ol 4 lrtigan Daily
Seventy-Sixth Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

Where Opinions Are Free' 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MICH.
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.

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1966

NIGHT EDITOR: MEREDITH EIKER


ov. .23
By LEONARD PRATT tion invo
Associate Managing Editor worst the
THE FASTEST WAY to end a Just w
love affair is to push it too pus is so;
hard, just as the record says. The ba
Somehow it's easy to confuse leadership
loving someone with loving one- Student
self. So everybodyt has friends might li
who've broken up with people just 3000 oft
because they weren't willing to and cone
leave them aloneeand accept them of their U
on their own terms. ThoseI
The campus' current love af- cause ofi
fair with "student power," "cam- nerve an
pus democracy," et al, isn't any rectly fo
different from these more con- to gain t
ventional affairs. had-stu
Though people's desires in this They a
particular affair seem' to range of a vice
from flirtation to fornication (one fairs wh
wonders about the possibility of sary thin
incest . . .) too few seem willing ly. It sho
to accept it on its own terms. rebellions
cals but
FROM MODERATES to revolu- won't bu
tionaries most are pushing things
too hard into molds they weren't THESE
meant to fit. At best there's a terest a:
good deal of unnecessary aggrava- "movemf

University Needs ,Campus
Constitutional Convention

You 're

Pushl n' Too

Hard

lved in this attempt; at
affair could break up.
hat is it that the cam-
hot about?
se of it, and more of the
p of it than Voice or
Government Council
ke tovadmit, is people,
them at least, interested
cerned about the future
University.
people are that way be-
an SGC that had enough
d imagination to bid di-
r their support and so
he first power it has ever
dent power.
are also that way because
-president for student af-
o not only did unneces-
ngs, but timed them bad-
ould be remembered that
s are caused not by radi-
by establishments that
edge.
E PEOPLE and their in-
re at the heart of the
ent," and they will deter-

mine to a great degree what that
movement is. Actions of the lead-
ership which would alienate those
3000 are taboo; major decisions
for the next several months will
have to be referenda.
This is a populist buildup in a
very real way. It has been saved
from fragmentation several times
in the last week by the "leader's"
knowledge that they are nowhere
without the 3000.
The "movement" is them, but
no organization on campus except
Young Democrats-and few indi-
viduals on campus outside of Mi-
chael Zweig, Douglas Ross and
the executive council of SGC -
seem to fully understand that.
A SIZABLE faction of SGC, for
example, somehow visualizes this
affair as some sort of student or-
ganization they have to sanction
or otherwise define.
Voice, for another, has a good
percentage of members who some-
how see this as the Revolution for
which they've been waiting all

these years and are perfectly ready
to try and make it into one if it
isn't obliging enough to come
across by itself.
The administration leadership
has two beliefs about it. The first
says this is the beginning of a
Berkeley that has to be politick-
ed out of at all costs. The sec-
ond thinks the whole business is
something that just couldn't be
happening because it would spoil
all our plans, and that if we ig-
nore it, it will certainly go home
when it gets hungry.
NONE OF THIS makes any
sense. Some of it is deliberate dis-,
tortion, but most is just people
making analogies before they've
sat down and figured out what's
going on here.
When it doesn't fit their pre-
dilections, they try and squeeze
it into them. And they seem de-
termined to do just that or kill
the thing trying-which they can
do.
That would be a very sad thing.

FOR THERE'S something won-
derful in all of this. Almost by
accident the campus has on its
hands something charismatic, val-
uable and delicate.
Those people who have the pow-
er should help it live, like all love
affairs, by wondering at it and
doing what's necessary to keep it
going. Such things have lives of
their own, lives which can be of
great benefit if only people won't
try and make them into something
they cannot be.
IT CAN BE influenced. It can
be worked with and made a part
of an individual's desires. But it
cannot be run or controlled by
anyone's personal interests.
For like all love affairs, this
one will continue to exist only if
it justifies its existence to all its
participants. Any group which
tries to push it into justifying it-
self to them alone will make it
impossible for it to justify itself
to anyone else. By pushing it too
hard, they will have killed it.

1

A CONSTITUTIONAL convention should
be called to reformulate the division
of power in University decision making.,
All of the interest in meaningful par-
ticipation will be wasted unless a new
structured role for students is devised. ,
Rather than having such a role hand-
ed down by the University administra-
tion or by some faculty committee, it
should be constructed -by a representa-
tive body of the University community.
There are three basic interest groups
which should have a structured role in
University affairs: the people of the
state of Michigan, represented by the Re-
gents; the students; and the faculty.
IT WOULD THEREFORE seem logical
that a constitutional convention on
internal university decisipn - m a k i n g
would involve representatives of all three
groups.
This convention would not only deal
with the role of students, but also with
that of the faculty and administration in
all areas of policy. In many cases, the
submission of the names of faculty mem-
bers and students for example, the ad-
ministration has shown the same callous
disregard for the faculty that it has
displayed for the students.
As a possible model for such a con-
vention, one could have 20 elected stu-
dents, 20 elected faculty members and 10
representatives of the Regents, presum-
ably administrators, as delegates.
IT IS IMPORTANT that the student and
faculty delegates to the convention be
elected directly. Although it would be
easier to have Student Government and
SACUA appoint delegates, such a plan
would lack political legitimacy. .

,The precedent for directly-elected del-
egates is a firmly established political
prdcedure. For example, look at Michi-
gan's constitutional convention, and New
York's con-con this year.
The basic rationale for direct elections
is that a body elected under the outdated
system such as the state legislature or
student government council tends to per-
petuate itself at the convention rather
than reflecting the need ror change.
It can be argued that there is a dif-
ferent constituency for elections to an
important student council or faculty
committee than for elections to a body
redefining structural roles.
ONCE THE REPRESENTATIVES are
elected, a committee system would
have to be adopted. Each of these com-
mittees would draft legislation to be re-
ported on the floor of the convention.
In order that the talents of valuable
resource people not be wasted, each com-
mittee of the constitutional convention
should have consultants' and witnesses
from divergent groups on campus who
would present the various viewpoints.
It is clear that this or some similar
model is necessary if the restructuring
of internal decision making within the
University community is to have legiti-
macy. If the recommendations of the
convention are ratified by two-thirds of
the University community, they must be
accepted as binding.
ALL OF THE CURRENT agitation is
meaningless unless the students get a
structured role. A constitutional conven-
tion should be called.
-BRXJCE WASSERSTEIN
Executive Editor

Letters: On Students, Power, Tactics

Remember Long-Range Goals

IY FOCUSING on the issues of making
the draft referendum binding and the
abrogation of the sit-in ban, there is a
danger that students will lose track of
the broader issues.
Even if the administration accedes to
both of the present demands, the basic
problem is not really solved. The real
crisis lies not with any one measure tak-
en by the administration, but rather in
the basic concepts underlying the old Of-
fice of Student Affairs.
Whether it be the HUAC issue, police
on campus, the bookstore, the sit-in ban,
or the draft referendum, the fundamen-
tal problem is that students don't have
real power in governing their own lives.
And thus the real solution does not
lie totally in achieving these two specific
issues. To correct the basic problem it is
required that:
* The powers allocated to the Vice-
President for Student Discipline Richard
Cutler earlier this year must be rescind-
ed.
0 The Office of Student Discipline
should cease to function as a policy-
making body, limiting itself to a service
role.

" Faculty, administration and students
must formulate a constitution for a new
University community government.
*Student Government Council must
maintain its independence until the new
constitution is put into effect. If SGC
puts itself again under the OSD, it is
accepting the decision-making system as
it currently exists.
" The Regents must accept the new
constitution for internal University de-
cisioii-making as being in step with the
needs of this academic community. They
must realize that the University as a
whole will be better off when students
are given responsibility "in campus af-
fairs.
WE CANNOT FORGET that the two
current pressing issues are merely
battles, and that the philosophy behind
those issues is the war. We shall only
achieve victory with the implementation
of a new structure for internal govern-
ment of the University.
-BRUCE WASSERSTEIN
-HARVEY WASSERMAN

To the Editor:
QNE OBJECTION to student
control of student life ("stu-
dent power" or "self-determina-
tion") is of this sort: "If an ad-
ministrator makes a mistake, he
can be 'held responsible' (that is,
called to account by 'his superior
or the Regents, censured, and
fired). If student government or
a student organization makes a
mistake, it cannot be held respon-
sible in the same way (that is,
for example, by expelling those
students involved)."
There is, I think, nothing wrong
with all this. What's wrong is
that what's concluded is, "There-
fore studentsudetermining for
themselves would not be respon-
sible." That doesn't follow.
HOLDING, an administrator re-
sponsible is a formal means of
giving him a stake in his decisions,
a stake compatible with that of
those he is deciding for. It is an
artificial stake.
Students determining for them-
selves do not need an artificial
stake-they have a natural one:
If they choose unwisely, they suf-
fer.
Consider the HUAC disclosure.
Cutler made a bad choice. He
had to account for it. He could
have been fired. But, whether they
made the decision or not, the stu-
dents involved will have to suffer
for it.
Now, which is more likely to
give the more responsible (that is,
the more considered)decision
having an artificial stake in the
decision or having a natural one?
I can't say with certainty now.
(Certainty would require research
as yet undone.) I can, however,
suggest an answer.
IT SEEMS to me that an artifi-
cial stake is a poor substitute for
a natural one: To escape censure,
an administrator needs to show
only that his decision was "rea-
sonable." To escape harm, those
deciding for themselves need to
be right.
An administrator then, is prop-
erly satisfied once he has found a
reasonable decision; and so he'll
tend not to look for others. Those
deciding for themselves cannot be
satisfied by what seems merely
reasonable; and so they'll tend not
to stop at the first "reasonable
decision."
I should here at least point out
that I have assumed the adminis-
trator's artificial stake and the
student's natural stake to be com-
patible. Of course, they need not
be.
There may well be universities
(this one among them) where
those holding administrators re-
sponsible have interests incom-
patible with those of students. In
such universities, a responsible ad
ministrator would be the enemy of
students.
I CONCLUDE THEN, that while
students may not be held re-
sponsible for their decisions in
the way administrators may be
for theirs, students are not, there -
fore, less likely (when determin-
ing for themselves) to make re-
sponsible decisions.
-Michael Davis, Grad
To the Editor:
THE STUDENT ultimatum dic-
tated the terms of peace to
the administration. WOWIE, that
is real communication!
The ultimatum also promised
"sanctions" in case the admin-
istration is unwilling to accede
to the demands. ZOWIE, that is
real student power; they flexed
their sittin' muscles.
The effect of the ultimatum
and promised "sanctions" will
probably be to make further com-
munication between students and
the administration even more dif-

ficult than it is presently.
The administration has no room
to maneuver; it has no choice but
to reject the ultimatum. Nor do
the activists have any room to

i

i
{
1
Lu

J~,~/
44' YE
AB,4

sage, "we give up," to the Indian
pow wow at high noon on Tues-
day? Doubtful. One can only hope
they enjoy a two hour lunch break
instead of the usual hour.
Conciliation between the admin-
istration and the student activists
will require concessions, not ulti-
matums. Perhaps a starting con-
cession is for SGC to reintegrate
itself under OAS.
-Alfred Mudge, '69L
To the Editor:
rfH E BASIC contention of a
large number of students is
that the administration is forc-
ing decisions on the student body
while disregarding student opin-
ion.
Furthermore, it is felt that stu-
dents should demand that the ad-
ministration listen to them and if
such demands are not met some
drastic action must be taken.
These ideas are in total dis-
cord with the facts of life. The
administration does not have to
listen to the students and there is
no way to support any demands
that they do.
Life could be made miserable
for the administration for a while,

To the Editor:
T HE SGC decision to break with
the Office of Student Affairs
(OAS) leaves many questions in
our minds.
Whether students realize it or
not, SGC is a student-elected body
which serves to organize student
activities. We repeat organize stu-
dent activities. Nowhere in the
Regents' bylaws is any mention
given to the power of SGC to
control student conduct, which it
now seeks.
AS HECTORIANS, affiliated
senior men's honor society, theo-
retically a group supervised by
SGC, we now find ourselves tech-
nically in the position of having
been divorced from the OSA,
through an SGC vote.
This was done without our con-
sent, and in the name of a power
which SGC does not possess.
We still feel a part of the OSA,
and resent this unsolicited man-
agement of our affairs. If SGC
members wish to speak for them-
selves as individuals, that's fine.
But, gentlemen, don't impose
your feelings on your subgroups.
For when you do, you are only

To the Editor:
A GREAT DEAL has already
been said about ranking; none-
theless, there still remain some
fair-minded people who feel that
the University should continue its
policy of sending, on the stu-
dent's request, the student's rank
to the local draft board.
It is argued that a democracy
is a balance between the conflict-
ing claims of majority rule and
minority rights, and thus the mere
fact that most students do not
want the University to compile
rankings is not a sufficient rea-
son for the University's not com-
piling and transmitting the rank
of the minority that so requests.
ONE OF THE THINGS that is
wrong with this argument is that
it misinterprets the situation.
If it is true that there is a
conflict between the will of the
majority and the rights of some
individuals, it is also true that
there is a second conflict, one be-
tween the rights of a large num-
ber of individuals not to have in-
formation about their grades sent
in or used in the compilation of
rankings, and the rights of a

or use information about them in
compiling rankings.
IT IS NOT possible to have a
ranking system which does not
violate the rights of some people.
One alternative would be to al-
low all people who wish to have
their grades compared to those of
their fellow students to submit
their names and be compared with
each other. In a system of this
sort, the University could write,
"out of the 200 students we rank-
ed, he was the 135th."
If there were no reasons to
oppose all forms of ranking, I
would be in ,favor of this alter-
native. But this is not the case.
--Jerome Segal, Grad
To the Editor:
ON THE EVENING of Nov. 21,
1966 at 9:30 p.m. a vital and
historic meeting was called to or-
der under the auspices of the lo-
cal chapter of othe Association of
Learned Chemists Opposing the
Harrassment of Our Leaders (AL-
COHOL).
The purpose of this meeting was
to debate, the current issues re-
garding student voice in admin-
As no member of the organiza-
tion voted in the campus elec-
tion of November 16, we were
forced to conclude that we ade-
quately represent the 20,000 stu-
istrative affairs.,
dents who likewise did not par-
ticipate in the balloting. In order
to fairly represent the feelings of
these 20,000 non-voters, each mem:
ber of the organization was ask-
ed to cast 4000 votes.
AT- 9:31 the chairman enter-
tained a moion to draught the
following resolution:
Whereas we feel that it is
the function of the adminis-
trators to administrate, the stu-
dents, to study, the deans to
dean, the cops to cop, and the
Selective Service to select, we
do hereby resolve to lend our
wholehearted support to main-
taining the separation and per-
petuation of these functions by
their respective operators.
After a long and heated debate
the resolution was carried by a
vote of 16,000 to 4000 at 9:35 p.m
Due to the lack of any other equal-
ly significant problems in the
world today, the meeting was
adjourned at 9:36 p.m.
-Norman A. Carlson, Grad
-Paul B. Condit, Grad
-Terry G. Crandall, Grad
-Gary E. Krejcarek, Grad
-Douglas J. Raber, Grad
(Ethyl Chapter, ALCOHOL)
Arab-Israeli
To the Editor:
1 AM STILL waiting for someone
to see this whole Israeli-Arab
conflict for what it really is-a
tragedy of fratricide, a shameless
waste of human and natural p-
tential, a criminal irresponsibility.
Innocent people on both sides
are " getting killed, losing their
homes and possessions, suffering
religious and national discrimina-
tion, so that their leaders can
hand them cheap rhetoric instead
of tangible reforms.
Mr. Khadduri (Letters, Nov. 18)
has shed no light at all on this
heartbreaking situation.
-Patia M. Y. Rosenberg, Grad
Un Chant D'Amour
To the Editor:
Y GRAND NEPHEW escorted
me to the showing of Un
Chant d'Amour, at the Cinema
Guild, which seems to have arous-
ed some complaints from the au-
dience.
I thought it a frank statement
of an important problem in pris-

on administration, and the objec-
tions advanced by people who
were shocked seem very trivial in
view of the unsavory situation
which does exist.

4-I

0

Politicking in Germany

CLOUDED OVER by the gains of the ul-
tra-conservative National Democrats
in Sunday's Bavarian elections is a re-
sult which seems to point the way to an
end to the current German government
crisis.
Despite predictions of a thumping loss
for Ludwig Erhard's Christian Democrat-
ic party, that party actually gained two
seats in the Bavarian legislature. This
indicates a surge in nationalist senti-
ment and refutes claims that the new
coalition would exclude the Christian
Democrats.
In fact, one of the most startling facts
about the elections is the fact that the
Free Democratic party was completely
shut out in the voting, losing all 17 of
its seats. This is another good indication
of lack of faith in a renewal of the old
coalition between the Christian Demo-
crats and the Free Democrats which
broke up last month over increased taxes.
THE NEW COALITION, then will be com-
posed of Social Democrats and Chris
tian Democrats. What is not so obvious,

though, is who will be selected as the
new chancellor to head the coalition when
Erhard steps down.
The only thing, then, which appears
to be in the way of a quick solution to
the crisis and a return of confidence in
the government is an election for chan-
cellor between Kiesinger and Berlin So-
cialist Democratic Mayor Willie Brandt.
But in the meantime, Germany's na-
tional legislature cannot conduct normal
business. It must wait for Kiesinger and
Brandt to form a coalition before the
Bundestag convenes to choose one of
them for chancellor.
THE BALANCE is clearly in iKesinger's
favor."Hopefully, the choice will come
quickly, so the Bundestag may return to
normal business.
-WALLACE IMMEN
Traffic Jam
IF THE UNIVERSITY acts consistently,
Tuesday will be a good day for bank

TN- s

J Y [1oSE

1S

TEAK?


but soon the troublemakers would
be arrested and/or expelled.
THE ONLY REASON that the
administration will listen to stu-
dent opinion is if they want to do
so. The way to make them want
to listen is by proving that stu-
dents have responsible views on
administrative issues and rational
plans for the solution of problems.
The way to convince them of
these facts is by supporting the
work of the now-being-formed ad-
visory boards and of other orga-
nizations like them which are al-
ready in existence (e.g., the LSA
Steering Committee and the En-
gineering Council).

imitating the actions of the ad-
ministration which you criticize.
LET'S CLARIFY the issues, so
that we know where we're going,
and stop this phantom game.
We definitely feel that a stu-,
dent government should be a rep-
resentative voice of the student
body. However, to effect such a
change in policy, adequate con-
sideration must be given to all
the possible alternatives.
Therefore:Be it resolved that:
SGC recommend that there be
a duly authorized Regental com-
mission composed of students,
faculty and administrators to
draw up a plan for a truly rep-
resentative and responsible stu-
fAnf a n 4. r ri n .

smaller number of individuals to
have information about their rank
sent in.
Consider the difference between
the present situation and one in
which the majority votes that the
University should not, even on a
student's request, inform the local
board that he is a full time stu-
dent registered at the University.
In this latter case, the infor-
mation is entirely about the indi-
vidual student, in our present sit-
uation, it is not!
IF THE UNIVERSITY tells the
draft board that I am first in a
class of one thousand, it tells them
that my grades were compared

r