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.

February 27, 1966 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1966-02-27

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


FEIFFER

a;jm £iBaillan & y
Seventy-Sixth Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

;. - _ *

opinions Are Free. - 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MICH.
with Will Prevail

NEWs PHONE: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the inidividual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This mus £ be noted in all reprints.
SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1966 NIGHT EDITOR: LEONARD PRATT

Hatcher Merits Praise
For Viet Nam Remarks

S01A PAPFE9
(AR)C1 ~~
EA
RUCoVtt-
1ACk Y! li&
FA Pae

MAC ~R56
(,JEAVE o
B6AOtFVUI1!
GAt\~g IO
Sc E; C.

MTKClY! A~p
YoUE AI'SR~1
To CRM
a

6 G E(7MC i
1kV tn&
Zal- 5~ffT;

A MUMJS
A!tRIce

STHE (COST ACTED
FRI tQY (?AV6
OF ISM
BEHAVEP
6v

"'

PRESIDENT HATCHER, who left yester-
day for a State Department-sponsored.
conference on education in Japan, will
probably return March 8 to a torrent of
criticism and abuse prompted by some re-
marks he made on the war in Viet Nam
before he left. Paul Harvey, the leaden-
tongued radio commentator, has already
started.
Ever since last fall President Hatcher,
along with Vice-Presidents Richard L.
Cutler and Allan Smith, has steadfastly
defended the right of those who are op-
posed to the war to make their views
known-despite pressure from legislators,
alumni and potential donors. Until this'
week, however, he was silent about his
own feelings on the war.
"I think it is widely held by our citizens
that something is not quite right here,"
he said Friday, saying that the increas-
Pollution
IN HIS RECENT conservation message to
the Congress, President Johnson urged
that the federal government be given
control over pollution problems at both
the interstate and intrastate levels.
At the present time, states have sole
jurisdiction over pollution problems in-
volving lakes and rivers which are con-
tained in a single state.
The centralization of pollution control
is necessary if we ever hope to reach a
solution to the problem. Under the pres-
ent system, individual states have failed
to retard the increased contamination of
rivers and streams by private industries.
A MAJOR REASON for this situation is
that the industries which are respon-
sible for pollution in many cases exert a
powerful influence in the state and local
governments. These industries often form
the economic base of a state, and the
states, therefore, fear their loss through
strict pollution control measures, and the
higher taxes necessary for such programs.
Industries cannot be expected to un-
dertake pollution control measures on
their own initiative. Waste treatment
plants are expensive undertakings and
the fierce competitiveness of American
industry is not conducive to the outlay
of these large sums of money.
The states have been given the oppor-
tunity to bring a halt to water pollution,
but their hands are tied by this relation-
ship to industry. The only course of ac-
tion remaining is to turn this power over
to the federal government which can take
a stricter approach to the pollution prob-
lem.
-JOSEPH TOMLINSON
Subscription ratea $4.50 semester by carrier ($5 by
mail); $8 yearly by carrier ($9 by mai).
Second class postage paid at Ann Arbor, Mich.

ing U.S. involvement in Viet Nam is a
"gamble." "Our response doesn't quite
seem to fit the scene," he added, declar-
ing that there is little parallel between
this war and World War II or the Korean
War.
ALTHOUGH HE, and the University, may
suffer considerably from self-appoint-
ed patriots who feel he is being "sub-
versive" in speaking his mind, President
Hatcher's statements are welcome - and
courageous for the situation is becoming
increasingly grave.
The Johnson administration evidently
contemplates committing more than 200,-
000 more troops at the minimum, with its
consequent drain on manpower at home
and further, rather well-known difficul-
ties with the Selective Service System.
The prospect of inflation, fairly strong
in view of the domestic situation, appears
even more likely as a result of the $12.7
billin supplemental appropriation for
the war.
Secretary of the Treasury Fowler told
a news conference last week that the
U.S. balance of payments position would
worsen "as a result of, the stepped-up
operations in Viet Nam," and the Penta-
gon estimated recently that the Viet Nam
escalation has added $700 million to the
total Defense Department contribution
to the payments deficit alone.
EDUCATION PROGRAMS from land-
grant college research to the National
Defense Education Act program have been
pruned, the latter being cut from $180
million to $30 million.
At the same time, however, accord-
ing to reports in yesterday's New York
Times, the administration has no plans to
continue an all out drive for a negotiated
settlement and does not believe that the
National Liberation Front should be in-
vited as an independent party to any
negotiations that may occur - despite
fresh Canadian, Ghanaian and British
contacts with the Soviet Union and North
Viet Nam.
With all this in mind, one is not sur-
prised to hear President Hatcher say
that "it is very hard to find convincing
evidence for our current policy in Viet
Nam." There is, of course, little enthus-
'iasm in parts of our society for the dis-
senter and the questioner, but Dante ob-
served long ago that the hottest fires in
hell are, reserved for those who keep
silent in times of crisis.
PRESIDENT HATCHER deserves praise
for voicing his doubts on the Viet Nam
situation, and hopefully his views added
to others' may prompt a more creative
administration policy in an increasingly
grave conflict.
-MARK R. KILLINGSWORTH
Acting Editor

V,

In

Viectory, Defeat, Stalemate:* U.S. Loses

By HARVEY WASSERMAN
Acting Editorial Director
WHAT HAPPENS if we win?
Let's say we continue win-
ning the war (if we are, in fact,
winning it) and eventually pros-
trate the North Vietnamese.
What's the future of foreign pol-
icy if the hawks are vindicated by
victory?
In last week's New York Times
appears a quote by Senator Long
of Louisiana. He said he did not
share the fears of others that
China might enter the Viet Nam,
war. Why?-
"IF THIS GREAT nation is to be
humiliated, is to be defeated and
run out and be downgraded to a
second-class power, by that little
nation (North Viet Nam), then
I wish the Red Chinese would
come in.
"It would be a great humilia-
tion for this nation to be defeated
by a small nation of 16 million
people. If we must be defeated, it
would be better to lose to a na-
tion of 700 million people."
Noble sentiment. But reports
from Saigon indicate that the

United States is preparing for a
war effort to span from three to
seven years. That means that if
we can't win, at least we're not
going to lose, and to prove it, of-
ficials are planning in some in-
stances for "400 to 500 American
dead, and about 15,000 wounded,
per month."
SO, SENATOR LONG, you
might rest assured that the 200
million of the United States are
going to be fully deployed to
overcome the humiliating 16 mil-
lion Vietnamese. And if we lose
to China, we can always hold
what's left of our head high in
the air and say "they outnumber-
ed us."
But let us say we succeed in
demolishing the North Vietna-
mese and holding off those 700
million Chinese possibilities?
One, a rejuvenation of jingo-
ism. Having beaten our foes in
Viet Nam will our country stop to
fear anybody else anywhere?
TWO, A FLOOD of contempt
for dissenters to the war. Mor-
ality tends to lose its validity as
an issue in the face of victory.

We should begin to hear cries of
"coward," and "we've done it be-
fore, we can do it again" to critics
of future "police actions" of this
sort.
Finally, a war psychology. The
cult of the Green Berets (which
besides leaving a "percentage" of
Sgt. Barry Sadler's cut to widows
and orphans, has made and con-
tinues to make RCA a fortune),
the headlong forces of our anti-
communist urges, and the war
industry will all be given a huge
shot in the arm.
If we win, and win decisively,
we can expect more and more in-
terventions, more and more high-
flying foreign policy, more and
m o r e headstrong, snowballing
thinking about our role in the
world around us.
BUT SAY WE LOSE. Say the
Vietnamese beat us at their guer-
illa game. Or say the Chinese en-
ter the war and push us, as they
might well be able to do in a jun-
gle land war, all the way back to
the Phillipines.
Well, when World War I was
over and the United States lost its
chances for what it saw as a truly

definitive victory in the conflict
between confused Wilsonian ideal-
ism and a partisan Congress, what
happened? A frustrated country,
undergoing serious recession vent-
ed its energies in a fearsome red
scare, complete with Alien and Se-
dition Acts.
Even a substantial and highly
legitimized opposition to thewar,
much like the one we see now,
was powerless to stop the post-
war reaction. Thirty years later,
a military struggle without vic-
tory was accompanied by Senator
McCarthy.
NOW AGAIN our country faces
a war with possible defeat and lit-
tle chance of sweeping military
"victory." There is some doubt
as to just how long our pacifying
consumer economy can offer all
the good things of life under the
strain of war. Do the signs, then,
point to another cycle of McCar-
thyism?
The United States has never
really "lost" a war. Maybe that's
why she keeps insisting on fight-
ing them. If she wins big in Viet
Nam, we can look for more tries
elsewhere, and a reinforcement of

quite an undesireable psychology
within the country.
It seems highly unlikely that we
will lose big in Viet Nam, but if
we do, the past indicates a "scare"
reaction at home which would be
disastrous. The holding type ac-
tion-the war of attrition we are
fighting, with the Chinese mon-
ster just on the sidelines, seems a
good bet to go on for years and
years with any number of effects,
both in attitudes toward foreign
policy and towards domestic dis-
sent. The last alternative at least
offers the prospect of wearying
the country of war, but the cost
of getting the' country tried of
such things may be 50,000 plus
dead and 180,000 wounded per
year on the American side alone,
If we are faced with a long, frus-
trating war, are we going to be
correspondingly weary of chasing
"the commies" out of our govern-
ment, army, and haylofts? Or is
it a good bet the country will
again turn into a frustrated mon-
ster ripping its insides out to vent
those frustrations?
IN THE STALEMATE-as in de-
feat and in victory-we lose.

4p

4,

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
Open Letter to Director Jack Hood Vaughn

4

>00
,.t' :,
s rn(' ,. [. 1 r~t f ,r ' y i t a9 a. .. a.",, " s
'T 4 r h. ,,e,' i.S
7 s~i 4 f t t ly t M" b .4 f .:, x ;.

Al

IT

To the Editor:
AN OPEN LETTER TO
JACK HOOD VAUGHN
YOU PROBABLY KNOW that
there is some displeasure
among former Volunteers over
your appointment as Director of
the Peace Corps. This letter is an
attempt to clarify some issues.
I and other PCVs with whom
I have talked on this campus have
objected to your appointment in
one way or another since it was
first announced. Though this let-
ter is in my name only we feel it
is a fair summary of the feelings
of many former Volunteers who
object to your appointment.
None of us doubt your admin-
istrative ability or your sincerity
in executing your duties while
with the Latin American Division
of the Peace Corps. Our objection
centers around your defense of
administration policy in the Do-
minican Republic.
You have in fact become a
symbol of that policy through
your role as State Department
spokesman. Herein lies our ob-
jection: Your being Peace Corps
Director places a burden on the
Volunteers in Latin America in
their attempts to establish a rap-
port with the people with whom
they are trying to work.
IF THE PEACE CORPS Volun-
teers were trying to work with the
landed oligarchy, who would share
your enthusiasm for military in-
tervention, then our objection
would not be valid. We could then
just write the Peace Corps off as
an extension of the whims of
Johnson and Mann. But not many
of us feel that this is what Ken-
nedy intended.
Because we feel the necessity
for political and economic bene-
fits and freedom for all Latin
Americans, we object to the mili-
tary occupation of the Dominican
Republic, and more particularly to
your defense of that policy and all
that it obviously stands for.
We leave ourselves open to the
charge of not understanding the
internal machinations of the cor-
ridors of power and that your de-
fense of administration policy was
nannqnc.r o hahte to fiLoht the

public. This, in turn, handicaps
the PCVs in Latin America in
their attempts at meaningful
communication with most Latin
Americans outside of the various
oligarchies. This emasculates the
Volunteer of one of the most
important justifications for his
presence in the host country.
FOR THESE REASONS we ob-
ject, Mr. Vaughn, to your being
Director of the Peace Corps.
-James Bass, Grad
PCV/Peru
Treason'
To the Editor:
MR. VAN EGMOND states in
his February 25th letter that
YAF refused to distribute Mr.
Stormer's book because "they
seemed to think as does Mr. Kil-
lingsworth, that it was a divisive
little paperback that should
rather have been burned."
Apparently, Mr. Van Egmond
and his friend did not share these
feelings, for they admit to passing
out the book. Mr. Van Egmond
justifies Mr. Stormer's cloak-and-
dagger libel on the grounds that
it doesn't matter what one says,
rather one's goal is the only im-
portant concern. The end justifies
the means-is that it, Chairman
Van Egmond?
Mr. Van Egmond boldly hacks
up our "little young editor in ox-
fords" on grounds that fanatic
Mark Killingsworth has no knowl-
edge of the Birch Society. Does
Mr. Van Egmond have this knowl-
edge himself? Does he know if the
society is itself democratic? Has
he read Mr. Welch's prolific docu-
ments - the "Bluebook" or the
"Black Book" (sometimes called
"The Politician) ?
IS HE FAMILIAR with this
sentence from the latter-"My
firm belief that Dwight Eisen-
hower is a dedicated, conscious
agent of the Communist conspir-
acy is based on an accumulation
of detailed evidence so extensive
and so palpable that it seems to
put this conviction beyond any
reasonable doubt."
Will Mr. Van mmond defend

ought to be vitally concerned with
means, for this very point is their
most cogent criticism of Com-
munism, which, I might remind
these men, has ends and goals
equal or superior to those of De-
mocracy. (Anyone familiar with
Marx is aware of this fact.)
THE PROBLEM is to approach
these common ends in a humane,
just manner. Part of the solution
is to realize that the pot of gold
is at the end of the rainbow, not
somewhere in the middle as our
conservative friends would lead us
to believe.
-Martin Kane, '68
Bus Ad Library
To the Editor:
IT IS paradoxical that the library
of the School of Business Ad-
ministration is one of the least ef-
ficiently-run libraries on campus.
Don't the librarians ever peek in-
side the worn covers of the many
assigned reading materials which
they religiously and repeatedly
dispense?
One would think that in the
mere handling of such a large
amount of business wisdom, at
least some of it would rub off on
the librarians. They certainly
must have dropped Prof. Moore's
"Management" text at least once.
When it fell open to the list of
management principles, why didn't
they read and apply them?
Note the following grossly in-
efficient practices:
LOW TURN-OVER of stock. A
firm purchases stock to sell it,
not to admire it on their shelves.
The business administration li-
brary likes to keep their shelves
full of books 'so we don't lose
them.'
Over the holidays, the business
administration library refused to
lend me a circulation book be-
cause 'we only charge books for
one week, and we would rather not
have the books leaving!Ann Arbor
("The Athens of the West"), since
some would probably be lost.' The
question is, does the library exist
to house the books, or are the
hnn to h eur9

customer tells Pappa that he
wants a can of peas. Pappa goes
to the shelf, and brings back the
peas. Customer sees peas, decides
he would rather have early June
peas. Pappa returns other peas to
shelf, gets early June. Customer
doesn't like that brand. Process
repeated.
Student, armed withi fist-full of
call slips, asks librarian for a book.
Librarian gets book from stacks,
upstairs. Student looks at table of
contents and index, concludes he
can't use it. Asks for another one.
Librarian/runner r e t u r n s first
book to stacks, gets second one.
Process repeated. Finally, student
finds one he can use, but he is
not .sure that there is not a better
one right in that section of books.
Today we have supermarkets for
the same reason that we have open
stacks. It is a waste of my time

SchtesCorner:
Maternal Approach.

!/
t ...
,.
r t
r
..

* _. lit - , .
up~

and the librarians to engage in
this hit-and-miss relay process of
selecting books from closed stacks.
QUEUING FOR reserved read-
ings.. All assigned readings are
kept behind the desk. Each stu-
dent in each class must fill out a
call slip for each assigned read-
ing. There are a limited number
of librarians, and an almost in-
finite number of assigned reading
materials. The many students
have to wait for the few librarians
to perform a middleman function
in distributing the reserve mate-
rials.
Why not copy the system of the
graduate reading reserve room in
thb general librai, by placing the
reserve material on open stock,
eliminating the inefficient use of
a librarian/middleman.
-Donald E. Nelson, Grad

4

A LOT OF MONEY is being spent
on the study of automobile
safety. If I may offer a sugges-
tion, I would like to point out
that, after all, the proper study
of safety is Mother.
If mothers could be strictly de-
nied the right to drive, park, dis-
cuss, or sit in the front seat of
motorized vehicles, automobile
safety would surely enjoy its big-
gest boost since the invention of
the brake.
My own mother, as long as
we're on this topic, happens to be
a uniquely appropriate example
of the maternal attitude toward
automobiles, or, as we call it at
home, the doctrine of mechanical
existentialism.
SHE REGARDS all control de-
vices-steering wheels, foot ped-
als, gear shifts, et al-as a collec-
tive insult to her dignity, her
imagination, and her native free
will: she refuses therefore to dig-
nify them with more than occa-
siirn-,a 1 nbeknn1tPAdmc n+f f +h

near those places she wills it to
go.
Gasoline stations, however, are
far beyond the car's ability. Moth-
er, who is generally compassionate
in her treatment of clumsy ma-
chines, almost always gives the
automobile a decent chance by
allowing it to park a safe hundred-
yards from the nearest gasoline
pump.
THEN, from herquiet station
on the far edge of the parking lot,
she firmly instructs the first at-
tendant who passes within ear-
shot to "fill my car up" (her
own phrase).
Most of the local pump jockeys
know my mother by sight in the
day, by voice at night. Those who
do, never fail to inform her po-
litely that, "I'm very sorry, Mrs.
Schutze, but we're fresh out of
gasoline. I guess you'll just have
to go away. Why don't you have
your husband bring it in tomor-
row morning." That was my fath-
er's idea

4

I vw_%\Nb '"I W.Palfflff V%111 A I

- I

Back to Top

© 2017 Regents of the University of Michigan