"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