I,
et Dal
Seventy-Sixth Year
EITEm AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSrTY OF MICHIGAN
UNDFR AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
SOUND and FURY
ayClarn xce Fanta Republican Candidate Speaks His Mind
re Opinions Are Free,. 42 MAYNARD ST., ANN AR.BOR, MICH,
~rmth Will Pr~rall
NEWS PHONE: 764-0552
Editoriats printed inThe Michigan Daily express the inidividuat opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 1966 NIGHT EDITOR: SHIRLEY ROSICK
An Invitation
To The,'Unestablished'
about
just as
YOUNG PEOPLE so indignant
the establishment will get over
soon as they become establish-
This statement is, sadly, a truism. Why?
Could it be that men are so self-centered
that, once they achieve success, they cease
to care or feel for those who haven't "suc-
ceeded" or who are being trodden into the
mire of a flaw-filled society? Is this why
men rubber-stamp decisions made for
them by others and cease to question the
irresponsible, illegal, and immoral policies
of their superiors or their country's lead-
ers? This unfortunately seems to be the
case.
WHO WORKS and demonstrates for
equality and civil rights, fights pov-
erty and aids the poverty-stricken, dem-
onstrates for an end to a senseless con-
flict, and participates as part of such
worthy organizations as the Peace Corps
and Vista?--that deep-thinking conting-
ent of college age individuals who can
truly be termed America's young intellec-
tuals, as they try to shape and form a
better world. That's thy this type of stu-
dent is always so extremely valuable.
However, in a few years, they too join
the "established," and a new contingent,
equally relevant, take their place.
FOR SUCH A LARGE, state-supported
institution, Michigan seems to have
quite a dearth of the aforementionel type
student. Perhaps a partial explanation is
the fact that the University isn't truly
representative and is, for the most part,
(as Prof. Boulding has said), "a subsidy
for the rich."
The University of Michigan student is
very well versed in his subject-matter,
because competition for the grade coerces
him to do so. He is, unfortunately (or so
it seems), neither very well-informed nor
sensitive as to what is going on in the
world around him about which he has a
responsibility to express his supposedly
educated opinion to the world.
The conflict in Viet Nam is indicative of
this; University of Michigan students, be-
cause they had the "foresight" to choose
Acting Editorial Staff
MARK R..KILLINGSWORTH, Editor
BRUCE WASSERSTEIN, Executive Editor
parents of the right socio-economic group
and have genes which precipitate intelli-
gence, sit comfortably back in their ig-,
norance, while others less fortunate fight
and die.
It's quite likely that 80 per cent of the
Michigan student body has never even
heard of the Geneva Accords. Now a
senseless war is taking its toll, and funds
which should have been spent for the
public's welfare are being reallocated.
On this campus since the "teach-in," how-
ever, experts who oppose this war have
rarely been heard outside the classroom.
With so many students ignorant of what
"is" going on, perhaps the responsibility
to educate lies beyond the classroom.
T HIS HIGH PERCENTAGE of students
has failed to uphold their role in a
democracy and become the enlightened
few whose responsibility it is to enlighten
others. Most blindly follow the country's
leadership and Hoover, Harding, and Hit-
ler have shown us how dangerous this
policy can be.
I A democracy cannot work unless its
people (especially those with the oppor-
tunity for higher education) question the
decisions of its representatives and if
they are unjust, pressure and educate for
change. With the "I don't know or care;
my country, right or wrong; it doesn't
affect me so why should I worry," atti-
tude exhibited on this campus, we might
as well have a popularly elected dictator-
ship.
Perhaps Professor Boulding is quite
right when he calls the State Depart-
ment "an intellectual Appalachia." Yet,
those at the University who certainly have
the intellectual ability to find out for
themselves what is going on, prefer to re-
main in ignorance and follow the dic-
tates of the leaders who may well be
erroneous.
O REITERATE, at least 80 per cent of
the students on this campus know
little or nothing about a war so obviously
unjust, illegal, and immoral that, if they
were enlightened, they would do a good
deal to bring it to an end.
You "unestablished" are a valuable
contingent that a democracy relies upon
to point out the mistakes of erroneous
leadership. So wake up! If you don't know
much about the conflict and are embar-
rassed to ask, get hold of a book compiled
by a respected author or editor. One
which presents both points of view is "The
Viet Nark Reader," edited by Raskin and
Fall. Enlighten yourself for your own
good and your country's.
This writer feels compelled to exhort
again, "Come on, now, wake up!" But
he feels futile because he knows many
that he wishes to address never read this
editorial page.
--DAN SPITZER
THE CITY COUNCIL race in
Ann Arbor's 2nd Ward has
raised some significant questions
about the relationship of the Uni-
versity, as an institution, to the
city.
The Republican candidate,
James Riecker, is running on a
platform which fails to deal with
some of the most crucial issues
facing the city as well as Univer-
sity students-the problem of
housing and the ridiculously in-
flated prices now being charged
by absentee landlords in numerous
student apartment buildings.
RIECKER, in a recent personal
interview, stressed that the hous-
ing situation was far worse five
years ago "when students couldn't
even get into off-campus housing;
most apartment landlords didn't
want or need them at that time."
However, he said, the construction
of many new apartments has in-
creased the supply so that, in a
short time, landlords will have to
price their housing more competi-
tively because of the glut of apart-
ments on the market that will pre-
sumably result.
Thus, Riecker, a high official of
the Ann Arbor Bank, advocates a
hands-off attitude toward the
problem of housing in the com-
munity, a problem which he ap-
parently believes will solve itself.
At the same time, he expresses
the attitude that the community.
has already bent over backward to
look out for the student's interest.
He fails to take into account the
fact that most landlords apparent-
ly are willing to charge what the
traffic will bear-i.e. $60 to $70
per month per person for most
apartments, whether they be new,
luxury units or old tenament-style
houses.
It is difficult to rid oneself of
the impression that Ann Arbor
landlords, or the local represen-
tatives of national firms, have in-
formally combined to maintain
apartment prices at their present
inflated level, and have virtually
agreed not to engage in a com-
petitive race to gain tenants by
lowering prices. This is because
they have plenty of students will-
ing to pay high prices, since they
have no other alternative.
HOWEVER, the University is
moving into the housing field in a
big way with the opening next fall
of Cedar Bend Housing, a North
Campus unit which will house
more than 600 upperclassmen and
graduate students at prices which
in many cases are lower than
comparable off-campus housing
values. The only initial disad-
vantages will be transportation
problems, the relative isolation of
the area to the Central Campus,
and the lack of eating facilities
directly on the premises (although
a nearby cafeteria will be avail-
able).
What this new housing will
mean to the supply and demand
situation in off-campus private
housing is difficult to assess-but
local landlords may find them-
selves with many empty units un-
less they are willing to lower their
prices to a more reasonable level.
$70 per month for a one-room
apartment for two tenants goes
beyond all rational levels of pric-
ing when compared with apart-
ment costs in other university
environments.
THE ATTITUDE expressed by
Riecker, however, is that students
are getting a pretty good deal in
this town. He seems to oppose
student voting "unless they are
responsible and legally qualified"
(our emphasis). He tosses nice-
sounding cliches such as "respon-
sible" and "reasonable" at the
student body without elaborating
on what he means.
One often hears similar phrases
hurled at Negro and other minor-
ity groups-and it is not difficult
to figure out that the use of such
terms is just a polite way of say-
ing that the community Establish-
ment is not willing to grant equal.
rights to the minority for fear of
losing its own dominant position.
Riecker's attitude toward stu-
dents bears other resemblances to
the attitude of segregationists to-
ward Negroes. He always uses the
deprecatory term "you people" in
referring to students. He char-
acterizes his Democratic opponent,
Dean Douthat, a candidate who
has consistently spoken out for
the student's interests as a "clown"
who doesn't know anything about
what students want and need be-
cause he didn't go to school at
this university, as Riecker did.
Beautiful non sequitur, Mr.
Riecker.
RIECKER CONSTANTLY em-
phasizes that the vote is by no
means the most important means
a minority group has for influenc-
ing the powers that be.
"Minority groups have done
very well in this country without
the vote," he boasts. In the next
breath, he proceeds to outline the
"tremendous gains" made by Ne-
groes throughout the nation and
especially in Ann Arbor. The im-
plication is that students, an un-
desirable minority group in the
view of some Ann Arbor denizens,
can get all they want without the
vote.
RIECKER'S campaign manager,
James Brinkerhoff, who also hap-
pens to be a high official in the
University's Office of Business and
Finance, sent a letter to Repub-
lican voters this month warning
them to cast their ballots "lest
'nonresidents' steal this. election."
He also warned that 1500 new
voters-many of them supposedly
students - had registered on
March 7th.
Funny thing, Mr. Brinkerhoff.
Official city statistics show that
less than 1400 new voters regis-
tered during the entire ten-day
registration period, most of them
not even in the Second Ward, and
most of them not students. Fur-
thermore, the Brinkerhoff letter
was printed before March 7th, ac-
cording to his own statements.
Thus, the letter can only be view-
ed as a divisive attempt to foster
a "second-class citizenship" at-
titude toward students among the
residents of Ann Arbor.
Riecker now claims to regret the
language of the letter which, he
says, was written without his
knowledge. But his definition of
what constitutes a student who is
eligible to vote-family, perman-
ent residence in Ann Arbor, "not
going home during college vaca-
tions"-seems unreasonably rigid
considering the extent of the stu-
dent contribution to Ann Arbor's
prosperity. Riecker even admits
that without the students, Ann
Arbor would be an economic ghost
town. Furthermore, his own bank
would suffer accordingly, and
Riecker knows it.
HIS ATTITUDE IS, therefore,
highly defensive. Without totally
disguising his paternalistic, "let-
the-University-take-care-of-these-
people" attitude toward students,
he attempts to foster the impres-
sion that he favors voting by
legally qualified students, since,
"I know that most of the students
on this campus are Republicans
anyway."
If this is so, why is his cam-
paign manager threatening to.
challenge the legal qualifications
of student voters at the April 4
city election? Why the panicky
letter to Republican voters. which
in effect warned of the possibility
of a student takeover of city
elections?
A two-hour conversation with
Riecker failed to shed much light
on these questions. He evaded the
issue of the Brinkerhoff letter; he
refused to elaborate on his defi-
nition of what constitutes legal
qualifications for student voters
("I prefer to leave that to law-
yers"), even though his campaign
manager evidently feels qualified
to challenge students when the
election takes place; and he pious-
ly reiterated his commitment to
"what's good" for the community.
HIS PARTING SHOT also bears
notice.
"Did you know that most large
firms in Ann Arbor are now hiring
Negroes on a preferential basis-
that is, if two equally qualified
applicants walk into a personnel
manager's office, the Negro will be
hired?" he asked me.
"Well, I haven't seen many Ne-
groes working at the Ann Arbor
Bank lately," I replied.
"Send me some qualified ap-
plicants and we'll hire them on the
spot," he sputtered back.
MR. RIECKER, your views and
those of your party are sadly out-
dated and are based on a laissez-
faire capitalistic outlook which has
long been abandoned in this coun-
try. Why not join the twentieth
century along with the rest of us?
You'll find that the fat cats of
your ilk are gradually being put
in their proper place.
All the insults you may wish to
hurl at your opponent and at "you
people"-i.e., the students-Are of
little value. If you get down to
the basic issues affecting this com-
munity, then people may start
listening.
4
The Supreme Court vs. Obscenity,
By DAVID KNOKE
First of two parts
T HE UNITED.STATES Supreme
Court last week rendered a
precedent-making decision in the
"Pennsylvania vs. Ginzberg" case
which has far-reaching implica-
tions for the status of censorship
and the definition of "obscenity."
By a vote of 5-4, the Supreme
Court upheld the obscenity con-
viction of Ralph Ginzberg, pub-
lisher of the magazine "Eros" and
other erotic literature, holding
that the "titillating" nature of
the magazine's promotional ad-
vertising was proof enough that
the material was obscene. At the
same Monday morning decision
rendering, the court overthrew
the Massachusetts conviction of
the book "Memoirs of a Woman of
Pleasure," known as "Fanny Hill,"
by a vote of 6-3.
GINBERG'S "EROS" was noted
as a slick-paper publication fea-
turing a mixture of photographs,
drawings and reprints of bawdy
stories by such acknowledged lit-
erary masters as Maupassant and
Boccacio. His advertising gim-
micks however included mailing
addresses from towns with con-
notative names, and claims of
taking "full advantage" of the
law in the expression of sex and
sexual matters.
"Fanny Hill," on the other hand,
is a string of successively more ti-
tillating erotic scenes, generally
conceded to be without much value
as a literary work in itself. It is
marked with an unillustrated cover
and has the time-honored value
of being an historic event in the
development of the novel, dating
back to 1750.
THE CLOSENESS of the deci-
sion in the Ginzberg case, and the
criteria of advertising and pro-
motional gimmicks as crucial tests
of obscenity have raised anew
many questions both for the court
and the general public about the
criteria for and validity of cen-
soring literature.
The majority opinion, given by
Justice William J. Brennan, not
only upheld the conviction but
further extended the previous
Supreme Court definition of 'ob-
scenity.
In the previous definition, es-
tablished in 1957 in Roth vs. Unit-
ed States, the court defined ob-
scenity in a social context:
"Whether to the average per-
son, applying contemporary
community standards, the dom-
inant theme of the material
taken as a whole appeals to
prurient interest."
In the Ginzberg case, the court
found that "Eros was created, rep-
resented and sold solely as a
claimed instrument of the sexual
stimulation it would bring." There-
fore the decision, held that, while
the Roth standard was not being
abandonned, the motives of the
publisher as evidenced by his ad-
vertising would "support the de-
termination that the material is
obscene even though in other con-
texts the material would escape
such condemnation."
PRESUMABLY THESE "other
contexts" were responsible for the
diametrical decision in the "Fanny
Hill" case, where the book in it-
self was tried, the advertising
techniques not being objectionable.
Applying the Roth test, in
Brennan's majority opinion the
book had the required prurient
appeal and patent offensiveness,
but had a modicum of literary
and historical value and its pub-
lication and sales promotions did
not fall under the Ginzberg def-
inition.
The Ginzberg case especially
caught lawyers, both from the de-
fense and the prosecution, by sur-
prise. Speculation was that the
$28,000 fine and five-year jail
sentence for Ginzberg might be
thrown out without arguments.
Justice Department officials had
conceded that "75 to 90 per cent
of the material the government
routinely seeks to suppress is more
objectionable than Eros."
THE EXTENSION of the ob-
scenity definition was strongly at-
tacked by Justice William 0.
Douglas:
"This new exception condemns
an advertising technique as old
as history. The advertisements
of our best magazines are chock-
full of thighs, calves, bosoms,
eyes, and hair, to draw the po-
tential buyer's attention to lo-
tions, tires, food, liquor, clothing,
autos and even life insurance
policies.
"T h e s e x y advertisement
neither adds to nor detracts
from the quality of the mer-
chandise . . . A book should
stand on its own, irrespective of
the reasons why it was written
or the wiles used in selling it."
In another dissenting opinion,
Justice Potter Stewart attacked
the censorship decision as an ab-'
rogation of the First Amendment's
guarantee of freedom of the press.
"Censorship reflects a society's
lack of confidence in itself. It is
the hallmark of an authoritarian
regime." In reference to "hard-
core pornography," Stewart men-
tioned that there exists a narrow
but "distinct and easily definable
class" of material which fits the
Roth definition of ""prurient in-
terest" and which should be sup-
pressed by the government.
Perhaps the most enlightening
statement to come out of the
flurry of decisions and dissentions
was the opening sentence of a
dissenting opinion to the "Fanny
Hill" case, written by Justice John
M. Harlan
"The central development
that emerges from the after-
math of Roth vs. United States,
is that no stable approach to the
obscenity problem has yet been
devised by this court."
The problem has not been
solved with the Ginzburg case, but
rather complicated. The "obscenity
problem" will continue to be ap-
proached in- an unstable manner
until the court takes a careful
look at the nature and function of
prurient literature and the con-
comittent problem of freedom of
press, and then establishes uni-
form, liberal guidelines.
Tomorrow:Censorship Reform
0
CLARENCE FANTO
Managing Editor
HARVEY WASSERMAN
Editorial Director
JOHN MEREDITH .......: Associate Managing Editor
LEONARD PRATT.........Associate Managing Editor
BABETTE COHN............,...Personnel Director
CHARLOTTE WOLTER .... Associate Editoral Director
ROBERT CARNEY .......Associate Editorial Director
Subscription rate: $4.50 semester ry carrer ($5 by
mail) $8 yearly by carrier ($9 by mai,.
Secoud class postage paid at Ann Arbor. Mick.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
An Op en Letter to, Gov. George Romney
9
I:
Ii
To the Editor:
The following open letter has
been sent to Governor Romney
by the U. of M. Student Eco-
nomic Union.
Governor George Romney
Michigan State Capitol Building
Lansing, Michigan
10N BEHALF of the University
of Michigan Student Economic
Union, one of the largest student
organizations at this state univer-
sity, we are writing you in hopes
that you will consider the follow-
ing criteria when appointing a
regent to fill the recently vacated
position of Eugene Power.
We feel that in the past many
Regents of the University have
not considered the true needs of
the University, and its faculty,
non-academic employes, and espe-
cially students. We would hope
that the Regent you select for a
term expiring in 1972 will have
the following qualities:
1) KNOWLEDGE of University
affairs, both financial and aca-
demic.
2) A sincere belief in academic
freedom; a Regent who opposes
limits on subjects which can be
taught and speakers who may be
heard.
3) A belief in equal educational
opportunity founded in the desire
of eliminating all economic bar-
riers to higher education.
4) A belief in collective bargain-
ing for public employes consonant
with amendments to the Hutch-
incnn Ani
ing your decisions. We feel that
the position of Regent is most im-
portant in that decisions derived
from this office affect not only
the thousands of faculty, admin-
istrators, students and non-aca-
demic personnel at the University
of Michigan, but virtually every
potential college student in the
state of Michigan.
Thank you for your considera-
tion.
-Judith Klein, President,
UMSEU
Israel Again
To the Editor:
R ECENT ARTICLES and editor-
ials appeared in The Michi-
gan Daily describing Israel as a
"peace-loving" state and the Arabs
as a nation bent upon hatred.
Such distortion of facts is typical
of the Zionist propaganda in the
United States. It is indeed unfortu-
nate to witness the Zionist infil-
tration in the mass media in this
country.
We, Arabs, are not advocates of
hatred; however, the devious ways
by which the State- of Israel was
created left nothing for us but to
resent its existence and entertain
profound misgivings about the
causes for its creation.
PALESTINE was thoroughly
Arab, 90 per cent of its popula-
tion inhabiting the area since time
immemorial while Jewish owner-
ship of land did not exceed 2.5
per cent. Both Arabs and Jews
liI1M i -- fra-hnnA h mnnv
and an appalling instance of hu-
man atrocities, of mindless evic-
tion and usurpation accomplished
by premeditated massacres and
the spread of terror.
DOES THIS JUSTIFY our sus-
picion of Israel?
When one individual enters the
home of another by force, throws
the rightful owner out into the
street or into the wilderness, and
establishes himself where only yes-
terday someone else lived in peace
and security, civilized people con-
demn that act of displacement.
and the laws of civilized nations
provide for the implementation of
justice.
Unfortunately, when in Pales-
tine a whole multitude did pre-
cisely the same thing to an en-
tire community, no one lifted a
finger and only a handful raised
their voices. And yet the two
acts, the individual and the col-
lective are precisely identical in
character, except that the latter
assumes an enormous proportion
in the perspective of the life of
millions.
One wonders, does this warrant
our apprehension of Israel and
whoever protects her and con-
dones her actions?
Strange indeed is the human
conscience. It seems capable of
tolerating and even justifying col-
lective crimes committed on a
large scale, while condemning the
selfsame crimes when perpetrated
on an individual basis. Moreover
its sense of justice seems at times
a bit violent expressing itself in
+m of i nmnatiblenrincinles.
their displacement.
The great majority of the Arab
population of the parts of Pales-
tine that were successfully sub-
verted by the Israeli underground
forces-which later formed the Is-
raeli Army--were actually evicted
by the Israelis. Zionist military
bands intensified their attacks
against Arab towns and villages.
On April 9, 1948, they attacked
Deir Yassin and slaughtered its
population, women and children
not spared. No wonder the pan-
icky huddled masses-their life
jeopardized by massacre, homes
levelled by sheer ruthless force.
villages erased by bombs-ran in
desperate flight to the distant.
forlorn hope; survival.
Are we asked not to detest Is-
rael?
IRONICALLY, the Arabs in Is-
rael, like the Jews in Nazi Ger-
many,' are officially second class
citizens. The guarded enclosures
where the Arabs are concentrated,
as in Jaffa, -are the true ghettos
of 1966. Only these areas are un-
der military rule. The banishment
of legal residents and the confisca-
tion of their property is an every-
day "lawful" practice.
Israel is on record as contem-
plating and executing designs for
further territorial expansion. The
ultimate Zionist vision is of an
empire spanning the entire area
from the Nile to the Euphra-
tes. The invasion of Egypt and
the Gaza strip on October 1956
was described by Israel leaders as
"liberation" of their "homeland."
Empire which must cover the
whole territory from the Nile to
the Euphrates." He further con-
tinues, "To maintain the status
quo will not be easy to do. We
have set up a dynamic state
bent upon expansion."
IS IT STILL possible to avert
hating Israel?
These are few facts for the
interested, the keen, or those
yearning for justice. Facts to de-
pict the human tragedy, the plight
of millions: Palestine. At the root
of the holocaust lies a movement
conceived in grievance, nurtured
by :animosity and flowering in
bloodshed: Zionism.
Arabs are bewildered at the at-
titude of indifference displayed by
the U.S. Are we to believe that
Israel's benefactors have domin-
ated! most political lobbies in this
country? It seems hardly feasible
to suppress a pressing question:
Is there a problem of double stand-
ards involved. Are the principles
of the Bill of Human Rights meant
only for Americans?
A shocked and dismayed world
rose in a unanimous denuncia-
tions of Nazi persecution of the
Jews in Germany only to ignore
and condone a parallel flagrant
persecution of the Arabs in Israel.
WE ARABS distinguish between
Judaism, an object-of our rever-
ence and profound inspiration, and
Zionism, an embodiment of poli-
tical hegemony and military con-
quest;, worthy only of our repudia.
tion. No wonder, one cannot help
hating Israel.
A
Y '
4
4
Will ,~ 4
. tb~ '* ...rkwi, ; f t r ,Y "