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.

May 11, 1968 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily, 1968-05-11

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


"I Wonder If We've Been Gypsied"

N_

M4'wM3*r441uDit
Ehe t thgan ffly
Seventy-seven years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students of the University of Michigan
under authority of Board in Control of Student Publications

\ F-- - - - - IJJ

420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich.

News Phone: 764-0552

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

SATURDAY, MAY 11, 1968

NIGHT EDITOR: PHIL BLOCK

Fining the protesters:
A Congressional rerun

AT FIRST IT sounds extremely menac-
ing that the House of Representatives
has decided to cut off permanently fed-
eral grants, loans and other educational
aid to college students and, teachers who
participate in protests that disturb the
functioning of a university.
This hastily passed bill is nothing more
than a gut reaction against the Colum-
bia protest. And if it is enacted and
deemed constitutional, it could seriously
threaten academic freedom and, per-
haps, even university autonomy.
However, the "if enacted and deemed
constitutional" conditions are more. for-
midable than they would appear at first
glance.
In the past, such legislation has in-
cluded anti-riot and anti-discrimination
laws, but this time the House aimed its
action at student demonstrators whose
disruptive protest at Columbia shocked,
and scalded the national conscience. In
the American tradition, the, purge of
protesters took the form o1, economic
punishment.
BUT, AS IN the past, the two vaguelyk
worded amendments will probably not
change very much. There are still riots;
there is still discrimination; and there
will still be student civil disobedience.
And since the amendments carefully
state that a university or college must re-

quest the government to cut off the
student loans, they probably never would
be employed at sophisticated universities
like Columbia or Berkeley and only would
be of importance at small, backwater
colleges.
Some Congressmen are already pre-
dicting that these amendments will be
rejected by the Senate or at least junked
by a Senate-House conference. Knotty
problems of constitutionality will prob-
ably keep the amendments from ever
being enacted.
IT SEEMS obvious: that the House re-
sponded to an irritating situation with
hastily written legislation designed to
appease public sentiment and die an,
early death. Even legislators who did
not want to pre-empt the powers of uni-
versity administrations felt compelled to
reflect (the public outrage in a meaning-
less public relations statement.
While these amendments will prob-
ably never be effective, the "do some-
thing hysteria which produced these
legislative inanities is profoundly dan-
gerous. For as long as reactionary legis-
lators on both a national and state level
believe that it is their solemn duty to
police the campus, academic freedom is
never that far from thin ice.
-HENRY GRIX

TOI
ii IiI ,~
t _ a r 4.
I I' ~1 I 4 j1
Ii *1 1
G f^I ''
AI*
a

'IY 1
J7/
,D AkP
Eli T k
-1'

s"4
fell t

How to live
without Regents

'I

,,I..

7 * :-4c a.4A. rs P '

By MICHAEL DAVIS
Daily Guest Writer
Last of Two Parts
EDITOR'S NOTE: The author-._
a doctoral candidate in philoso-
phy who has been active instudent
Government Council for the past
two years as administrative vice
president and as an at-large mem-
ber-attempted yesterday to re-
fate arguments in defense of the
Regents. In today's article Mr.
Davis presents constructive argu-
ments for doing away with the
Regents.
THERE ARE at least four ar-
guments for doing away with
the Board of Regents:
That the Board of Regents
represents the worst possible
method of governing the Uni-
versity.
A body of men having little
acquaintance with contemporary
campus life, having full-time jobs
elsewhere, and being two genera-
tions removed from the values and
life-style of two-thirds of the
University they are supposed to
govern, come to campus once a
month for two days, are briefed
by only one source, make broad
policy decisions on that pattial
information, and spend much of
the rest of their short time here
meddling in details that happen
to concern them (sex, unions,
communists, and so on).
At least, if the state legisla-
ture ran the University directly,
it would have less time to med-
dle. If the alumni ran the Univer-
sity, at least those who had been
inside a classroom in the last
thirty years would hive a major
say in making policy. If the ad-
ministration ran the University,
then at least those who' daily
saw the effects of decisions would
be making them. If the faculty
ran the University, then at least
people who lived academics would
be making academic decisions. If
the students ran the University,
then at least decisions would be
made by the overwhelming ma-
jority of those affected.
Instead, we have a system giv-
ing up the advantages, while re-
taining all the disadvantages, of
every one of these alternatives.
That the existence of the
Board of Regents is itself a
provocation to the legislature.
The Regents claim to repre-
sent the people of Michigan. In
fact,das every legislator knows,
they do not. They are old Michi-
gan graduates, no more in touch
with the people of the state than
with the University community.
They have no support.
If' they were chosen by the
University community, they could
at least speak with its full force
behind them. They cannot. If
they represented the people of the
state, then theyycould mobilize
their constituency against the
legislature when, say, the Uni-
versity budget was cut. They can-
not. If they were self-appointing,
they might, aware of their own
weakness, treat the legislature
with more respect.hThey do not.
The legislature, every now and
then, is obliged to show who
speaks with the force of the state,
and the University gets hurt.
That the Regents insulate
the real decision-maker, the
administration, from faculty,
staff, and student pressure.
Administrators are in the habit
of saying, "Oh, I agree with this,
but I'm not sure we can get it by

the Regents. I'd like to advise
you to make such-and-such
changes." In fact, the adminis-
trator often does not agree with
"this:" but the easier an admin-
istrator finds it to take the pres-
sure off himself and put it on
someone more distant and less
vulnerable, the better.
Most policy is, in fact, made by
the administration which - by
controlling the information go-
ing to the Regents-can in gen-
eral control the decision they
make.
That the best alternative
to regental rule is highly de-
sirable in itself.
That alternative is rule by a
Community Council of, say, eight
members elected at-large from the
University community, every ad-
ministrator, faculty member, staff
member, and student having one,
vote. The term of office for
councilmen should. I think, be
two years. The president of the
University would stand to the
Council as a city manager stands
to his city council.
Rule by this Community Coun-
cil would assure that those who
spoke for the University commu-
nity had support there, that they
had immediate knowledge of con-
ditions there, and that they had
to respond to the interests and
concerns expressed there.
In addition, election by the
University would increase the
likelihood of having persons of
understanding. and knowledge
making the final decisions; for
the University community is a
better judge of what it needs in
leadership than are the people of
the state.
The legislature would, of course,
continue to speak for the people
of the state, exercising the same
control over the University that
it now does-by the same means-
granting and withholding of
money.
There should, however, be an
improvement in the relations of
the University with the legisla-
ture. The issue of who represents
the people would no longer cloud
and inflame the conflict between
the University's need for auton-
omy in educational matters and
the state's need to plan for sys-
tematic use of its limited resource.
While these arguments should
alone be enough to prove we
should do away with the Board of
Regents, I have still left unsaid
the most important: "Everyone
is degraded," says John Stuart
Mill in Considerations on Repre-
sentative Government. "whether
aware of it or not, when other
people, without consulting him,
take upon themselves . . . power
to regulate his destiny . . . Rulers
and ruling classes are under a
necessity of considering the inter-
ests and wishes of those who have
the suffrage; but of those who are
excluded, it is in their option
whether they will do so or not;
and however honestly disposed,
they are in general too fully oc-
cupied with things which they
must attend to, to have much
room in their thoughts for any-
thing which they can with impu-
nity disregard."
The substitution of a Communi-
ty Council for the Board of Re-
gents would, in short, make the
University a more humane and
humanizing place in which to
live, work, and learn.

a

Columbia from the inside

Seeking peace of mind

THE FLURRY OF HOPE that has arisen
around the Paris "peace" talks must
be viewed merely as another attempt by
the government to switch public atten-
tion away from the real issues underlying
the U.S. position in Vietnam.
The Korean experience indicates-as
the government itself readily admits-
that the talks are likely to drag on for
quite some time. Wbrse than this, the in-
transigence'of both parties will undoubt-
edly mitigate against any acceptable set-
tlement. The U.S. is not likely to agree to
an unconditional cessation of bombing
as long as it can raise the fear that such
a halt would be used by the North to
build up its troop supplies. ,
It would be unrealistic to assume that
the U.S. is unaware that nothing mean-
ingful may come out of the preliminary
peace talks. Rather, such an eventuality,
would be extremely advantageous for us,'
for then Hanpi could be ,branded once
and for all as unwilling to reach a peace-
ful settlement, and the war could be
continued with renewed vigor.
WHATEVER happens in ,Paris, it will in
no way change the basic immoral
and illegal nature of the U.S. position.
The most obvious fact-and the one that

is most consistently overlooked-is that
the U.S. has no business being involved in
negoiations in the first place. The "com-
mitments" in Asia that Johnson makes
so much of are nothing more than nebu-
lous promises to the puppet Saigon gov-
ernment that remains in power only be-
cause of U.S. support.
The undeniable fact is that the gov-
ernmentI will pull out of Vietnam only
\ when internal conditions make it un-
feasible for money and manpower to re-
main tied up there. As long as the gov-
ernment is able to suppress ghetto re-
bellions without bringing the troops
home, and as long as public sentiment
against the war is misled by false hopes
for a quick, negotiated settlement, the
war may drag on.
Thus, the growing belief that the U.S.
is making a "sincere effort" to bring the
war to a close is disastrous. The Vietnam
war is only symptomatic of an imperial-
istic foreign policy that feeds on counter-
insurgency movements. If people cease
protesting because they feel that the war
is about to end, the government can con-
tinue to create new Vietnams around the
world with complete immunity.
-DAVID DUBOFF

By MAL BROWN
and
BOB LEWIS
EDITOR'S NOTE: The authors,
an assistant professor of philoso-
phy at Barnard and an associate
professor of geography at Colum-
bia, were members of a faculty
committee which attempted to me-
diate between administration and
protesting students during the
seven-day sit-in at Columbia. Their
eyewitness account was made avail-
able to the Daily through the
kindness of Prof. Rhoads Mur-
phey of the geography department.
RAGIC EVENTS have occurred
at Columbia University. Be-
cause we have been intimately in-
volved In these, and because they
have deeply affected us, we
thought we should set down some
of ,our impressions and share
them with our, friends.
We don't claim to provide here
a definitive analysis, however,
partly because we want to set
down our thoughts in a hurry, and
partly because of the fluidity of
the current situation, which is
still in process.
To understand the complexities
of the current situation, it is ap
propriate to characterize briefly
the structure of Columbia Univer-
sity. During the reign of Nicholas
Murray Butler (the first half of
this century), Columbia had a
highly centralized and dictatorial
administration. With the coming
to power of President Kirk there
was some decentralization in that
departments were given consider-
able autonomy. The power of the
Administration was still supreme,
however, in relation to student af-
fairs and in relations with the sur-
rounding community. In the last
year the're was a reorganization
which resulted in a return to
greater centralization.
IT WAS AGAINST this back-
ground that a-number of particular
issues arose on which students
and faculty were sharply divided
from the administration. For ex-
ample, the expansion of the Uni-
versity's physical facilities out into
the surrounding community was
carried out imperiously and with-
out regard for the feelings of the
residents, even when these were
expressed by organized groups.
When it was first proposed in
195 to build a gym on public land
in Morningside Park, little objec-
tion was raised, particularly in
view of the provision for some
limited community use of the
facility. But organized objections
subsequently grew up both to lo-
cating the gym there and to Co-
lumbia'smethods in acquiring the
site. The central administration
paid no heed to these objections,
but persisted in their plans and
began construction.
Internal issues which intensified
the divisions in the University
community included: participation
in the Institute for Defense Anal-
ysis (ILA); unilateral issuance of
rules governing student affairs;
and inconsistent and arbitrary ad-
ministration of these rules.
In response to a recent ban on
indoor demonstration, the Stu-
dents for a Democratic Society
(SDS) organized a protest which
rpent r i +then ntn n fa

amnesty in -the form of a letter
signed by President Kirk.
THE COLUMBIA College facul-
ty voted to condemn the action
of the student demonstrators, to
call for a peaceful solution, to
urge that police power not be used,
and to establish a tripartite com-
mittee composed of Administra-
tion, Faculty and Student repre-
sentatives to have jurisdiction
over matters of discipline, sub-
ject to the approval of thePresi-
dent.
On the next day a group of fac-
ulty gathered informally to dis-
cuss the part faculty should take
in resolving the crisis. The ap-
proximately 200 faculty in attend-
ance were broadly representative
of both seniot and junior faculty
and from all the units of the Uni-
versity. This group decided to
function as a mediating force be-
tween the recalcitrant students
and the implacable administration
by calling for the following four
points:
" Request Trustees to stop con-
struction of gym.
* Turn disciplinary powers over
to tripartite committee.
* Evacuation of buildings by
students.
* Faculty agrees to stand be-
fore occupied buildings to prevent
forcible entry by police or others.
This Ad Hoc Faculty Committee
was in almost continuous session
for the whole week before the
"bust." It sought a non-violent
solution by trying to negotiate with
both of the contending parties. As
members of this group, we sta-
tioned ourselves around the oc-
cupied buildings to interpose our-
selves between the demonstrators
and either police or right-wing
counter- demonstrators.
The Administration's reaction
to the early difficulties in the ne-
gotiations was an attempt to im-
pose their authority by calling in
police without consultation of this
group or the Columbia College
faculty. Indeed on the second day
of the strike the Columbia College
faculty, an official body, in the
third point of its formal resolution
mentioned above had urged that
police action not be used. Several
days later this resolution had been
endorsed at a meeting of the gen-
.eral university faculty meeting for
the first time in over twenty years.
Faculty on the ad hoc commit-
tee immediately interposed them-
selves to prevent a violent con-
frontation, and at least two fac-
ulty members were injured. The
police withdrew.
Although the Trustees never met
during the crisis, nor were in
evidence on the campus, several
of them made public pronounce-
ments supporting the authority
of the Administration. The Facul-
ty group couldn't call a meeting
of the Trustees because there are
no procedures for doing this. It
was also very difficult to main-
tain adequate contact with mem-
bers of the Administration.
PRESS RELEASES from the
Administration repeatedly em-
phasized the fact that the demon-
strators were a very small minority
of the 1'7 A mmmhr stient

ture common to Administration
and the press, leaving them even
farther out of touch with reality,
,This brings us to the "bust."
The Administration maintained
that negotiations had reached 'a
stalemate, and without consulta-
tion or advance notice they order-
ed the police on campus. This ac-.
tion was taken after the Admin-
istration had not met the demands
of the ad hoc committee. The ad-
ministration also turned down a
last-minute faculty proposal to
call on Mayor Lindsay to mediate.
WE CAN SPEAK in detail to the
excessive use of force and brutal-
ity on the campus. We stood in
front of one door to Fayerweather
Hall in a line of about 15 faculty
members. Behind us was a group
of about 50 nonviolent students
who had interposed themselves
to protest the use of police force.
Three ranks of helmeted riot po-
lice formed in front of the other
door to the building, where there
also were faculty and student
demonstrators.
The occupants of the building
were put on notice that they were
on the private property of the
Trustees, and the people in front
were ordered to stand aside. In
response, however, the demon-
strators only continued to sing
"We Shall Overcome" and "We
are not afraid."
The troops charged the non-
violent demonstrators, and used
blackjacks to beat them as well
as kicking with their feet. In a
matter of minutes , they gained
entry to the building through that
door. A new group of police now
formed in front of us in three
ranks. These were in the regular
blue uniform of N.Y. City police.
Perhaps the students and fac-
ulty received preferential treat-
ment, as the Administration
claimed, in that police did not al-
ways use clubs. Police brutality
and excessive force were clearly
in evidence, however. There was
no need to kick and beat the non-
violent students and faculty. They
could easily have been dragged
away from the entrance. There
was no need to assail those run-
ning toward the exit. No one that
we saw struck a policeman; we
surely did not. Furthermore, the
building's other entrance had al-
ready been entered by the police.
'There was no need to bust our
entrance, If what we experienced
and witnessed was not police bru-
tality, but restrained conduct on
the part of the police, their normal
conduct must clearly be beyond
belief.
THE UNIVERSITY-WIDE Stu-
dent Council immediately called a
student strike, which was honored
by a majority of students and many
of the faculty, including us. They
also called for the resignations of
the President and Vice President
and Trustees sharing responsibility
for the decision to call the police.
They further supported the de-
mands of the previous strikers.
Mayor Lindsay has admitted that
"excessive violence" was used by
his police force, and has called for
an investigation.
The net reslt of the whole af-

Anarchy vs. totality

Rebuilding insurance

STATE BUSINESSMEN and property
owners whose holdings in riot-stricken
areas have become too risky for insur-
ance companies to handle can only watch
without surprise as their insurance cov-
erage vanishes.
Policies which provided as much as 90
per cent fire and extended coverage for
property in these areas lost all feasibil-
ity when "fire-bombing" became asreal-
ity in Michigan cities last summer. No
single insurance agency could reasonably,
cover property in the cities where explo-
sion is only barely dormant, whether
the owners are soul brothers or slum-
lords.
But denying insurance coverage can
only worsen ghetto conditions. Owngers
without insurance will be forded to raise
rents and prices or simply close up and
move away. In either case, the residents
of the area would suffer most and the
motive for rebellion would be increased.
If the cities do erupt again this sum-
mer, as has been repeatedly predicted,
the disasterous effects will spread even
farther than before.' Property owners who
cannot collect insurance claims ,neither
could nor would rebuild.
THE STATE House of Representatives
has lrjiv'r annroed n meane tn

The pool would provide insurance for
high-risk areas without forcing any one
agency to take undue risks or demand
payments too high for most property
owners to afford.
The Senate Commerce Committee has
recommended passage of the bill. All
that remains is for the Senate to approve
the measure.
The problems of the cities are not go-
ing to be solved immediately, and until
solutions begin to appear, measures like
this must be provided to alleviate un-
due pressure on riot victims. The Senate
should act quickly so that the insurance
pool can become effective as soon as
possible.'
-MARCIA ABRAMSON
In -nemoriarn
WHEN Bill Buntin came to the Univer-
sity almost seven years ago, the bas-
ketball tradition here was generally lack
luster, especially compared to the high
stature of its football teams.
But Buntin changed all that. As star
center of the University basketball squads
from 1962-65, he helped establish an era
of packed field houses and winning team-s.
T~H us thre' time All ia Ten selec-

The following remarks by Repre-
sentative James B. Utt of Cali-
fornia are reprinted from the Con-
gressional Record.
MR. SPEAKER, fantastic though
it may seem, this great Re-
public is threatened with anar-
chy, In fact the threat has grown
so far that the only salvation may
be a miiltary dictatorship. Anar-
chy and dictatorship represent
two opposite extremes; the first,'
complete absence of government;
the second, a totality of govern-
ment. These two extremes have
faced many civilizations over the
past 4000 years.
The Founding Fathers of this
great Republic were well aware of
this fact. They had done their
homework, and they labored long
and hard to produce a Republic
with checks and balances suffi-
cient to prevent the usurpation of
power either by anarchists or by
dictators. I have always felt that
the primary responsibility of the
Congress was to preserve this very
delicate balance between these two
extremes.
Over the past 35: years, there.
has beentasteady downgrading of
this concept of government. The
dignity and ruggedness of the in-
dividual have become submerged
in collectivism, group dynamics,
mass psychosis, humanism, and
biochemistry culminating in group
self-criticism. All of this is aimed
at destroying the independence,
the self confidence and self-reli-
ance of the individual, which have
always constituted the solid foun-
dation of liberty, justice, and good

blackmail and blackjack the Con-
gress into complete submission.
Regretfully, too many feather-
legged politicians are caving in on
every side. People are too willing
to believe that property rights
should be taken without due pro-
cess of law or just compensation,
as provided in the fifth amend-
ment of the Constitution.
We in Washington are facing
an invasion intended to overthrow
the Government by force and vio-
lence. The doctrine of nonviolence
is as phony as a $3 bill, and falls
in the category of dialectical ma-
terialism. The instructions of Len-
in were to proceed in a nonviolent
manner, in such a way as to pro-
voke extreme viblence, which
would completely disrupt Gov-
ernment and society.
The writings of Ralph Bunche,
founder of the National Negro
Congress, a Communist front, in
"Science and Society," a Comnu-
nist magazine, of which he was a
contributing editor, laid out the
complete blueprint for what is
happening' in America today.
He contributed to this publica-
tion and added his name and
prestige as a professor of Howard
University even after the Com-
munists in their publication, "The
Communist," openly stated that
"Science and Society" magazine
had as its function "to help Marx-
ward moving students and intel-
lectuals to come closer to Marx-
ism-Leninism" and "to bring Com-
munist thought into academic
circles."
Anv American whn does not

4I

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan