"We Have A Few Primitive Conditions Here, Too" Seventy-First Year EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN - UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS ere Opinions Are Free STUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG. * ANN ARBOR, MICH. * Phone NO 2-3241 Truth Will Frevail"a Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints. NESDAY, OCTOBER 25, 1961 NIGHT EDITOR: ROBERT FARRELL i Fa.ern~t.. Aut01my By PAT GOLDEN, Associate City Editor .u/"' r _,.,,,, . r ; ; r fif y u rr < _ 1 . . : = _- .c , . ,, s.. r: t , _, ^." ' ety s _ tom. .. s4 , . :. f ' ; . 1 +s ._. r tyZ' ~o 'iwIT ro WI Ant DEARBORN: Ethnocentric City Draws the Line NY GROUP OF STUDENTS having the right of occupancy of a living unit not owned or administered by the University cer- tainly has the right to choose other occupants of that living unit. But if it operates within the context of the University, making use of facilities or activities of the University as a housing unit, the group must select its mem- bership within the framework of University bylaws and regulations. If this University maintains a bylaw prohib- iting discrimination on the basis of race, creed, color, national origin or ancestry, then no fra- ternity or sorority chapter can use those cri- teria. The University's demand that member'ship not be limited by arbitrary criteria is the sole restriction in a group's right to choose its' own members. There can be no justification for allowing any other part of the decision-making process to rest beyond the current residents of the living unit. There can be no restrictions on membership selection placed on the local by its national organization. The -rest of the national does not live in the chapter house. Any criteria which the local sets for accepting new members can only apply to the current crop of prospective pledges, and cease to be ap- plicable when those pledges become members and other individuals leave the house. A RECOMMENDATION from an alumnas or an alumni group is a helpful addition to the discussion about a prospective pledge, but it cannot be a binding requirement for membership. Neither can a negative recom- mendation from an alumnus legitimately serve as a blackball. The decision must be wholly within the active chapter membership. If membership is self-perpetuating at a lo- cal level--with no one present merely because his ancestors and relations belonged to that group, and no one missing because he falls into an arbitrarily excluded classification-then a fraternity chapter may claim some measure of the elusive quality called brotherhood. For this brotherhood, or fraternal loyalty, of an affili- ate group does not arise mystically with the chanting of certain secret oaths or the per- formance of ritual motions-I feel no tie of brotherhood to the millions of persons who everyday perform the same toothbrushing rit- ual as I do, with the same brand of toothpaste. Cooperative work, plus opportunities for social and intellectual interaction, create group loy- alty-and none of these depend on paper and jewelry ties with fraternal groups at any other campus, The local co-ops can make a more legiti- mate claim to the group loyalty and unity than most sororities, because they elicit mean- ingful cooperation from their occupants. In a women's co-op, the kitchen is always open for snacks and leftovers, and the women plan meals, cook, serve and clean up. In a sorority, the housemother plans meals, a hired cook pre- pares them, hired male students serve and clean up. Most sorority kitchens are locked be- ween meals so the "sisters" can't get in and "steal" any food. TO SOME EXTENT, the loyalty of a chap- er is built-upon its traditions and its alum- ni. There can be, a feeling of ties through the years with people who have lived in the same house at overlapping times. But even these bonds can only be to a particular campus chap- ter where the alumnus once lived. The status of a national is a pleasant fringe benefit for a local chapter, granted. But this status alone is not a legitimate reason for maintaining affiliation with a group that binds, a local chapter to outside control of its mera- bership policies. And if status is not an ade- quate justification, the only valid one is the financial support a national can offer to a lo- cal. Hence, a workable financial alternative ought to eliminate altogether the reluctance of a chapter to sever national ties which, by their strangling bigotry, endanger the life of the local on this campus. BECAUSE IT DECIDED not to tolerate dis- crimination after it had officially recog- nized a number of organizations which do dis- criminate, the University has an obligation to provide feasible means for these units to re- move their discriminatory restrictions, locally, rather than immediately booting them out of the University community. In the Sigma Kappa fiasco of a few years ago, the house in question had been admitted to the campus after passage of Regents bylaw 2.14, .the anti-discrimination ruling. Since the University was not applying a law retroactive- ly in this case, it had perfect.justification for removing the offending group. That it failed to do so is a disgrace to the University. How- ever, the only constructive way to deal with the problem of enforcing the bylaw in 1961 is to, deal with all groups as if they had equal right to University assistance in removing their dis- criminatory restrictions. The University can provide a feasible pro- gram by establishing a revolving, low interest fund to assist local chapters in paying off all debts to their nations, including the purchase of chapter houses and the payment of mort- gages and loans when necessary. It can fur- ther provide assistance from the Inter-Cooper- ative Council to help houses cut costs and set up cooperative work plans. It can use its in- fluence to persuade the alumni of local chap- ters to remain loyal to the, Michigan chapter rather than to the national organization. The University should bend over backwards, with financial and personnel assistance to chapters that want to remove the fetters off discrimination. Then it can legitimately re- move from the University community those groups which do not wish to operate on non- discriminatory terms. T Ohl- i1/ 4' ...- / : . L; £. y .. ? .d.:: , *1%I A.F.A. WAR LORDS: Loud Voice for Militarism By ROBERT SELWA Daily Staff Writer DEARBORN, MICHIGAN, ac- cording to many integration- ists, is a city of sin. This is false. Dearborn is not a city of sin. Dearborn is a city of ethnocen- trism. Ethnocentrism is the belief in the inherent superiority of one's own group and culture accom- panied by a feeling of contempt for other groups and cultures. This is the belief of many Dear- bornites regarding their commun- ityand their feeling toward the Negro race.t Ethnocentrism is a violation of humanism, the emerging spirit of the American nation. Those Dear- bornites who maintain an ethno- centric estimate of the Negro race are operating on norms contrary to the national movement toward a more humane United States. *r * * DISCRIMINATION against Ne- groes is a force that underlies much of the political, social and ethical life of Dearborn, but it is a force that is not generally overt. There is no discrimination in pub- lic transportation and little in public eating places. When the Congress On Racial Equality con- ducted, 35 tests of Dearborn res- taurants this summer, Negroes were served in all but two tests- usually with courtesy, often with resentment or anxiety. Bigotry is a tacit issue in mayoralty elections every two years. Orville L. Hubbard has neverlost an election since he was first elected mayor in 1940. He came in as a crusader intending to clean up the town-there re- portedly was a house of prosti- tution directly accross the street from the city's east-end high school-and did as he promised. Hubbard provided excellent public service on the motto, "Keep Dearborn Clean." The problem emerged when many of the citizens came to asociate this motto with keeping Negroes out of Dearborn, and Hubbard did not stop, this development by his reportedly out- spoken views "one million per cent" in favor of segregation. Many of the people of Dearborn thus came to develop their spirit of self-reassuring ethnocentrism, and associated the maintainance of it with the maintainance of Hubbard in office. HUBBARD USES no overtones of race in his election propa- ganda except as "Keep Dearborn Clean" is given the added implica- tion by some of meaning "Keep us clean of Negroes." When many of his supporters are asked why, in the light of city hall extrava- gance and of what is charged as the rule of men rather than the rule of law, they still back him, they answer, "Would you like to live next door to a Negro?" Not all Dearbornites feel this way. Many, particularily the young and the students, are bit- terly opposed to this point of view. And'Negroes do live in Dearborn. Mayor Hubbard will readily ad- mit that there are a few Negro amilies residing in Dearborn. They live in the south end of the city, a section in which many dark- skinned people who are not Ne- groid live. But the 'knowledge that a few Negroes do live in Dearborn seems only to encourage more the ethno- centrism of those who are bigoted. * *' * ETHNOCENTRISM operates in spite of, rather than along with, respectable American norms. For the Dearbornites are members of the solid middle and lower upper classes. Nearly all are homeowners. Most are regular church-goers. The basis of humanism is there; but for many the double standard operates-humanism on Sunday morning, ethnocentrism on Sun- day afternoon when friends come to visit. The city's leading newspaper, the Dearborn Guide validly ob- serves that ethnocentrism is not exclusive to Dearborn and that it operates just as vigorously in neighboring suburban communi- ties. "Whatever bigotry exists in this city is relatively small and insignificant and should not be branded on the community as a whole," the Guide wrote after Dearborn was visited by the Epis- copal Society for Cultural and Racial Unity. * * * BIGOTRY should not be branded on the community as a whole, nor on the' community exclusively. However, that it is small and in- significant can be disputed. Ethno- centrism, which differs from bigo- try, is certainly not small and in- significant. Mayor Hubbard is, rightly or wrongly, the symbol of this society as long as he stays in office. And the outlook is that he will stay in office and wield power as long as he wishes to do so. He has this fall's election cinched, and it ap- pears that his majority of pro- Administration puppets will be re-elected to the city council. THE YOUNG of the community are' not entirely humanistic nor anti-ethnocentric, but they tend to be firmly opposed to the Hub- bard regime, having been strongly influenced by their teachers (edu- cation and city government are frequently at odds). But few of the city's high school graduates settle in Dearborn, which will re- main an enclosed city unless it agrees to annex Dearborn Town- ship. In addition, the young have little political force, although they have a leader in 24-year-olcd law- yer Roger Craig, a member of the school board. Intolerance is not subscribed to by law in Dearborn; it is sub- scribed to by attitude of a portion of the community. The change of attitude will emerge slowly and only through recognition by the ethnocentric that America was founded on principles of brother- hood and fraternity-that America is seeking to better achieve :these principles, and that Americsns must move together in this achievement. The realization of this may be hindered by integra- tionist groups that seek to make an example of Dearborn, and in doing so make it firmer in its ethnocentrism. DAILY OFFICIAL BULLETIN, The Daily Official Bulletin an official publication of The Univer- sity of Michigan for which The Michigan Daily assues no editorial responsibility. Notices should be sent in TYPEWRITTEN form to Room 3519 Administration Building before 2 p.m., two days preceding publication. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 25 General Notices Regents' Meeting: Fri., Nov. 17. Com- munications for consideration at this meeting must be in the President's hand not later than Nov. 7. Please sub- mit twenty-one copies of each commu- nication. (Cntinued on Page 5) By RONALD WILTON Daily staff Writer MANY AMERICANS who laugh at and ridicule those who fol- low Bertrand Russell and his "Better Red than Dead" slogan are unaware of a more dangerous group operating at the other end of the political spectrum, here in the United States. The group is the Air Force As- sociation. It is staffed largely by retired Air Force officers and is spokesman for the Air Force and the aviation-missile industry, the latter of which pays the bills. By their very nature these two groups are foremost among those which have a vested interest in the con- tinuance of the arms race. At its last meeting in Philadel- phia, September 20 to 24, the As- sociation adopted a statement of policy which appeared in full only in the Sept. 30 issue of the Army Navy Air Force Journal. The state- ment heralds the birth of a military-industrial alliance of the type President Eisenhower re- ferred to when he warned against "the conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry." * * * THE GOAL of the Association is nothing less than "the complete eradication of the Soviet system." As they put it, freedom must bury Communism or be buried by Communism. Thus we are pre- sented with a goal which can only come from people who have let their hatred for Communism and their desire for profits over- ride their reason. Their means towards this goal are equally frightening. They in- sist that "national policy must prescribe that the choice between nuclear and non-nuclear weapons is neither moral nor political, but is essentially a military considera- tion." What this is asking for, in ef- fect, is the transfer of the de- cision-making power on the use of nuclear weapons from the elected civilian leaders of this country to the military. From there it would be a small step to control over the total American foreign policy since they also say that the U. S. should not hesitate to employ its nuclear strength in response to Soviet aggression -- whether in the form of nuclear attack, non-nuclear attack, nu- clear blackmail, aggression by So- viet satellites, infiltration,. or blackmail. And once foreign policy is under their control the remain- ing peak to conquer is domestic policy. NATURALLY, the statement also calls for a massive step-up in armaments research and pro- duction, including a search for new weapons "more selective in application and less destructive of life and property." They will not be satisfied with the Neutron bomb which can be built to kill a variable number of people yet leave buildings intact and un-radioactive; they want more effective toys, although how something could be more militarily effective than the N-bomb -is dif- ficult to imagine. THE ASSOCIATION claims that the only insurance against a gen- eral nuclear war is the ability to fight, win and purposefully sur- vive such a( conflict; yet they say TODAY AND TOMORROW SAlliance Troubles By WALTER LIPPMANN we must not hesitate to use our own nuclear strength. What this boils down to is a strike first policy with the hope that our- first strike could completely knock out the Soviet Union's ability to retaliate. These same military leaders are very fond of pointing out that if the Soviets were to attack first, they could not achieve this goal with respect to us. How we could do it to a country which is at 'least as strong as we are, and whose retaliatory forces are more spread out and possibly more numerous than ours, is left out.' What is also left out is the slightly debatable explanation of how anyone could win a nuclear war. SOME PEOPLE will argue that the Association is merely a form of lobby and thus is no better or worse than any other interest group, nor more dangerous. Un- fortunately, this is not the case.' The Association is merely a front group, that says for various mili- tary and industrial leaders what the government will not allow them to say for themselves. The Philadelphia meeting was at- tended by a large number of gen- eralsheaded by Air Force Chief of' Staff Curtis. Le May, and the Army Navy Air Force Journal said they came to the mneeting "under wraps that had been put onat the Pentagon," (or, in other words, by the civilian Secretary of De- fense Robert McNamara). One of the generals made this known by telling the convention that after all the blue-penciling done on his speech at the Pentagon, "I don't have a hell of a lot, to say." Such an attitude among our highest military and industrial leaders is frightening for the chance exists that they will be able to force the adoption of their' policies. The Air Force Association, and the military leaders and arma- ments industry behind it, reject the concept of ;disarmameit, arms control, negotiation, co-existence and even the concept of a balanced deterrent. They advocatestriking first in a nuclear war which would destroy us as well as the Soviet Union. THUS IT CAN BE SEEN that all the Association's policies would end up doing, would be to involve this country in a total nuclear war which we would have started. This war would result in the death of a majority of the American people. Thus, by a somewhat less than loose definition, the Association can be said to be subversive, since it advocates the violent overthrow of the United States government; going on the possibly naive as- sumption that this government is "of the people, by the people and for the people." This nation may still have to do business with the "merchants of death," but to let them set our "-li- IV-..1s1% VI' WHAT WE KNOW of the controversy in Moscow about "Stalinism" is rather like seeing the second act of a mystery play, hav- ing missed the first act. Why, just now, should Stalinism have become a burning issue? We can only guess. Could it be because the hard- boiled line taken by Red China, Albania, and Herr Ulbricht in East Germany, is incompat- ible with the paramount interest of Khrush- chev's Russia, which is to realize the Twenty- Year Plan of internal development?. THE TROUBLE inside the Western- Alliance is not nearly so important as that between Red China and the Soviet Union within the 'Communist Alliance. For Red China is p0- tentially a very dangerous rival, once it achieves industrialization. With its enormous population, its long and vague frontier with the Soviet Union, it will in not too many years be able to challenge not only the leadership of the Soviet Union in the Communist world, but the defenses of the Soviet Union on the continent of Asia., As compared with this, there is no such deep issue in the Western community about nego- tiation concerning Berlin. But there is a con- troversy and it is not negligible. If it is ne- glected, it could fester into something dan- gerous. The crux of the Western controversy is this. We' are committed to the freedom of West Berlin, free access to West Berlin, and a continuing military presence of the Western powers in West Berlin. But we are not com- mitted irrevocably to the status quo in all of Germany as it has been formulated in foreign policy of Dr. Adenauer. We are com- mitted not to recognize the East German onvernment. Thi scnmmitment will he onn negotiate a wider settlement within which the freedom of West Berlin can be assured by something more thana perpetual willingness to unleash thermonuclear war. FOR THIS we are being called appeasers, and we are warned publicly by the French ambassador in Washington that we must not wreck the Western Alliance. Such threats, which imply that the Western Alliance is very fragile, are coming from Paris and from Bonn. Their real purpose is to obtain a veto of all negotiations. The threats are unpleasant but they will prove to be unacceptable and un- workable. Experience has shown how costly can be the policy of refusing to negotiate, the policy not only of standing pat but of sitting down. Last summer when the President had made the crucial decision to stand firm at the risk of war on our basic commitments in West Berlin and to negotiate on wider issues, Gen. de Gaulle imposed a veto on negotiations. Not long after that veto there took place the action of Aug. 13 to raise the wall in Berlin. In the Rusk-Gromyko exploration, which took place after the action of Aug. 13, there was achieved the removal of the Dec. 31 deadline for signing a separate peace treaty. It is impossible for us to break off these ex- plorations. We cannot conduct the Western Alliance on the troika principle. We cannot repeat the mistake of last summer. For that mistake led to the Berlin wall. The same mis- take now would lead to the separate treaty, and the nastiness of having to deal with Herr Ulbricht. IT IS BLATANTLY UNTRUE to say that our willingness to negotiate stems from weakness CAMPUS RELIGION: Students Avoid The Big Questions LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Homecoming Judging* Passing Fancies? ALTHOUGH the colleges pride themselves on the awakening of young minds, on the asking of the Big Questions of life (who and what is man; whence has he come, where is he going, what is love, what is passion, what is reason, is there a God?) it is soon clear to college students that the Big Ques- tions don't count-either in aca- demic standing, or in later life, or in research grants. In the first place, the standing assumptionris that ultimate ques- tions are in principle unanswer- able, and hence not worth asking seriously. This assumption may not discourage freshmen, but over a four-year period it is pretty well driven home. In the second place, nobody is much interested in stu- dents' answers to such questions, or deems them worth putting in competition with anybody else's. Even among the professors it is assumed that ultimate questions are nonintellectual, personal, and if mo+ai.c irnurnmP imnnrtoine Anglo - American university has committed itself to all that is "ob- jective," countable, precise, pub- licly verifiable. Though this com- mitment suits the middle - class temper capitally, it stifles religion almost to death. NOT ONLY RELIGION is stifled. More fundamentally, it is possible -_it is even common-for a stu- dent to go to class after class of sociology,'" economics, psychology, literature, philosophy, and the rest, and hardly become aware that he is dealing with issues of life and death, of love and solitude, of inner growth and pain. He may never fully grasp the fact that education is not so much infor- mation and technique as self-con- frontation and change in his own conscious life. He may sit through lectures and write examinations- and the professors may let him do merely that - collecting verbal "answers," without really think- in +hrrnirh a ndA idinv ,hnit To the Editor: WENLEY HOUSE protests the manner and process in which the judging of this year's Home- coming displays was conducted. While this criticism was initally expressed to the Homecomingdis- play co-chairmen, it has implica- tions for the whole campus com- munity. Homecoming officials, in per- mitting the judging of displays from inside of cars, place the larger entries in favored position. Small displays, often with de- tailedrcomponents, are placed at a severe disadvantage, even if this is unintentioned. Regardless of the judge's com- petence, good intensions, or eye- sight, their view of the displays' details is obscrued by distance, parked cars and people milling about. Consequently, detailed dis- play items are rendered insig- nificant., In addition to this confinement, the judges were only allowed "about three minutes" (as con- firmed by display co-chairman evaluation. The role of conscien- tious judges differs from that of mere display spectators. The Further, 'these questions are raised about Homecoming: 1) Why were no judges selected from personnel involved in art, and architecture and design, es- pecially for artistic evaluations? 2) Why must one set of judges examine all exhibits instead of separate judges for each division? 3) Why must football fans wait until the dance to learn the names of the winners, when the Ann Arbor News, through an officially denied "leak," announced the winners in its 2 p.m. afternoon edition. -Thomas Rogers, '63 President, Wenley House Clowns To the Editor: WHEN A STUNT is to be pulled in a classroom it is custom- ary to get the prior permission of the lecturer. Those muddy-headed S. A. E.