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


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.

March 09, 1966 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1966-03-09

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

Seventy-Sixth Year

March 9: Regents and Ballot-Splitting-

>e Are Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ASBOR, MICH.'
1l Prevail

NEws PHONE: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the inidividual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
The War.in.Viet Nam:
Which Side AreW eO1?

Acting Associate Managing Editor
THE FACULTY advisory com-
mittee on the selection of the
next University President, which
the Senate Advisory Committee on
University Affairs will form March
21, may, well begin its life like
most new organizations-wonder-
ing where to start first.
Student Government Council's
elections will be over that Wed-
nesday and it will be able to join
with Graduate Student Council
to form the student advisory com-
mittee for the next President's
selection. And it too will not know
just what is expected of it, prob-
ably not even what it expects of
Both groups could begin to solve
their problems and in the process
help the selection a good deal by
sitting down with one another
and commonly defining some of
their objectives. The Regents also
would be helped a good deal if a
common faculty-student presen-
tation were made to them at this
point; it would give them some
outside advice at a time when they
have had very little.

TWO PRINCIPAL dangers for
both the faculty and the student
committee would be avoided by
such a meeting of the minds right
now. The first problem that would
be avoided would be the lack of
coordination between faculty and
students that can be so fatal to
the advisory system which the
Regents have created.
When the Regents split the
representation of the two groups,
they created, intentionally or not,
a situation that could easily re-
sult in the isolation of the groups
from one another.
This situation might lead both
committees to become parochial
in their outlook and limited in the
kinds of things they are willing to
consider relevant to the selection
process. The Regents would ob-
tain the advice, but it would be in
danger of being restricted by the
in-bred nature of the committees.'
Such a fragmentation would ob-
viate the committees' reason for
being: the presentation to the
Regents of a wide range of inter-
pretations about the proper na-
ture of the University.

thus leave the Regents in effective
isolation from the University com-
munity, that very body which their
decisions will most affect.
Moreover, the areas with which
the Regents should be most con-
cerned in selecting a President are
those areas in which the faculty
and the students have a common
interest: scheduling, academic re-
forms or grading. Yet these areas
cannot begin to be well defined
until the students and faculty sit
down and begin to define them.
These vital areas of common in-
terest will be considered by the
Regents separately and in dif-
ferent contexts as the advisory
groups report individually. They
need more coordination than that.
Neither do the two advisory
bodies owe one another any less
than their mutual education.
There are important perspectives
on the University which faculty
and students can offer one an-
other. Both comprise the Univer-
sity, and for either to ignore the
other in its recommendations to
the Regents would be for them to
ignore their closest campus soul

THE SECOND major problem,
that a joint meeting would help
to solve, is the possible competi-
tiveness between the advisory
committees. This danger should,
certainly not be exaggerated; no
one expects either group to at-
tempt to cut the other's throat on
any proposal.
But the dual situation as it now
exists is certainly very conducive
to the creation of a "we-they"
relationship between the two that
can be nothing but harmful. The
natural tendencies of each group
to feel that it' alone knows the
University best must be combated;
neither alone knows the University
completely - together they can
build a fairly concrete picture of
Nor'can the Regents themselves
afford anything less than a Joint
faculty-student effort at advising
them of the University's needs.
They created the two committees
to provide themselves with a wider
perspective on the University's
needs and prospective Presiden-
tial candidates than they could
assemble themselves.

ever, neither faculty nor students
will be able to capably fulfill this
task in isolation from the other.
The Regents will thus be ill served
by any faculty or student recom-
mendations which are not made in
consultation with the other group.
All of which is to say that struc-
ture will out, that the natural
tendency of separate groups is to
divide their area of concern, not
unify it.
To a degree this consideration is
irrelevant; as has been noted by
some, the students' and the fac-
ulty's suggestions to the Regents
will be taken insofar as they are
relevant and helpful to the selec-
tion process. Structural considera-
tions, however, do not dispute this
They show rather that, in order
to be relevant and helpful, the
advisory groups' structures must
be more unified than they are
now, whether that unification be
requested by the Regents or as
informal as that suggested above.
To make relevant suggestions both
groups need each other and under
the present arrangements they are
quite isolated.

PRESIDENT JOHNSON, the most vaunt-
ed domino player in the world, hasn't
been doing very well lately. In fact his
pet, domino theory, appears to have boom-
President Johnson's pragmnatic ap-
proach to the military situation in Viet
Nam appears to have one minor failing;
rather than halt the spread of Commu-
nism, his policy has actually aided "the
Communist cause."
FIRST, U.S. MILITARY intervention has
widened the influence of Communist
China in Southeast Asia. The North Viet-
namese, a people historically opposed, to
Red China, have been forced into a close
alliance with their northern neighbor.
And by widening the. scale of the fight-
ing in Southeast Asia, the war is helping
to create the chaotic conditions under
which Communism flourishes. ,
Should the conflict grow much larger,
Russia and China may resolve their ideol-
ogical battle to unite in a vastly strength-
ened Communist front. Most important,
the conflict is aiding the "Communist
cause" in underdeveloped countries
around the world.
It is common knowledge that the Com-
munist parties in the world today are split
into a large number .of ideological camps.
However, the war has tended to make the
Communists forget their differences in,
common opposition to the United States.
The Viet Cong and the North Vietna-
mese have become increasingly depend-
ent upon China for, military support in
the war. This naturally widens the Chi-
nese influence in Viet Nam.
MOREOVER, U.S. military efforts along
the Ho 'Chi Minh Trail in Laos and
Cambodia have widened the scale of the
fighting in those countries. This has in-
creased the Communist infiltration of
men and' weapons, making both these
areas part of a war zone. The United
States freely admits that, under the con-
ditions created by war, the economic and
social changes necessary to the establish-
ment of real social stability in these areas
cannot be attained.
As long as the United States continues
to widen the war zone in Southeast Asia
its aim of creating political and, ultimate-
ly, social stability will be unobtainable. In
other words, the American military effort

in Southeast Asia is creating the chaos
under which a democratic form of gov-
ernment can never succeed.
BUT BEYOND the direct implications of
the fighting are two developments that
may be far more important to American
foreign policy than the war itself.
First, the ideological battle between
Communist China and Russia seems to be
nearing a cease-fire. Both countries area,
outraged over American efforts in Viet
Nam. As a result they sound increasingly
willing to forget their many differences.
If China and Russia should join forces
the Communist bloc would be immeasur-
ably strengthened. One key reason why
Communist expansion has had limited
success in recent years is that the diver-
gent courses taken by Russia and China
have neutralized each other's efforts at
political conversion. In other words, to
continue escalation of the Viet Nam war
is to risk creating a far more imposing
Communist threat.
our policy in Viet Nam is that it is ser-
iously hurting our relations with other
underdeveloped nations. Small countries
feel an affinity toward one another. The
student in Guatemala certainly feels close
to the Vietnamese peasant whose home
has been bombed out.
And, pictures of the Air Force drop-
ping napalm bombs, Marines burning
down villages, and soldiers poisoning rice
hardly speak well for democracy.
Therefore, whatever the immediate mil-
itary gain we make -in Viet Nam we are
losing a far more important political bat-
tle in small nations around the world.
racy fails. It thrives on the kind of
chaos, confusion and destruction we are
creating daily In Viet Nam. For as long
as the Communists can point to the Amer-
icans action in Viet Nam they will be able
to score a decisive propaganda victory.
The destiny of the world simply does
not hinge on the military situation in
Viet Nam. Apparently President Johnson
doesn't realize that our military goal in
South Viet Nam is inconsistent with our
declared long run political battle against

Fait Accomplis by thePolicy-Makers

ASKED ABOUT the criticism of
the Viet Nam war in the Sen-
ate, Senator Dodd of Connecticut
said, "It is the price we pay for
living in a free country." This
routine response is quite taken
for granted. But what an aston-
ishingly negative estimate of the
democratic process it is, as if free
discussion were a weakness we
must put up with, in order to
avoid a greater evil.
To Milton, Spinoza or Jefferson
such discussion was precisely the
strength of free society; to them,
truth. was a power, admittedly
weak, but steady and cumulative,
and in free debate the right course
would emerge and prevail. In clas-
sical democratic theory- there is
no other method for truthto pre-
vail, since there is no final
authority but all the people, and
therefore it is an advantage if
there are combative opinions,
widely disparate and searching.

SENATOR DODD seems to have
the following epistemology of de-
mocracy: we elect governors who
then have inside information,
through spies and secret diplo-
macy. They alone, therefore, can
make policy and commitments.'
(Presumably we can repudiate
these at the next election, but
usually commitments lead to fait
accomplis which make it hard to
repudiate a policy.)
More important, there is a per-
manent group of selfless and wise
experts who alone understand the
technology involved, e.g., materiel,
strategy and tactics; we must per-
force do what they advise. The
fact that they make bad predic-
tions and, on the evidence, are
partial or at least narrow in their
commercial interests and political
views, does not alter the picture.
It follows that public discussion is
irrelevant and harmful because it
is divisive, but it is "the price we
pay. '

WHAT IS the attraction of such
a diluted democratic faith? Partly
it is our laziness, which Morris
Cohen used to call the first prin-
ciple of political theory. Mainly,
I think, it is that we live with
a sense of chronic low-grade
emergency. Senator Dodd's is the
philosophy of emergency, for in
an emergency ,it is rational to
concentrate temporary power in
a few hands, to decide and make
commitments, and for the rest to
stick to the fait accomplis for
better or worse. But since it is
a low-grade emergency-nobody
is invading San Francisco-we
like to go on as usual, including

criticizing, as long as it does not
affect policy.
Unfortunately, t h i s attitude
keeps the low-grade emergency,
chronic. There is no way to get
back to normal, no check on new
fait accomplis, no accountability,
of the decision makers, no chance
for a philosophical view to emerge
that might be realistic and effec-
IN THE SENATE debate itself,,
excellent and useful as it was, we
saw that not a single senator was
able to raise the basic human is-
sue that could put the Viet Nam
situation in a fair light and per-
haps undercut the dilemnas. E.g.,
we. live in a period of worldwide
communication and spread of
technology, and. therefore of "ris-
ing aspirations," yet a majority of
mankind is fast becoming relative-
ly and even absolutely poorer;
hundreds of millions are starving,
who used to make do under

simpler conditions.
For our own country, is it really
in our national interest to come on
as a ,Great Power, touchy about
saving face and telling other
people how to act or else? Are
Englishmen, Frenchmen and
Dutchmen worse off since they
bowed out, not to speak of Danes
or Swedes who bowed outlong
ago? Most crucial of all, in the
present era of One World and the
atom bomb, is there not something
baroque and unreal in the proud
sovereignty of nation states and
the legalisms of who has "lag-
' gressed" on whom?
OBVIOUSLY, such "antination-
al issues cannot be raised by
senators, even. in a free debate.
.All the more reason' why' others
of us must freely raise them, if
we are going to make some sense
and perhaps live on at all.
copyright, Paul Goodman, 1966

Fairer, Procedures for Voter Registration

THE PROCESS which has regis-
tered a currently undetermined
number of University students for
the April municipal election-the
same process which has undoubt-
edly denied voting privileges to
others-has dubious moral and
legal justification. Students at-
tempting to register expressed
chagrin at the procedures they
encountered, not because those
procedures denied them voting, but
because they were grounded on a
poorly-rationalized policy of dis-
crimination against students.
Michigan statutes define the
current voter registration proce-
dure. The city clerk is empowered
to accept applications and judge.
whether they are valid. He has
court cases and opinions of the
State Attorney General as prece-
dence for his decisions.
The clerk's major responsibility
to ascertain whether or not appli-
cants meet local residence require-
ments. There are no definite stan-
dards for his decision, but rather,
a few very general criterions. In
most cases, the clerk's respon-
sibility is to render a value judge-
ment as to residency.

SUCH A decision-making policy
is not only legally unjust but weak
and unsatisfactory for practical,
frequent application. To leave the
outcome of voter registration to
one man's outlook-no matter how
comprehensive or responsible that
outlook may be-is a. dangerous
policy for any community.
Complicating the already dan-
gerous situation in Ann Arbor is
the attitude of preferential exam-
ination of students as a group. No
other segment of the population
is forced to document a statement
of residence made to a municipal
clerk. Residency is made an issue
where students are concerned, and
studies in a college town are con-
sidered unsubstantiative for resi-
rrhus, what students found at
City Hall when they attempted to
register was a rather casual sys-
tem of registration which made an
issue of their attendance at the
University. Although the current
City Clerk was considerate of stu-
dent interests, and the City At-
torney and his assistants offered
their opinions when requested, the
legal basis for voter registration
seemed bypassed.

THERE ARE several remedial
actions which may be undertaken.
None offer immediate solutions
and none may be easily enacted.
However, here are some which
may improve registration pro-
cedures in Michigan.
Possibly the most difficult un-
dertaking would be lobbying in
the state legislature for examina-
tion and reform of laws. One such
reform could be an addition to
statutes in which students of
state-supported and perhaps pri-
vate institutions were granted
equal residency status with other
members of the population.
In an age when industries re-
locate and a population of young
adults moves across America with
jobs, it is justifiable for students
to travel to distant schools and
make definite,'if temporary homes
there. Attendance at the Univer-
sity should not be held against
citizens as a detriment to estab-
lishing residency. At present, it, in
fact, is.
A comprehensive affidavit on
residency requirements was ex-
pected from the Secretary of State
in Lansing. What arrived in Ann
Arbor was a half-page, laconic ap-
plication blank that proved to

offer little aid for municipal
clerks. The form should be with-
drawn and replaced with a com-
prehensive form testing the resi-
dency of all applicants and not
merely students.
ed with antistudent philosophy
should be reversed. This can mean
that new court decisions will re-
place those currently relied upon.
It is, however, unfortunate that
such cases would usually occur
when a refused applicant charges
that a city clerk has unfairly ap-
plied his legal power. A better
court issue would be whether or
not the current procedure is un-
constitutional, jeopardizing indi-
vidual rights to representation and
freedom of speech. It appears that

a decision of a state supreme court
could serve to restructure current
Finally, University officials, civic
leaders and laymen, and legal
authorities must investigate and
discuss the structuralized denial
of residency to students. A weak
student authority will always be
inadequate in stimulating voting
registration reform, for, of course,
students cannot vote, as a group,
and thus have no force for law
TO EMPOWER a municipal
clerk to register voters, with a view
towards discriminating against
students, appears to curtail the
rights of the clerk, circumvent the
legal system, and cheat the voting


Faculty Draft Resolution
Creates Larger Problem

passed a resolution which criticizes the
present draft deferment policy, and calls
for the University administration to sup-
port a "position favoring a national policy
of random selection."
The resolution stated "the faculty be-
lieves that the present deferment policy
of the Selective Service System penalizes
students from lower socio-economic strata
and places a false emphasis on the mere
attainment of academic grades," and that
a random selection of college students
would represent "a sounder social and
educational policy."
At first reading, this appears to be a
practical and level-headed proposal aimed
at smoothing out some of the present
unfairness of the draft. In reality, the
resolution proposes an unworkable and
damaging change in the present system-
a system that is far from perfect, but
which could be worse.
THE RESOLUTION reveals an unreal-
istic philosophy of social equalitarian-
ism which has clouded the thinking of
the faculty on this issue,
It will be very popular with the "down
to earth," sensible and anti-intellectual
citizens of our country who would argue
that the mere possession of an "educa-
tion" does not make a person a more valu-
able member of society.
Our faculty seems to have forgotten
that in our present complicated society,
knowledge is not only useful, but has be-,
come absolutely. necessary. A person who
has an education is. a more ,important
and valuable contributor to society than
his less educated but legally equal fel-

IF IT IS ABSOLUTELY necessary to take
any student away from his studies,
then it will be most beneficial to the en-
tire society to take those who seem to be
the poorest students by the only measure-
ments we have, grades and tests. If mem-
bers of lower scoio-economic groups are'
being overburdened by this system, be-
cause they are less well able to adapt to
the middle class values of the university,
then the problem is social and can only
be solved by helping them in their strug-
gle to advance. It will not be solved by
ignoring the fact that they are presently
less equipped to succeed.
The literary faculty's resolution is try-
ing to remove a social problem by creat-
ing a bigger one. The problem is one of
value. Will it be more beneficial to so-
ciety to remove a discrimination against
a minority group-a discrimination which
has by no means been satisfactorily prov-
en-than it will be to keep our best stu-
dents in school?
ONE OF THE MOST common arguments
against granting deferments for the
"better students," is the problem of de-
termining who really is a good student.
No one can seriously argue that national
tests or college grades are a satisfactory
way of determining intelligence or aca-
demic achievement.
But they do give an indication of such
natural intelligence and achievement. To
say that they do not, would be to declare
that our entire system of education is a
In the last analysis, it may appear that
the only good to come out of the Viet

Schutze: Did Yott Hear
The One About the Pope


; "
f .



troit has embroiled himself
in a clumsy grab for the Polish
vote: he recently banned a book
of Polish jokes from sale in the
city of Detroit. The mayor may
not realize that his political am-
bition has led him to trample on
native American tradition,
Americans are hard-working,
serious-minded, level-headed, no-
nonsense social strivers with little
time and less energy to waste on
being funny. But certain occasions
inevitably call for humor, and the
conscientious American must be
prepared to meet such occasions
with what will be accepted as a
humorous remark. The United
States of Democracy have be-
grudgingly acknowledged the ne-
cessity of occasional wit with a
compromise measure, the formula
joke. And by far the most popular
form of mathematically exact wit
is the Great American Ethnic
Punch Line.
Most ethnic humor follows a
precise and perfect equation by
which name-of-minority plus bad-
trait equals riotous-mirth-and-
knee-slapping-guffaw. Why do
Negroes bring watermelon to
church? I don't know (heh-heh);
why? Because (heh-heh), they
don't know no better. Painful side
holding. laughter.
adapted to the description of
Poles wearing bowling shirts to
church, Irishmen wearing potatoes
to church, Germans wearing noth-
'ir,.' to ehiivh.nh nd Frevnchme'n

chicken soup), English ./humor
(amusing because it has no punch
line), and poverty humor (drole
because it's so cute to be a loser"
And all sorts of ethnic formula
humor are worthwhile contri-
vances. They allow each of us to
be amusing without wasting time.
The only persons who can legiti-
mately feel hurt by ethnic humor
are white middle-class third gen-
eration Protestants in the suburbs:
they've never met a member of a
genuine minority group, so they
have to devote their wit to ele-
to rue the day he rid Detroit of
Polish jokes (Why do Poles come
from Poland? I don't know, heh-
heh; why? Because they wear
bowling shirts! Knee-slap, knee-
slap). Deprived of a healthy outlet,
Detroiters will begin to fritter
away their time inventing new
forms of infectious humor. And
they might just be clever enough
to come up with something offen.,
sive to the mayor, something like
.. let's see . . . Catholic jokes!
To the Editor:
ulty awards grades as a con-
venient method of evaluating stu-
dents; expects student perform-
ance to be influenced by these re-


7 I.



Back to Top

© 2023 Regents of the University of Michigan