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 "