' 3w tqtan a t Seventy-seven years of editorial freedom Columbia: The seven days' war #i Edited and Managed by Students under authority of Board in Cc 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich. s of the University of Michigan ontrol of Student Publications. News Phone: 764-0552 p ress the individual opinions of staff writers be noted in all reprints. NIGHT EDITOR: MARCIA ABRAMSON Editorials printed in The or the THURSDAY, MAY 9, 1968 Michigan Daily ex editors. This mustr 'U' housing rules should not a prison make THE ELIMINATION of compulsory dormitory residence for all underclass- men is the logical culmination of this semester's "hour power" battle and the issue provides an opportunity, for the Regents to take an enlightened position on their own without being forced to respond to student pressure. Vice President for Student Affairs Richard L. Cutler is expected to present to the May Regents meeting reports on the economics and educational relevance of making livingg in residence halls vol- untary beginning in August, 1969. There is only one course for Cutler to recommend in his report. The economics, academic and social viability of volun- tary dormitory residency has been docu- mented since 1961 and is unquestionable. It is to the credit of the Office of University Housing that they have brought the issue to the Regents in ad- vance of student opinion on the subject. This is a decided improvement over the intransigent position the Housing Office took on the question of eliminating women's hours last semester. THERE ARE many indications that Director of University Housing John Feldkamp is correct in predicting that voluntary dormitory living for all will not mean a mass exodus. After Joint Judiciary Council made enforcement of non-student rules im- possible last semester, the Regents voted to put regulation of hours and visitation policy under the care of the dormitory houses making University residence halls a better draw for students who would not have to live in them now under the new regulations. With the power to determine demo- cratically the conditions of their own environment-how they will dress, when they will come in, when they will receive visitors of the opposite sex-students in the residence, halls already have a place to live far more conducive to maturation than they had 'a year ago. Up to now dormitories have in general failed to cultivate the feelings of com- mnunity which is potentially their strong- est selling point because of the negative feelings of those students who regard forced dormitory residency as something akin to imprisonment. IN ADDITION to making the dormitories a more desirable place to live, volun- tary dorm residence should provide the valuable spinoff of putting University Housing in complete competition with Ann Arbor private housing. To compete with the "plush" apartments ,of Ann Arbor, residence halls will be forced to improve on their current fairly sterile image. It is safe to predict that voluntary residence in the dorms will produce more University living units with special prcgrams like Pilot Program or Honors Housing. It is highly likely that there will be a greater.shift to dormitories with special images like South Quad's exclu- sively upper class Kelsey House. There will probably also be more emphasis on special conveniences such as better bus service to North Campus and more flex- ible eating schedules.- TpHE SPECIAL problems of the typical entering freshman provide even bet- ter argument that residence would re- main economically sound. At best the enteringfreshman would receive a plethora of glossy brochures from Ann Arbor landlords and University Greeks while the University residence halls would be giving him a dependable and' thorough look at his prospective home during orientation. It takes a certain amount of experience to deal with the idiocyncracies of Ann Arbor apartments - 12-month leases, damage deposits, and roommates. Most freshmen would recognize that and wait until they had had a year or so to study apartment living. THE ARGUMENT for the continuing use of voluntary residence halls is supported by the experience of the Uni- versity of California at Berkeley as well as by the number of University upper- classmen living in our dorms. .A S2 --e~~nnr.,gin - - ' aTT nl[ ple just don't want to cook for them- selves. EVEN IF THERE were some sort of de- crease in the number of people desir- ing to live in the dorms, there is good reason to believe the University still would not be hurt financially. Operating costs for residence halls are paid by student fees on a yearly basis, but actual building costs are paid largely from bonding. Older dorms such as West Quad and Stockwell have been paid for for a long time. Part of their income goes to pay for residence hall expansion -an expense that has become obsolete with voluntary residence hall living. The conversion of part of West Quad into office space proves that the Uni- versity could find other uses for any extra space created by fewer dorm residents. ALL THE University community sup- posedly operates on the assumption that all expenditures should be directed so as to produce the best educated stu- dents possible. If this is indeed true, voluntary dormitory residence would be an unquestionably sound educational investment no matter what the cost in terms of dollars or administrative incon- venience. The sophomore, junior and senior men, and the junior and senior women who currently live outside University hous- ing have maintained for the last two years scholastic averages higher than overall residence hall averages. ACADEMIC AND social advantages of voluntary dorm residence transcend these statistics, however. The more a student makes his own decisions, the greater his chances r of developing a commitment workable in life outside the University. Apartment living, particularly for sophomore women, offers something closer to this maturing environment than the current situation as does provision of a choice of residency for freshmen. The advantages for social as well as academic growth that voluntary dorm residence would provide have been ex- pounded since the Reed Report was re- leased in 1961 and must not be ignored. The Reed Report's studies indicate that the "element of compulsion" (in resi- dence hall living), "significantly impedes the achievement of educational goals. When the operational changes herein recommended take place; many students, perhaps most, will wish to remain in the residence halls, but the availability of choice is educationally sound and emo- tionally important."% The Report of former University Presi- dent Harlan Hatcher's Commission on Student Decision Making released this semester reiterated this idea in recom- mending that the University should move. "as rapidly as its financial com- mitments permit . . . toward a policy in which residence hall living is not com- pulsory for students at any level." WHEN THE recommendations of such University commissions have been ignored in the past, student unrest has been a logical consequence. Regental ap- proval of this residence hall proposal would be an opportunity for the admin- istration to prove that it puts student rights and academic excellence above non-student moralizing about in loco parentis. -LUCY KENNEDY Today Indiana .. . AMERICAN VOTERS should be delight- ed that the Indiana primary has fi- nally drawn to a close. Now the election itself can finally be settled. The NBC voter projection analysts can turn their microphones nationwide. Gal- lup pollsters can spread to every 100th house all over the country. Time-Life writers can at last analyze the style of national campaigning and get out of Gary, Indiana. With only five months to go before voters select the next President, panic was spreading over the nation that poll- sters and primary voters would not be freed soon enough to predict who would By STEVE DIAMOND LiberationNews Service Last of Three Parts ON FRIDAY evening, around six o'clock, the entire ten block circumference of the campus was ringed by an enormous number of NYC policemen. The situation seemed to have reached an im- passe with black and white stu- dents In the buildings refusing to leave, the cops in position, and the university dickering with the faculty, who were not authorized by the rebel students to speak for them. It was almost impossible for the imajority of people, reporters, and activists alike, to distinguish the days and hours, one from the other. BUT AT AROUND 3:15 a.m. Saturday morning, Vice Presi- dent Truman announced that the university had rescinde the decision to call in the police and that school would shut down un- til Monday. I spent Friday, Sat- urday and Sunday nights in the Mathematics Building. It was tru- ly a beautiful scene, democracy evolving before 'one's very eyes'. A large meeting was being held on the main floor on the question of the police bust and what to do when it came. Mathematics had been billed as the most "militant white" liber- ated building. Its main door was barricaded with heavy steel desks, chairs, filing cabinets and other metal and wood items. Mathe- matics has one wall facing Broad- way. It is a twenty foot high wall almost impossible to scale. The windows on the Broadway side were blocked with huge sheets of heavy styrofoam, discovered in the basement. "WHAT WE HAVE to decide now is what is going to be done in the event of a cop bust. Are we going to lie down and link arms, hold out in the building as long as we can, what are we going to do?" Tom Hurwitz a tall Co- lumbia junior, who wears a red bandana around his forehead, Apache-style, spoke quietly to the students. Hurwitz was the head of the defense committee in Mathe- matics, and you could tell he had- n't slept more than four solid hours since the "thing" began on Tuesday. But everyone was tired, no one had really slept. People raised hands, spoke, and the whole place seemed divided yet somehow unified. THE MAIN FLOOR of Mathe- matics where the students had barricaded themselves is a large Ivorj By WALTER SHAPIRO Associate Editorial Director NOW THAT Columbia Uni- versity nas begun to fade from the headlines, defenders of the students' actions are starting to appear in greater numbers. Gone are the shrill attacks of the New York Times on "student hoodlumism and beginning to emerge are the vague outlines of the eventual moderate view that the mono- lithic structure of Columbia needed a little reform after all. It has been correctly pointed out that the actions of the Co- lumbia studentswere a direct consequence of the lack of an e q u i t a b e decision-making structure. Where students are effectively thwarted from play- ing any major role in deter- mining university policy, it is inevitable that the only way they can make their influence felt is through mass action. Unfortunately this defense inadvertently slights the con- tent of the students' initial demands for an end to the construction of a gym in Morningside Park and the university's withdrawal from the Institute for Defense An- alyses (IDA). The focus on decision - making processes gives the false impression that the ills of Columbia were only structural deform- ities and that there were few, if any, actual maladies. Content is important here because embedded in the stu- dent demands are what can be best described as the "moral di- mensions of the problem." Admittedly it is difficult to pigeonhole the Columbia situa- tion into a simple right-wrong, good-bad dichotomy. But the very complexity is part of the reason why one must not ne- glect underlying "moral" prin- ciples at Columbia. As the career of Robert Mc- Namara attests, it is danger- ously easy for a fundamentally "good" man to lose his human- ity by concentrating exclusively on the specifics of issues with- out weighing their underlying assumptions. And this excessive concern with the pragmatic is L-shaped room. In the leg of the L, the lights were out and if you looked you could make out sleep- ing forms, bodies snuggled close. to other bodies, brown university- dorm blankets, colorful blankets brought in from apartments near- by, and a few sleeping bags. For many of the kids, this was the first opportunity for sleep in three days. The university had shut down until, Monday, so the possibility of a police bust would not materialize again until Sun- day night. There would always be another meeting to attend when you woke up. Saturday, April 27 I woke up Saturday morning to find a huge sign over my head which read "Sarah Lawrence is Here for the Duration." Sarah Lawrence? Sure enough, there were some twenty Sarahloo chicks spread out around the floor, mingled in with the Columbia and Barnard people. It was pretty funny to think that only three weeks earlier, there had been a big hassle with Linda LeClair at Barnard, 'who had been "discovered" living with her boy friend. Here was a com- munity voting, joking, holding out against the superstructure; a community talking, sharing mea- ger food supplies and co-operat- ing in night watch. At a defense committee meeting, several girls adamantly demanded to be al- lowed to participate on the night- watch. Hurwitz calmly explained that it would be a slight "secur- ity risk" if a group of "jocks" de- cided to try to bust in and kick the sleeping protestors out: they wouldn't feel intimidated by two girls on the window sill. SATURDAY was the day of the big anti-war demonstration in the Sheep Meadow of Central Park. Steve Hallwell of SDS,nrepresent- ing the Columbia Students, was the last speaker. When he got to the podium, he called for people to march up to Columbia to show support for the rebel students. By the time he had finished speaking, some eight hundred New York City cops pulled into the Amsterdam Avenue entrance to the campus with fifteen patrol cars, five public buses, and several vans and paddy wagons. Another detachment of around three hun- dred police marched down to the Jim-Crow-Gym site in Morning- side Park where the revolution had begun four days earlier. Police at Sheep Meadow raced ahead of the marchers, who were walking peacefully up the park drive from the Sheep Meadow at 68th Street to 116th Street. Near 86th Street, police on horses and in cars blocked tle route of march. The demo strators de- toured on to Central Park West where they were attacked by po- lice. About 20 were arrested; oth- ers fled into the park and were surrounded and beaten. The press was not there: they had gone on ahead to 116th Street to await the parade. The demon- strators split up into small groups and about 400 made it to the Co- lumbia campus, where they were addressed by Rudd, Halliwell, Hayden and others. To4e strike leaders asked them to disperse for now, but to return to Columbia when the police tried to break the strike. SATURDAY night was cool, but within the liberated buildings ten- sion was building up over the probability of a police bust Sun- day night. The university admin- istration was saying that classes would be held on Monday. A long meeting was held to discuss the possibility of modifying the last and most important demand, am- nesty for all persons involved in the demonstrations. Jonathan Shills, a Columbia senior, favored a change in the wording so that a compromise could be reached and the faculty appeased. The faculty was not in favor of a total amnesty, though many of them sided with the students on the issue of the gym and the IDA. Shills proposed a re-wording of the sixth proposal to go some- thing like "no suspensions, and no permaner.t disciplinary probation", so that if disciplinary probation were to be imposed it could not follow a student throughout his college fcareer, but would be lim- ited to one or two semesters. called by the Coalition, consisted of five to eight hundred athletes, egged on by several aging alumni who wanted to see Columbia brought back to its "senses." The athletes ringed the area and threatened anyone who tried to run the blockade with bodily harm. It was obvious that the jocks, who had felt left out since the takeover began last Tuesday. wanted to have a "good time, too." Outside of Low they were singing football fighting songs, arms around one another's necks, beer cans everywhere, determined to starve out the occupants of the president's suite. LATE SUNDAY night the "white militants" of Mathematics, which is about one hundred yards away from Low, decided to rush the "jock blockade." They met with little success. It was a mat- ter of "psychological" concern, not being able to get food in to Low. People in other liberated buildings began to worry that morale would fall if everyone knew that no food was getting into Low. Monday, April 29 Monday morning there was an- other assault on the blockade. Two hundred SDS sympathizers led by Tom Hurwitz and John Ja- cobs from Mathematics met in a knock-down drag-out fight with the protectors of "law and order." Again they were repelled. No food had entered Low for over twenty- four hours except for an apple tossed through the window. At three o'clock Monday, two black brothers from Hamilton/ Malcolm X Hall with around fifty or so white demonstrators ap- proached the blockade surround- ing 'Low Library. The athletes girded themselves for a charge. It didn't come. Instead, the food- bearers began lobbing loaves of bread, sandwich meats and other hard goods through the one open window in Low. After futilely try- ing to intercept the air-borne foodstuffs, the jocks began to threaten the relief detachment but from out of nowhere came a line of police. At first, the counter-demon- strators cheered, assuming that the policewould contain the food throwing radicals, but much to their surprise, the police, who had been their compatriots in inrform- al chats, formed a cordon around , the "jock blockade" and allowed the food to be thrown in. The oc- cupants in Low, rescued at last, cheered loudly as did those who were throwing the food from out- side. The jocks, betrayed by their own, merely grimaced. * A o;/; John Jacobs, an SDS leader, was riled. "No concessions, we are here to win. If we do not get total amnesty, all is lost. We' are winning now, but we must win the whole war. No concessions." The whole Mathematics forum ap- plauded as "j.j." turned and left; the room. Herhad made his point. It was all or nothing. Sunday, April 28 There was enough conservative7 and moderate support for yet an- other group to form, this one call- ing itself the "Majority Coalition." The group had been trying to get started after it became apparent that the SDS and Black groups were "playing for keeps," but their first decisive action came on Sun- day when they decided to form a .blockade of bodies around the area of Low Library where the students were holed up in Presi- dent Kirk's suite'. They refused to allow anyone to enter the building (by climb- ing up the twelve-foot wall) with. food for the people inside. Med- ical teams were allowed to go in and inspect, but no food could be taken in. The "Vigil" as it was _1 a - t _ .. .,. ,, to wer, ebony Harlem crusades these days. And there are few who are vitally con- cerned with the fate of about two acres of an almost 30 acre park, now relatively unused because it is just not safe. Furthermore the issue of Co- lumbia's membership in IDA is only an easily graspable aspect of the larger issue of Colum- bia's participation in war re- search. But IDA itself is one of the least potent organizations ever created - kind of an asea- demic equivalent of the Sub- versive Activities Control Board - and any school's withdrawal will have almost no effect on the continuation of war re- search. So the students at Colum- bia were undoubtedly guilty of oversimplifying the issues. The precise demands raised at Columbia do not have the grand appeal of transcendent moral causes. Many of the SDS radicals and black mili- tants in the forefront of the Columbia demonstrations al- legedly viewed the struggle from a revolutionary per- spective. But as emotionally and personally insipiring as the revolutionary vision may be, believing in the revolu- tionary potential of this coun- try is at best a romantic de- lusion. But "moral" issues, while muted by a welter of contradic- tions, were definitely present at Columbia. The Harlem community sur- rounding Columbia was not really infuriated over this par- ticular gym in this particular park. Rather, the gym issue symbolized for them the mad- dening spectacle of the power- ful white institution on the Heights jealously guarding its prerogatives. Traditionally, the attitude of Columbia toward its responsi- bilities to the surrounding com- munity has been one of legal- isms and tight calculations. Columbia never did more for Harlem than it had to. For ex- ample, the second gym in Morningside Park was a very callously conceived token de- signed to head off any protests. frontations. The explosion over the gym, therefore, can best be understood as a fail- ure of the sensitive liberal calculus. Defenses for Columbia's in-y action were always easy to cre- ate. Of course, the university's primary aim had to be its edu- cational ends, and of course many of these ends demanded that Columbia fiercely guard its legal prerogatives, such as the right granted by the city to build the gym in the park. Furthermore the maintenance of quality education is not an uphill struggle for the "Mother of State Universities" alone, it has become a severe problem for the slightly shabby mem- bers of the Ivy League as well. The "moral" outrage of the students and members of the black community was di- rected precisely at Columbia's own calculating moral reti- cence on the problems of the neighborhood. The issue was not one of a gym, but one of the legalistic liberal attitude toward our racial problems. This attitude exudes bene- ficence after its own funda- m e n t a 1 prerogatives and needs are completely satis- fied, but until satiated it will fight any intrusion, any ob- jection, with all the institu- tional fury it can muster. This institutional potency should not be underestimated. Columbia has far from incon- siderable influence in New York's citadels of political and financial power. And the exist- ence of these powerful friends of Columbia help explain why the university never lost a ma- jor battle until this year's memorable seven days in April. The point of the other prong of the students' attack was an- other "moral" issue. And this was the entire issue of war re- search. Our society has been scarred and calloused by the way we have institutionalized the nu- clear age and the accompany- ing increase in defense tech- nology. Conveniently, the col- lective horror became muted and finally almost died away. Were it not for the all-en- .zt.....n ni. of weapons of destruction for profit is appalling, but when this sort of endeavor is en- gaged in and encouraged by leading educational institu- tions, the result can only be politely described as "nause- ating." And it is this pro- found "moral" disgust which is the real issue hidden be- hind the furor over IDA. It was this "moral" dimen- sion of the "war research" is- sue which became lost here at the University during the stu- dent referenda last semester. For throughout the campaign, the emphasis was on "letting the students decide" and not on the need for moral decisions. To a large degree the Univer- sity's referenda appeared to be merely another battlefront over "student power" and the .griev- ances - classified research and membership in IDA - seemed contrived in the same manner as the "draft referenda" which highlighted the University's major student movement in 1966. In the referenda campaign, the emphasis unfortunately fell on the abstract issue of "classified research," and the arguments were conducted on the abstract level of the uni- versity as the domain of free inquiry. Discarding the stalking horse of IDA used here and at Co- lumbia and dropping the eu- phemism of "classified re- search" employed here, war re- search must be challenged as something morally unpalatable because its ultimate end can only lie in the destruction of more human lives. The actions of the students at Columbia should be support- ed from a broader perspective than the lack - intolerable as it may be - of an adequate de- cision-making process. For the dead-end reached with the fail- ure of the referenda here last March should remind one of the profound limitations of fo- cusing on decision-making pro- cesses. Rather the actions of the students at Columbia must also be supported because of the moral vision - implicit 'A"Ar cta %Q ff -- n.- nature. But institutional actions premised on a moral void are a permanent disfigurement. The actions of students who possess some sort of moral vi- sion can only be encouraged in a nation whose foreign policy currently consists of banrupt pragmatism carried to unbe- lievable excess. The ends of this sort of pro- test should be both the "ideal" university and the "moral" university. And as utopian as they sound, both visions have a very real practical importance. As mass education continues unabated, the emphasis on the "ideal" university can only serve as a spur to academic ex- cellence of the sort which fos- ters meaningful learning by the students. As the political influence of the individual decreases and the importance of institutions increases, a "moral" university which can attempt to influence public policy through non-par- ticipation in "immoral" proj- ects must become the keeper of the nation's conscience. Free from many of the prejudices of the larger so- ciety and more flexible than most institutions, universities must be citadels of "moral" policies, and the fierce oppo- nents of sucheinstitutional- ized "evils" as racism and the warfare state. It is this factor which has been lost in making men like Columbia President Grayson Kirk major enemies. It is not that they are any more re- sponsible than anyone else - and in many ways they are less so - for the sins of the larger society. Rather they must be opposed because the institutions they champion have the capacity to influence the nation and to serve in the vanguard of those wanting to add a ,deeply lack- ing "moral" dimension to both our domestic and our interna- tional policies. The major lesson of Colum- bia does not lie in the care- fully explored realm of deci- sion-making. Rather the moral of the Columbia uprising is that universities cannot continue to acnuiesce in the evils of society 4 * *