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.

January 27, 1967 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1967-01-27

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

Seventy-Sixth Year

PERSPECTIVES Toward Other American Causes

Where Opinions Are Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MICH.
Truth WIU Prevati

'NEWS PHONE: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.




Michigan Loyalty Oaths:
A Useless Appendage

TO QUALIFY for a position in the Mich-
igan government at the University,
every prospective employe, whether jani-
tor or faculty member, must sign a loy-
alty oath stipulating that he will "sup-
port the Constitution of the United
States and the constitution of the state
of Michigan, and that (he) will faith-
fully discharge the duties of (his) posi-
tion according to the best of (his) ability."
Recent Supreme Court decisions of the
constitutionality of states' loyalty oaths
should force the Michigan Legislature to
reappraise its thinking on the issue.
Monday's Feinberg decision declaring
invalid a New York law which makes
membership in the Communist party
grounds for dismissal of state college and
university teachers, in the latest of a
series of judgments which have abol-
ished archaic and unnecessary pledges.
The Supreme Court had virtually nulli-
fied loyalty oath requirements in five
states on the grounds of infringement of
constitutional rights and vagueness of
the law. Appeals are still in process from
other states, and the Michigan pledge
should also be brought before the courts.
NOT ONLY is the legality of the Michi-
gan pledge questionable, but its use-
fulness is, too. It contributes nothing to
the prevention of the undermining of the
University and government.
First, anyone intent on overthrowing
the government or school system would
have no qualms about signing the oath.
Besides, the opportunities for a secretary
or janitor to bring about revolution are
rather limited, so the pledge complete-
ly fails to root out potential subversives.
As for secret work in nuclear physics,
or other security fields, the investiga-
tions of the backgrounds of personnel
is not enhanced one whit by a signature
below a loyalty oath.
SOME PEOPLE, however, will argue, what
happens when a professor intent on
"molding the minds" of unsuspecting stu-
dents into accepting ideas antithetical
to American society, is knowingly employ-
ed? Should he be stopped at the employ-
ment office?
Here, once again, you cannot preserve

freedom by abridging it. If this occurred,
University students would have the abil-
ity to choose the philosophies they will
abide by. Even John Stuart Mill realized
the importance of having divergent view-
points presented by their enthusiastic
proponents. How else could one decide
rationally between alternatives?
BESIDES FAILURE to attain its goals,
the pledge is an insult to patriotic
signers who have not the slightest desire
to subvert, yet who desire employment.
It makes a mechanical mockery of the
profession of loyalty by desecrating it
into a symbolic, meaningless officially ap-
proved statement. It restricts the free-
dom of individuals to be judged on their
actions, and not on their beliefs.
An effective deterrent to "undermin-
ing" is already established through our
security laws, and actions of responsible
members of the community so that the
need for further security measures has
been abrogated.
Of course this is taking the chance of
not squashing the match before it is lit.
Yet, the whole idea of due process of
law accepts risks in order to insulate in-
dividuals from prior judgment of guilt.
Justice Holmes said that a "clear and
present danger" was necessary before pro-
hibitive action could be taken against
an individual. In this sense he recognizes
the gap between advocating or thinking,
and acting, but the oath fails to make
this distinction.
THE OATH cheapens the meaning of pa-
triotism, and is an extension of the rote
recitation of the pledge of allegiance in
grade school. It implies disloyalty to the
government is never justified, even if the
government is itself unjust.
Lastly, the whole concept of loyalty
and disloyalty hinges on rather ambigu-
ous and highly individualized notions. So,
what is "constitutional" in one instance
becomes unconstitutional in another.
What is called for then, is a repeal of
this humiliating and useless mandatory
pledge, which distorts the whole idea of

by Russell Kirk, with a for-
ward by John Dos Passos. Henry
Regnery Company, 1966; $1.00.
TWO YEARS AGO, when thirty-
nine students were being arrested
for their protest at the Ann Arbor
draft board, The Daily got a let-
ter: "You liberals wanted it. Now
you got it."
What we got was big govern-
ment; what we wanted was some-
thing else, but the letter was right.
Over the past years the left has
fought for the extension of gov-
ernment control in nearly every
facet of American existence. Fed-
eral laws now determine who the
private restauranteur can and can-
not serve. Millions are dependent
directly to Washington for their
day - to - day subsistence. Federal
aid is an integral part of nearly
every school in the country. 20
million now work for' federal and
state governments-10 per cent of
the country's total population.
But if the left wanted part of
it, the right made it at its worst.
Over the post-war years there
has been no right wing opposition.
There has been a nihilistic oppo-
sition. There has been a backward
opposition. But there has been no
creative opposition which could
provide a workable synthesis be-
tween a monster in Washington
and injustice in the countryside.
us of the encroachment of govern-
ment on private enterprise. They

were right, there was a danger.
But where were they when en-
croachments on freedom were be-
ing made by McCarthy. They were
with McCarthy.
Where are they now, when gov-
ernmental authorities are investi-
gating and labelling those who
question h war not yet decided on
by the American people? They
are doing the investigating.
Where are they other issues of
government intrusion: issues of
censorship, freedom of reliigon in
schools, civil rights, and the draft?
They are on the side of author-
ity, as presently constituted, no
questions asked except why the
war on poverty? and, leave big
business alone. Economic "free-
dom," it seems, is more important
than political liberties.
YET, WITH ALL that in mind,
the leftist who reads Russell Kirk
to find a difference of basic goals
between himself and the right will
be somewhat disappointed.
Kirk states quite plainly: "Every
man has the right to seek the
fulfillment of his own peculiar
nature, to develop to the full the
abilities which God has given
That is precisely what the left
argues for. Kirk's way of going
about achieving it is a system of
laissez-faire capitalism; the left
argues that no man without ac-
cess to a decent education and
surrounding is free to compete.
The value of Kirk's book, how-
ever, is not for a re-hash of do-

mestic economic policy, but for
the hints it gives as to why no
real synthesis with the left has
been possible, and why one kind
of freedom-economic-would be
valued while immediate concern
for political liberties is thrown to
the wind.
ALONG THESE lines, Kirk's
book reveals two very real and
powerful strains of thought in
American society - moralism at
home and Christian anti-commun-
ism overseas.
First, Kirk cites the fact that
the vast majority of Americans are
of Judeo-Christian origin. He cites
the religious background of the
early United States: "America is
founded on Christian principles."
But he then concludes that while
there is no state church, one of
America's reasons for greatness is
that it practices "toleration."
But with that word, "toleration,"
comes the inescapable idea that
there exists of a body of the whole
allowing, by its own grace, an
existence for its dissenting mi-
When a country is as big and
as diverse as the United States is,
identifying a "moral order" with
any particular label is quite dan-
gerous. It is instead far healthier
and more natural to assume a
morality of the whole of the na-
tion's parts, writing diversity
rather than uniformity into the
stated outlook. Once one posits a
legitimate whole, the brakes on
"toleration" - censorship, HUAC,

the FBI - are natural, not un-
natural, to the social order.
tended to our foreign policy. "We
do not want to make the world a
big United States. We are not a
self-righteous nation, or, at worst,
we try not to be." But then "Al-
though the Communists have
promised Utopia, they have deliv-
ered whole nations to mortal tor-
ment. Although they have talked
unendingly of peace, they have
thrived on war. Such is the result
of supposing that men will be vir-
tuous and good after they have
decided the common fatherhood of
God and the brotherhood of man."
As Billy Graham said in a
Christmas-day sermon last year,
"Our soldiers in Vietnam are the
soldiers of Christ." And Kirk adds
only: "to save the rest of the world
from this decadence, this collec-
tivistic life-in-death, is a part of
the American cause."
have always existed factions who
value order above change, and
who would oppose any alternations
in the way things are done.
Through United States history
there has always existed a real
streak of majority moralism in
political utterances and social
theorozing. Both these patterns of
thought are deeply embedded in
Kirk's book. It is quite ordinary.
But the forward by John Dos
Passos is disarming because it

bears neither of them. He con-
cludes: "A left that was really
new might be worth having. Intel-
ligent radicals will find aid and
comfort in the principles on which
the American republic was found-
ed." But this statement has come
on the heels of a nine-page tirade
against communism and its "New
Left dupes."
DOS PASSOS, the artist and the
individualist, does not understand
that the artistic and individual-
istic New Left is aimed at pre-
cisely thos'e principles, but that to
achieve them a revolution of sorts
is needed-a revolution Dos Pas-
sos will acknowledge, but will not
accept because of its "Marxist"
The principles of Dos Passos'
anti-communist right seem sepa-
rated from the principles of the
anti - establishment left by a
stereotype - one which fosters
thinking in absolute and irrational
rather than flexible terms. There
must be more social orders to be
had than just the "American" and
the "Communist" ones.
volves beauty of principle and be-
lief far more real than the po-
litical pragmatism of a Richard
Nixon or a Bobby Kennedy. But
the vocal American right is hot
libertarian. Basically it has offer-
ed this country only a moralistic.,
status-quo defense of business in-
terests and, most ironically, of
state authoritarianism.




Letters:The Need for 'U' Dissent

To the Editor:
AS A STUDENT interested in the
affairs of the University, I feel
called upon to answer Miss Mc-
Mahon's letter to The Daily (Jan.
14, 1967) .
She first states, "Students will
never be satisfied with their
Should they be? Will any group
ever organize their project so well
that it does not need improve-
ment in time?
Would she, rather see the thou-
sands of students have no serious
concern other than their classes,
which is a rather restricted en-
deavor, and thing of nothing else
than the world of academics?

SHE NEXT condemns SGC and
"The Movement" for its immatur-
ity. She reproves us for not using
legal methods and channels.
This truth is elementary. The
labor movement would have died a
bloody death at the hands of the
business community were it not
for their resort to power. The civil
rights movement is following a
similar path.
Now, surely, affairs are not so
bloody on campus, but it is true
that the administration will con-
Anue to ignore students' demands
unless those demands are backed
by more than just polite requests
and tame suggestions.
Miss McMahon wrote "(you are

1927: Year To Remember

_ r
e A

in college) to receive an education,
attaining the full and sound use
of your mental faculties ..."
That is exactly what we are
trying to do. It is the student
who worries only about his classes
and grades who fails to achieve
"full use of his mental faculties.'
It is we, among others of course,
who are trying to put things in
their proper place, to use our
minds, to think for ourselves.
LASTLY, she asks, "What kind
of responsible adult will you be
when you get through with your
little play things that you have
now?" I answeri: a very good kind.
It is the person at the college lev-
el concerned with campus affairs
who will be most responsible when
he becomes an adult and is con-
cerned with his nation's affairs.
-Ronald Landsman, '70
To the Editor:
IN 1953 President Hatcher wrote
in the "Foreword" to Wood-
ford's "Life of Justice Woodward"
that "the concept" of the univer-
sity went back to Woodward and
the Territory of Michigan in 1817.
Around the Catholepistemiad
(University of Michigania) of that
time and the Act of 1837, creating
the University of Michigan in Ann
Arbor, there exists a controversy.
Judge Woodward was indebted to
the French Revolution for his pro-
jected public system of lay educa-
tion under state control, The
Michigan Act of 1817 authorized a
body of professors-one of them
the president-to operate a univer-
THE NET RESULT was an ideal
including a primary school - sup-'
ported by fees - and a classical
academy supported by taxes until

In the years 1827-1835 the clas-
sical academy was dependent upon
student fees. The old university
building on Bates Street,'Detroit,
in another connection, was used as
a school umtil 1858.
THE STATUTE OF 1837 estab-
lished the University of Michigan,
which still claims for its students'
goal "a broad intellectual experi-
ence." It was not until 1856 that
the Michigan Supreme Court
awarded the Regents such control
within the state educational sys-
tem which haddbeen claimed by
the Detroit Board of Education.
Thus "the legal entity" of the
concept and purpose of a great

On 'U' Status Symbols

educational system was judicially
declared the possession of the Uni-
versity in the middle of the 19th
century. In the degree to which
the public school system of the
state has left a considerable field
of instruction of a higher nature
to the University of Michigan, the
Regents may claim to be heirs
)f the great plan of Justice Wood-
As the classical academy of the
82 0's paralleled the modern high
school, so the Catholepistemiad
was comparable to the University
-Paul E. Hubbell, '38PhD
Eastern Michigan University

HE DAILY ran an eight-page supple-
ment on the University's celebration
of its 90th anniversary on March 18,
1927 - 40 years ago. The supplement's
headline was "Alumni Clubs To Observe
Ninetieth Anniversary." Creative jour-
nalism, I suppose,
Running in, the off-lead position was a
feature by one Paul J. Kern, editor-
to-be, which began:
"Practically everything that exists at
all has a history, and the University of
Michigan is no exception. In order to have
this history it was necessary for the Uni-
versity to be founded, and this is where
the story begins.
"RECENTLY a few idle alumni with
nothing else to do have discovered
that the University of Michigan was ac-
tually founded in 1817 instead of 1837.
The cause for this momentous change
is found in the fact that the Territorial
Legislature made plans for such an insti-+
tution at the earlier date. This is a very
useful point for alumni to argue about,
if they must argue, but if the inimitable
logic of this viewpoint be carried to the
extreme we could easily prove that the
University was founded in 1804, which
is worse yet. At this date a preliminary
grant of land was made.
"Carrying it down to the ultimate es-
tablishment, however, we can safely as-
sign 1492 as the date of foundation, for
The Daily is a member of the Associated Press and
Collegiate Press Service.
Subscription rate: $4.50 semester by carrier ($5 by
mail; $8 yearly by carrier ($9 by mail).
Published at 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich.,
Owner-Board in Control of Student Publications,
420 Maynard St.. Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48104.
Bond or Stockholders-None.
Average nress run-8100.

in that year Columbus discovered Amer-
ica and certainly we should have no uni-
versity if the Italian navigator had fail-
ed to perform this rather vital function.
Accepting 1492 as the date of founding
also has added advantage of giving us
some 150 year start on Harvard, and
makes us easily the oldest educational
institution on the continent. .."
THE HEADLINE in the next morning'sI
paper said, "Thousands Listen to An-
niversary Celebration . . . Century Mark
Is Reached in 1937." Daily headlines may
not be too creative, but they're more
than made up for by alumni imaginations.
Associate Managing Editor
The State
Board Budges
THE STATE Board of Education took
"action" on the medical education ex-
pansion recommendations presented to
the board by its Citizens' Committee on
Health Care Education.
The board recognized the obvious need
for more physicians in Michigan and
recommended expanding Michigan State
University's two-year medical program in-
to a third full four-year degree-granting
school. They also recommended expand-
ing the two existing medical schools, at
the University and Wayne State Univer-
BUT THEY CUT SHORT the full rec-
ommendations of their citizens' com-
mittee by not including specific goals for
the expansion and the priority given to
the University and WSU. They leave these
things to be determined by the Legisla-


HERE ARE SOME status sym.-
bols Lee Weitzenkorn's article
of January 13 overlooked:
President Hatcher has, besides a
private toilet, a private study (and
very beautifully appointed); is the
only University official with the
smooth, deeper-pile carpeting used
in the Regents' Room in his of-
fice; and is the only official with
a "modern" and very executive
desk built like a table, without
Vice-President Pierpont also has
a private toilet (which means that
Niehuss probably does, too), as well
as the biggest chair.
Vice-President Cutler are the only
executives with air-conditioned of-
There are, in addition, at least
three other ways the vice-presi-
dents can rate their pecking or-
The University/has one Lincoln
for the President's and the Re-
gents' use, and two Buicks for the
vice-presidents. When the Lincoln

is out with a Regent, and Hatcher
has had a Buick, Cutler has been
observed to take priority over Nie-
Vice-presidents are listed on the
Administration Bldg. lobby direc-
tory; the last time I checked, Nie-
huss, Smith and Cutler were list-
ed in that order, with larger let-
ters, over Pierpont and the others.
ELSEWHERE: The University
parking supervisor has the space
in the structure behind West Quad
nearest the ground floor; and Pier-
poit sits a 'perfect mid-court at
basketball games, flanked by for-
mer boss and now Regent Briggs,
former business administration
professor-mentor Paton, and as-
sistant Gilbert Lee, even as Eu-
gene Power, while a Regent, was
3bserved far down court; the Nie-
huss-Hatcher receptionist gets
choice, ground-floor seats for the
APA premiere, while Smith's per-
sonal secretary still sits in the
balcony (and his receptionist may
not go at all).
-Robert Johnston
Editor, 1965-66


".. . Let's re-shoot that last scene . '..!"

..... . . . ...... . ................... ..... ..'..
....... YrY1YfY :.." . ..1...... ... . ...'......,'...........,.


Pushing Over the Old Dominoes

BEHIND THE FOG of war lies
the great unanswered question
of our role in Asia. None of us
today can answer this question
finally and conclusively, for there
is no all-wise and omnicompetent
Asian expert who can speak with
authority on a situation which has
existed for only about 15 or 20
Our present position in the Pa-
cific and our relations with Asia
are the unplanned and accidental
consequences of the Japanese vic-
tories over the European empires
in Asia and of our total victory
over Japan.
The result of this immense his-
torical upheaval has been to bring
our military frontier not only all
the way across the Pacific, but
also on to the peninsulas and off-
shore islands of the Asian main-
land-to South Korea, Okinawa,
Taiwan and South Viet Nam. The
great unresolved questions turn
on where an enduring frontier can
and should be stabilized.
BEYOND the military frontier
lips China which is n aing thrngh

When an alien power attacks a
big revolution it generally brings
a reign of terror and dictatorship
which maintains itself by military
aggression abroad. Experience
teaches us, too, that the best pol-
icy is one of watchful waiting
while the internal revolutionary
fires burn themselves out. Even-
tually they do. A new generation.
arrives after a generation of revo-
lutionary upheaval. It has forgot-
ten the original grievances and is
bored with the old ideologies and
seeks for itself a quieter life.
watchful waiting the smaller na-
tions on the frontiers of a gigan-
tic revolution are bound to be ner-
vous and apprehensive. They do
not know what will happen, but
they do know in their bones that
in the long run they will have to
find a way of coming to terms with
the masters, in the present case the
Chinese masters, of the revolution-
ary struggle.
As the small peripheral countries
are unable to know who the even-
tual masters will be, they resort to
the classic rule of nower politics.

the end they are overthrown, their
rulers must look for safe passage
to the Riviera or to Palm Beach.
THERE ARE other weak bor-
derland countries like Burma and
Cambodia, Malaysia and Singa-
pore whose overriding purpose is
to stay out of war. Cambodia has
used words to placate Peking, Sing-
apore has used words to please
Washington, but both have can-
nily avoided any military engage-
ment. The prime minister of Sing-
apore has not offered to let our
fleet use the great naval base at
The administration would have
us believe that there is at stake
in Viet Nam not only the security

power. What was the sense of say-
ing that?
WE ARE LIKE a man who
makes a reckless promise, says
that he will climb the face of the
Washington Monument, and then
in an excess of exhuberance and
pride adds "and if I do not climb it
you may consider that I am a
coward and a horse thief."
In truth, the power of the Unit-
ed States is not being tested in
Viet Nam. It has been tested
against far more powerful ene-
mies than the Viet Cong and their
northern allies. There is no doubt
about the power of the United
What is being tested is whether
the generation now in command
in Washington has the intelligence
to use American power wisely and
effectively or whether it thinks it
can kill mosquitoes with tanks and
build -a Great Society with B-52's.
Nor is the good faith of the
United States being tested. What
is being tested is the competence
and' common sense of a handful of
men who, acting furtively and by

comes bogged down in Viet Nam,
the less able or willing it will be
to undertake a second and a third
Viet Nam somewhere else. It is an
empty boast and a false promise
to tell the world that the United
States will fight aggression every-
Beyond that, if they feel them-
selves threatened by the develop-
ment of Chinese missiles and nu-
clear weapons it might be useful
to see whether an agreement can
be negotiated by the nuclear pow-
ers promising to unite against the
country which makes the first nu-
clear strike.
ONLY LATELY, we must re-
member, the Chinese have said
again that they will never strike
first. It would be most useful if
this could be spelled out in a col-
lective agreement.
In the lonmg run the countries of
the Chinese borderland will have
to make peace with -China. They
will not be able to do this, we
must recognize, until the Chinese
Revolution has run its course, but
eventually they will have to do it.
It is good statesmanship to keep



Back to Top

© 2017 Regents of the University of Michigan