the fires of
Hell. It is called conscription, or
"The Draft."' In this country,
however, the draft is basically un-
constitutional. Many young men

I speak of the famous twenty-nine,
some of whom are having their
classifications changed to I-A by
local administrative boards. One
out of every five draftees are being
sent to our illegal war in Viet
Nam. It is conceivable that a
drafted protester could be sent to
Viet Nam.. . and killed in action.
The decision that would start the
fatal chain of events would.be a
local board classification change
used as punishment for "obstruct-
ing the work of the local board."
Supposedly the people of the
United States are to be protected
from action by the government of
that sort. The reclassifications
have a possibility of violating the
fifth and eighth amendments to
the Constitution, about trial by
jury and no excessive punishment,
respectively.
THE QUESTION should arise
as to whether or not the protest-
ers were hampering the work of
the draft board. Just who, spe-
cifically, was hampering the work?
Was it the fellow sitting by the
door, or the one in the middle of
the floor, or was it the reporter
who tied up the phone during the

whole demonstration? Obviously
one or two people demonstrating
alone would not have hampered
the board, so the entire group, (in-
cluding the reporter) should be
punished equally for the obstruc-
tion.
Only, the girls cannot be re-
classified, and some of the boys
who are eligible for reclassification
were not. The point is, that in this
case, local board action is too
arbitrary to be just, fair, and con-
stitutional, and therefore, reclas-
sification cannot be used as a
punishment because it does vio-
late a person's rights.
The violation may not seem
very important, because after all,
they're 'only Vietniks and mis-
guided children. But, good people,
if they can lose their rights that
easily, so can you. A country that
does not allow protest has lost
its free dom: If my brother is not
free, so am I not free.
In short, the only legal crime
the protesters can be convicted of
justly, is trespassing. We are truly
slaves if there be crimes of con-
science.
-Brian J. Issaacson, '69

4

9

An Immoral Choice'


FEIFFER

CYd()'O()1T
U04W '1k AHeC
FOR
YvovP

MIDI
-2 LS
t FIa.C

COMO2AA~4TC
LOW* £OIAL'*IJTW
MQ'A H AS M'( KIND
OMEP you.
WAARE!
OLT IMAT
BETRAYAJ1

By MARSHALL LASSER
LAST WEEK Ann Arbor's aca-
demic world was given a rare
opportunity to view in movie form
the distressing immorality of mod-
ern day America. Exemplified by
riots, twist parties, Billy So Estes,
Bobby Baker et al., and contrasted
with the purity and glory of the
days of the Founding Fathers, this
era was clearly seen as mired in
moral decay.
Shown by the Young Dems,
"Choice," originally Republican
propaganda for the 1964 election,
was about as successful here as
an Old Time Religion revival would
be-and for much the same rea-
son. It failed to convince a soul
because it was a vision of clouded
eyes, of mixed-up perspective and
mixed-up thinking. This movie
would warp the definition of im-
morality out of significance.
To begin with, what does a
twist party have to do with the

Age of Harding? Is their reason-
ing so twisted that they can com-
plain "but when the people pro-
test, they only get one answer..
put the lid on?" Most often, it is
their block of the political spec-
trum that feels the lid should be
clamped on unpatriotic war pro-
testors, on "radicals" and on
"agitators."
But the biggest failure of the
movie is in its unrecognition of
the nation's most pervasive and
destructive immorality-prejudice.
The prejudice of white against
black, black against white, Chris-
tians against Jews, prejudice that
these "flag wavers" are too willing
to ignore.
AND IF this is a nation in de-
cay, a nation letting itself go to
seed, why is there a war on pov-
erty, why is there medicare, why
did anybody bother to pass civil
rights bills?
Rightists of their ilk may com-

*
U

WKjg
IO v..1C
Y~

'r. wP R T AT C
CAS} PUAcp 7DT

IT A xii A1.50

t' fJVC F 1 ~ j
1TO B3UY ~v1v





T