100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

October 12, 1966 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1966-10-12

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


Seventy-Sixth Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

Oct. 12: Democracy at the University

tmmwsftoi .:_

ere Opinions Are Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBORMICH.
Truth Will Prevail

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.

IWEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1966

NIGHT EDITOR: MEREDITH EIKER

Homecoming Panel Should
Abide by Democracy

By LEONARD PRATT
Associate Managing Editor
EVER SINCE the Voice sit-in in
Vice-President Pierpont's of-
fice, people in the administra-
tion and in campus student groups
have been saying a lot more than
they want to. They've also been
saying different things than they
probably would have liked, be-
cause the sit-in has backed them
into corners.
In doing so it may have dealt
a hefty blow to the thinking about
the proper nature of a modern
University's government that had
been going on in several places.
It's time to get back on the right
track.
ACTUALLY, students and ad-
ministrators backed themselves in-
to corners because neither was
ready for the sit-in. When it came
along, both reacted to it-and to
each other-more out of defensive
instincts based on old stereotypes
than out of rational desires.
Although the administration's
reaction to a potential sit-in had
been hanging fire for some two

years now, no concrete plans for
dealing with it had been laid.
On the students' side, not even
Voice was ready for the sit-in.
It was an ad hoc affair that had
not been sanctioned by the mem-
bership as a whole. Other groups
were caught entirely unaware un-
til the bitterness of a frustrated
administration burst upon them.
BOTH STUDENTS and admin-
istrators fell back on their ster-
eotypes in the midst of the uncer-
tainty they found themselves in.
Now both tend to see the discus-
sion of the campus government is-
sue-which had been picking up
pace until now-as a sell-out from
the position they've been forced
to avow. The administration, es-
pecially, has seen recent requests
for talks with students as an ideol-
ogical challenge to its "right" to
run the University.
This conflict, and all the talk
about who has the "right" to do
what that has accompanied it, is
absurd.
It is impossible that an ad hoc
sit-in by 0.1 per cent of the stu-

dent body in one room of one
University building could alter the
historic relationships between ad-
ministrators and non-administra-
tors on which a wise campus gov-
ernment should be based.
THOSE RELATIONSHIPS are
in danger of getting lost in the
shuffle.
The growing alienation of stu-
dents and faculty from anything
resembling institutional goals, the
increasing divergence of aims be-
tween administrators and non-ad-
ministrators and the changing re-
lationship of the University to its
sources of financial and social sup-
port should be the only founda-
tions for a new guiding force on
campus.
IT'S TIME the talks about Uni-
versity government were put back
into perspective.
What that government should
be isn't hard to see, unless the
sit-in-created smog is allowed to
get in the way.
In many ways the ideal Uni-
versity government is synonymous

with the much-vaunted "Univer-
sity family" concept. Both are now
notable for their absence and the
creation of one would almost cer-
tainly lead to the other.
THIS IS BECAUSE of our
changing concept of democracy.
Democracy used to be thought of
as being synonymous with suf-
frage; a democratic society was
one in which everyone could vote.
But it is obvious that there are
subtle but powerful pressures in
society much more operationally
powerful than the ballot box. Ever
since Andrew Jackson, the em-
phasis in democratic thought has
been shifting to the control of
those forces directly, in addition
to indirectly, through the vote.
The major emphases in this
new" concept of democracy are
two: information availability and
a formal system of advise and
consent between governors and
governed. The way people now
influence social decisions directly
is not by voting but by getting
information about issues and try-
ing to influence the officials who
hold statutory power.

THAT'S WHY the "new" de-
mocracy resembles a family. Peo-
ple consult with one another on
decisions affecting all of them.
University government must go
this same route, but it is this
goal which is so easily obfuscated
by arguments about who has the
"right" to do what.
Thus, those who've been think-
ing about what that government
should be must not let the largely
artificial sit-in furor upset their
views on the primary question at
hand: the community's need for
a new analysis of its government.
OPPORTUNITIES for this an-
alysis abound. SGC's proposed stu-
dent advisory committees would
provide an excellent forum. The
Senate Advisory Committee on
University Affairs could also be
a good place to begin.
The point to be kept in mind is
that this analysis must be begun
and that no misty interpretations
of a relatively isolated event
should be accepted as a substitute
for it, no matter who does the
rationalizing.

d

FRAUD!
A hoax has been perpetrated on the
University community. The nefarious
Homecoming Special Events Committee
has rigged the Homecoming Queen Con-
test.
Chairman Howard Weinblatt has blat-
ently refused to let the girl with the high-
est number of points in the first round of
the contest take her rightful place in the
semifinals.-
AS A LAME EXCUSE, he rationalized
his deception by saying that some ob-
scure fraternity would give this contest-
ant an honorary award.
_ Are we to idly stand by as this villainy
is perpetrated? If we do not stand up
for justice now, when will we?
I cannot in good faith remain in my
exalted position as one of the Homecom-
ing queen judges under these circum-
stances. After many hours of thoughtful
deliberation, I must announce I am re-
signing my post in protest.
BUT IT IS NOT TOO LATE for the forc-
es of evil to be defeated.
Student Government Council must set
up one of its infamous investigating com-
mittees which will issue a detailed report
of the whole sordid affair.
No doubt SGC, using its vast power to

0

Hutchins: The Methods of an Age Gone By

Top Vote-getter

regulate student activities will be able
to rectify the situation by crowning the
overwhelming choice of the judges.
AND THERE WILL BE little doubt that
the Homecoming spirit will be truly
embodied in the new Queen: Prof. Hazel
Losh.
--BRUCE WASSERSTEIN
Executive Editor

By ROBERT HUTCHINS
]rHE STRONGEST defense of
American foreign policy runs
something like this:
The world is in bad shape.
Gangsters and brigands are loose
in it. Many nations are too small
and weak to protect themselves
against them. Somebody has to
maintain order and protect the
small and weak.
This responsibility falls to us
because we are the only power
capable of discharging it. When-
ever the territory and independ-
ence of a nation are threatened,
and it appeals to us to defend it,
we must respond because if we do
not such world order as there is
will collapse.
THE ARGUMENT continues with
the recognition that this condi-

tion of affairs is unfortunate for
us. We would much rather stay
at home and build the Great So-
ciety. It is embarrassing, more-
over, for us to have to be police-
man, prosecutor and judge, all
rolled into one.
Our motives are suspected, our
actions are resented, even by those
whom they are intended to bene-
fit. But we can do no other, sim-
ply because there is no other to
do.
There is no effective world or-
ganization, and such a world or-
ganization cannot develop out of
the United Nations because some
of the principal gangsters and
brigands belong to it. They have
prevented it and will continue to
prevent it from acquiring the
means to keep disorderly members

and non-members in their places.
THIS IS the argument. It is an
argument from necessity. But this
necessity is visible only to our-
selves. Gen. Charles de Gaulle, to
say nothing of the Soviet Union
and China, does not see our quali-
fications to run the world, or even
Europe, quite as clearly as we do.
In the second place, it is not
merely embarrassing to be a judge
in one's own cause, it is fatal.
This is not simply because other
people will suspect us of judging
in our own interest. It is because
it is impossible for a judge to
judge his own cause justly.
A nation that sets itself up to
maintain order in the world must
end by trying to conquer it be-
cause it will inevitably define a

gangster or a brigand as anybody
who tries to thwart its self-ap-
pointed mission.
IN THE THIRD place, if we
spent one-tenth of the money,
brains and attention on solving
the problems of world organiza-
tion that we have dedicated to
military preparations and military
exploits,. if we, as the greatest
power in the world, devoted our-
selves to making the United Na-
tions work, we might not succeed,
but at least we might complain
with a clearer conscience than we
are entitled to have today.
It is significant that two rea-
sons why U Thant resigned his
post were the failure to admit
mainland China and the war in
Viet Nam. The United States is

responsible for both.
Finally, the world is not call-
ing for a self-anointed Caesar.
The countries of Asia, and Africa
in particular, are not asking to
be "saved" from Communism, cer-
tainly not by military power,
which, when applied on the Amer-
ican Plan, means the destruction
of their property and the corrup-
tion of their people.
THE ARE ASKING for help
and guidance as they try to find
their way out of a miserable past
into a tolerable future. By re-
sponding with military power we
show that we have no grasp of
the realities of the 20th century.
Our slogans and our methods are
those of an age that is gone.
copyright, 1966, Los Angeles Times

4t

Soviet-French Pact
Points Way for U.S.

Letters: New Course Evaluation System

SOVIET SCIENTISTS are learning the
value of cooperation.
As an example, releases from Russian
news sources have lauded the recent ar-
rangements made with France for coop-
erative outfitting and operation of a 70
billion electron volt nuclear particle ac-
celerator, now nearing completion in Mos-
cow.
This facility has a capacity more than
twice that of the largest accelerator lo-
cated outside the Communist sphere. It
gives the Russians tremendous capabili-
ties in nuclear research and promises to
advance their knowledge of nuclear phys-
ics.
IN THE PAST the 'Russians have been
deficient in such work because of their
lack of sophisticated scientific instru-
ments.
Now the French have agreed to supply
a hydrogen bubble chamber for the pur-
pose of viewing particle trails and iden-
tifying properties of sub-atomic matter.
This multi-million dollar piece of
equipment is considerably more precise
than any the Russians have been able
to produce; and the accelerator itself will
be larger than anything France could
finance at the present .time. Both sides
feel this is, a mutually profitable ven-

ture, and their work will yield much pre-
viously unobtainable information.
BUT PRESENT PLANS do not include
sharing this information with anyone
outside of the arrangement. This means
that the United States must depend upon
expansion of its present capabilities, and
the building of a proposed 200 BEV ac-
celerator. The plans for this are being
stifled by a long delay in the selection
of a site.
The Soviet accelerator will be in opera-
tion for seven years before the American
facility is completed.
In this time the Russians will gain
information which would be very useful
in our studies with the 200 BEV machine.
A U.S. agreement with the French and
Russians beforehand could have preclud-
ed duplication of studies and advance
capabilities on both sides.
RECENT ADVANCES have been made in
a series of talks concerning Soviet-
American relations on peaceful explora-
tion of space and nuclear treaties.
Hopefully the diplomats working on
these goals will now see after years of
talk, that cooperation between the two
warring giants in scientific research is
the only way in which new fields of sci-
ence can be efficiently explored.
-WALLACE IMMEN

Residential College:
The First Donation

To the Editor:
IN RESPONSE to a point raised
in the article by Bruce Wasser-
stein in The Daily of September
30, I agree that students should
have a choice in evaluating the
teaching effectiveness of faculty
members. They are, after all, the
primary consumers.
Two problems arise. The first
concerns the meaning of teach-
ing effectiveness. An effective
teacher might do a variety of
things. He might rouse the in-
terest of a large number of aver-
age 'students, or he might chal-
lenge a few extremely able ones.
An effective teacher might be
one whose lectures are enjoyable
to hear, or he might be one who
says things that will suddenly re-
appear from dusty memories 10
years hence. Some effective teach-
ers may simplify and make un-
derstandable complexissues, oth-
ers may introduce previously un-
perceived complications.
Some effective teachers may syn-
thesize existing knowledge, oth-
ers may break new ground and
share the process of discovery.
This list could easily be expanded.
PERHAPS some effective teach-
ers would score high on all con-
ceivable counts, but that seems
unlikely. Thus any definition of
teaching effectiveness must en-
compass a variety of dimensions.
Secondly, the method of eval-
uation is crucially important. As
a graduate student several years
ago I viewed the operation of
the Yale course critique system,
and I feel that the techniques
employed there deserve broader
application.
The end product was a com-
prehensive booklet published by
the Yale Daily News in which
most courses in Yale College were
evaluated in various ways in a
paragraph or two.
The first step in preparing the
evaluation was an elaborate and
carefully prepared questionnaire,
which was administered to all stu-
dents during class time. Using the
data gained from these question-
naires as a basis, a small group
of students from the class draft-
ed the evaluation. Usually this
small group was comprised of stu-
dents majoring in the department
of the course who had -high aca-
demic standing.
IT WAS impossible to dismiss
these evaluations on the grounds
of an inadequate and possibly
biased sample of opinion or to al-
lege that the writers did not un-
derstand the field.
By the grades which they had
given them, the faculty had al-
ready acknowledged that those re-
sponsible for the drafting had at
least some comprehension of the
field.
The overall grade point average
of the students in the course,
which was appended to the course

evaluations ought to be given in
decisions relating to promotion
and tenure.
-Harold K. Jacobson
Professor of Political Science
Nu Sigma Nu
To the Editor:
W HILE the administration is
busying itself with measures
that will crack down on the an-
tics of Voice (why not simply
order 30 chairs and set them up
in Cutler's office, with a velvet
rope around and a sign reading
"Reserved for Sit-In) is there
danger that an issue at least as
important will be ignored?
The University is apparently
going into the fraternity house
realty holding business without the
slightest notion that some im-
propriety may be involved.
THE DAILY hasn't reported
which member of the administra-
tion took it upon himself to de-
cide that the University's priv-
iliged status as a tax-exempt or-
ganization was going to be used
to shelter Nu Sig, but whoever
it was evidently wasn't bothered
by the fact that Nu Sig is a
private, social organization and
that if Congress had wanted do-
nations to it to be tax-exempt it
would have written the tax law
that way.
How does the University intend
to justify lending itself to an ar-
rangement which achieves by in=4
direction that which is not per-
mitted by law?

It's true that this will encourage
donations to Nu Sig and help it
build a house it might not other-
wise have.
BUT THEN HOW can this bias,
itself, be justified? Why fraterni-
ties and not co-ops?
Most fundamentally, is the Uni-
versity ever right in according
privately-controlled organizations
special treatment, under circum-
stances like this, when these or-
ganizations are ones with exclu-
sive self-determined (even if de-
segregated membership-so that
assisting this fraternity is tan-
tamount to discriminating against
every other student not a member
of this fraternity?
It would seem that these are
serious questions and that the
wisdom of this maneuver is doubt-
ful.
MOREOVER, as if making the
gift of its tax exempt status to
Nu Sig (and its bankrollers)
wasn't enough, we are told the
University is actually going to put
its public money into the Nu Sig
facilities. This makes the arrange-
ment even harder to justify.;
What is the University getting
in return for its generosity? Hous-
ing for a few score of the thirty-
odd thousands. Who's getting the
better of the bargain? How can
the University explain its sub-
sidizing of a fraternity house when
there are dormitories overcrowd-
ed, run-down and unbuilt?
PERHAPS, of all the urgent

competing priorities for1
versity's limited funds,I
is first.
But is the University
step which will show u
able partiality to a single
exclusive social organiza
which will suggest that1
versity does not take i
obligations to the taxpa
its students seriously?
-Roger Lee
To the Editor:
I AM WELL aware of
that the Ann Arbor p
partment is conspiring
this campus of the diseE
monly called "the motorc
must they also rid our
school of the drivers?
University regulations
ing the use. of motors
freshmenprdposed law
strict the enjoyment an(
tages ofhmotorcycles, and.
Bonnet Meter-Maid areE
do us in (or rather out).
However, these meas
all within the law and
cases are the law.
BUT WHAT accuses t
conscience is that the A
roads are slightly le
smooth. Maybe you don
school on a motorcycle
cycle, maybe you don
classes on a go-cart
shopping cart, but surely
be aware of the abomin
dition of our campus stre

the Uni-
Nu Sig's
taking a
unjustifi-
private,
tion and
the Uni-
ts wider
ayer and

ed,'
Ro
th(
)olic
to
ase
ycle
ha..
pr
┬░yc
the
all
ur
he
nn
ass
t r
or
et
or
yo
ab
ets.
.1.

THE REGENTS, in considering where
funds from the $55 Million campaign
could best be channeled, gave "high pri-
ority" but not "top priority" to the Resi-
dential College.
Editorial Staff
MARK R. KILLINGSWORTH, Editor
BRUCE WASSERSTEIN, Executive Editor
CLARENCE FANTO HARVEY wASSERMAN
Managing Editor Editorial Director
LEONARD PRATT........Associate Managing Editor
JOHN MEREDITH....... Associate Managing Editor
CHARLOTTE WOLTER .. Associate Editorial Directol
ROBERT CARNEY......Associate Editorial Director
ROBERT MOORE .................. Magazine Editor
BABETTE COHN .............Personnel Director
NIGHT EDITORS: Michael Heifer, Merle Jacob, Rob-
ert Kivans, Laurence Medow, Roger Rapoport, Shir-
lev Rosick. Neil Shister.
CHARLES VETZNER .................. Sports Editor
JAMES TINDALL ............ Associate Sports Editor
JAMES LaSOVAGE.........Associate Sports Editor
GIL SAMBERG... ....Assistant Sports Editor
SPORTS NIGHT EDITORS: Grayle Howlett, Howard
Kohn, Bill Levis, Bob McFarland, Clark Norton, Rick
Stern, John Butkus, Gretchen Twietmeyer, Dave
Weir.
Business Staff
SUSAN PERLSTADT, Business Manager
JEFFREY LEEDS ........Associate Business Manager
%&.Vt ifly? ftAfl A Atrar.4,.,4.... tA

In short, according to Michael Rad-'
dock, vice-president for University rela-
tions, a new Graduate Library has been
getting all undesignated contributions.
Thus the Residential College will have
to wait until this and several other proj-
ects have gotten their share of contribu-
tions, unless, of course, contributors be-
gin to specify that their gifts are meant
for the Residential College.
BUT THE PROPHETS of Residential
College doom can take heart.
The first contribution specifically des-
ignated for the Residential College has.
arrived. Marshall Richards, an alumnus
working at a farmers' market in Ells-
worth, Mich., has contributed $100 to the
project.
Burton Thuma, dean of the Residential
College, has the Richards letter framed
in his office. Residential College boosters
on campus, students unable perhaps to
make as eloquent a contribution as Mr.
Richards, can look to the contribution as
a start.
Campaign strategy includes dissemina-
tion of material stressing the urvencv of

While bumping along Washte-
naw Ave. (a U.S. highway no less)
I frequently stop to bemuse my
fate and to fix my suspension
system.
Owners of large cycles may eas-
ily ride over these gulleys and
potholes, while owners of smaller
bikes have to experience these
states of depression.

do -ow,

'67L WHY DO THESE holes still ex-
ist? Is it because the City Coun-
cil owns stock in Lloyds of Lon-
oads don? Or is it because the City
Fathers are simply trying to weed
out motorcycles?
ce de- I tend to think it is the lat-
0 cure ter. Motorcycles may be hazard-
com- ous, noisy, space consuming and
e." But nuisances; but Uncle Samneeds
allowed our boys so let's try to keep
them alive.
ohibit- If the impeccable conditions
les by of our roads are not soon recti-
to re- fied, we may have to resort to
advan- riding on the sidewalks. The Ice
L Blue- Age is long gone and these era-
out to ters no longer need remind us of
who controls the Asphalt in Ann
.es. are Arbor.,
n some -Karl Manheim, '69
moral ilitaris m
* Arbor
than To the Editor:
ride bo MILITARIST fervor on the
go ti rise in the U.S.? Is the John
in a son administration gradually pro-
u must voking China into war through
le con- the progressively indiscriminate
s n use of power (i.e., escalation of
the war) in Viet Nam?
If so, the weight of public opin-
ion in America doesn't seem to
care. Have we, after a 20 year
moratorium, become so accustom-
ed to the horror of a nuclear holo-
caust that we no longer fear it?
Would we, as at Dr. Strangelove,
rather laugh nervously than really
concern ourselves?
During the frenzy of the missile
race of the late 1950's, the threat
of world conflict was paramount
in the minds of men on both
sides of the world. At that time,
caution stemming from a real
awareness of danger helped to
hold world conflict in check.
SINCE THEN, however, nuclear
delivery systems have reached pro-
gressively higher levels of perfec-
tion while concern over their an-
nihilative capacity seems to have
been somehow repressed.
Before we go any further with
this war in Viet Nam, let's ask
ourselves a few questions. Can we
shamelessly allow Washington to
pick an Asian land war with China
-a war it could not win without
nuclear weapons?
Has conscience become an ir-
relevant or weaking emotion in
U.S. foreign policy formulation?
And are we too cool and comfort-
able to care?
THERE SEEMS to be a hideous

*

A

-4

e

Back to Top

© 2017 Regents of the University of Michigan