UNDERSCORE :
&nventy-Tbird Year
EDrTED AND MANAGED $Y STUDENTS (w THE UNm ExsmTYof Ml CH1WN
- -CINDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PU3LICAMIONS
"Where opinions A e STUDENT PUMUCATIONS BLDG., ANN ARBoR, Mier., PHONE NO 2-3241
Truth Will Prevail"
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must b6 noted in all reprints.
SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 1963 NIGHT EDITOR: ELLEN SILVERMAN
Technology Aids
Genera Bargaining
The 'U' and Fair Housing;
Apparent Inconsistency
WO SEEMINGLY unrelated events at Fri-.
day's Regents meeting 'shed an interesting
and strange light on one another.
First, University President Harlan Hatcher
praised the concern of students who had
picketed the Administration Bldg. asking him
to make a statement favoring fair housing
legislation in Ann Arbor. There can be no
doubt what his personal sympathies and the
University's are in this matter.
The University has always been against dis-
crimination and over the years has worked
consistently to eliminate it both within and
without the University. The Human Relations
Board and Regents bylaw 2.14 were created
to further work that was already going on.
But the University cannot dictate legislation
to Ann Arbor. The picketers have his sym-
pathy but his hands are tied.
Second two Regents systematically tore
apart Gov. George Romney's proposal for a
blue ribbon commission to investigate the
needs of higher education in the state and
come up with recommendations. There has
been enough studying done on the problem,
Regents Eugene B. Power and Donald M. D.
Thurber agreed. Now is thedtime for action.
The inconsistency here is obvious. When it
comes to the University appropriation-as well
as a myriad of semi-related matters-the Uni-
versity has no compunction, about lobbying.
Discounting the appearance before appropria-
tions committees and the like, the University
has more or less officially delegated members
of the University staff to lobby for University
and University-related legislation in Lansing.
If that is not enough, the squawk that
went from Ann Arbor to Washington when
limitations were put on indirect research costs
last year would have drowned out the noise
generated by a herd of charging elephants.
NOW IN THE CASE of fair housing legisla-
tion, it might seem as though this does
not relate directly to the University, at least
not in the same way that appropriations do.
Yet there are literally thousands of University
students affected by fair housing legislation.
Questions of religious and racial bias are
also a matter of University policy, as delineated
in bylaw 2.14.
In addition to eliminating all discrimina-
tion within the University itself and private
organizations recognized by the University, it
says that the University shall attempt to end
bias "from non-University sources where stu-
dents and the employees of the University are
involved"
Therefore, it is clearly a duty of the Presi-
dent or the Regents or the Vice-President for
Student Affairs or the Director of University
Relations to delineate a University policy to-
wards a fair housing ordinance. The Univer-
sity is already engaged in the process of in-
fluencing legislation. There is no valid reason
for the University 'not to speak out on a
question which does indeed affect the welfare
of its students and on which it supposedly has
a firm commitment to act.
EXCEPT PERHAPS if the University does
not interpret bylaw 2.14 as a strong com-
mitment to act. Passed in 1959, it is a rela-
tively recent addition to University policy. And
it is difficult to see how the University worked
to eliminate discrimination either before or
after that.
For example, when President Hatcher first
came to the University, he vetoed a resolution
of the student legislature to place a time limit
for the removal of fraternity bias clauses.
Yet ten years later, Student Government
Council could pass a regulation against fra-
ternity and sorority bias requiring member-
ship statements (sans time limit). But lest one
think that this means that the University has
taken a definitive stand on the question of
membership selection, let us remember the Sig-
ma Kappa incident in the spring of 1959.
Here Student Government Council revoked
the recognition of a sorority for discrimina-
tion. The decision was reversed by the Board
in Review.
If one has any doubt that the University
has not been firmly committed to anti-bias
action over the last decade, one need only look
at the record of the lately-dissolved dean of
women's office where, among other things, in-
ter-racial dating or dating with foreign stu-
dents was strictly taboo.
These actions do not indicate that the Uni-
versity or any of its officials are actually in
favor of bias. What it does show is that the
University through the years has lacked a con-
sistent policy toward bias.
Worse still, the question of discrimination
has taken a secondary position in the scale
of values of the administration. Despite the
fine words of bylaw 2.14 and President Hatcher,
this attitude has been demonstrated by the
University's action or rather its lack of action.
THE REAL PROBLEM is that the University
is afraid of any kind of pressure at all. In
this particular case, any attempt to back a
fair housing ordinance would undoubtedly
anger many Ann Arbor townsmen. The Univer-
sity is of course concerned about pressures
from Ann Arborites. That is why the Univer-
sity has a policy against allowing students to
run cooperatives or even a bookstore, for fear
that the Ann Arbor businessmen will have to
compete instead of having neat little cliques.
Similarly, the University is afraid that if
fraternities and/or sororities are kicked off
campus, their alumni will no longer cough up
money for the University. This has been at
least a partial consideration in the minds of
some administrators. Their hope is that with
time, the problem will solve itself without any
action.
Now this is not intended to prove that the
University as an institution is discriminating.
Instances of overt discrimination where detect-
ed have sometimes been eliminated. But the
policy of the University is definitely not a
clear-cut one as President Hatcher claims.
On'the contrary, it is ambiguous when con-
sidered in the light of the University's perform-
ance in this area. An outsider, objectively,
evaluating the University's policy on the matter
could easily interpret it as a sop to the NAACP
and other interested organizations that might
otherwise bring pressure on the University.
Under these circumstances, it is imperative
for the University and for President Hatcher to
take a stand on fair housing. A noncommittal
program of "working behind the scenes" is
only a way of avoiding the issue.
IF THE UNIVERSITY is committed, it ought
to back the concrete action that can make
that commitment a reality. Influencing legis-
lation that has a relation to the University
has always been done. President Hatcher has
a tremendous amount of personal influence
with'n the Ann Arbor community.
He ought to use that influence to imple-
ment a University policy if that policy is really
important. Otherwise, he is shirking his re-
sponsibilities and the mandate given him by
bylaw 2.14.
-DAVID MARCUS
' I
i-
1
f,
By MALINDA BERRY
WITH THE United States' latest
concession in the area of on-
site inspections at the bargaining
table in Geneva, possibly the first
steps toward removing the major
stumbling block to an acceptable
nuclear test ban treaty have been
taken.
The negotiations have been
stalemated ostensibly over the is-
sue of inspection and detection of
underground blasts. The Russians
have been loathe to allow any on-
site inspections for fear of possible
"espionage." They have expressed
interest in the proposal which calls
for unmanned seismic detection
stations - the so-called "black
boxes."~
However, even last week's offer
by William C. Foster, chief United
States disarmament negotiator, to
reduce the demand to eight on-site
inspections, is unacceptable to the
Russians who want no uninvited
foreign visitors'. And the United
States is not ready to forego alto-
gether its demand for on-site in-
spection.
This new Western demand for a
minimum of eight in itself is a
reduction of earlier demands for
12 to 20 a year.
THE BIGGEST Russian conces-
sion was made two months ago,
when they said they would permit
two to three annual on-site in-
spections. The United States
thinks this would be inadequate.
However, they probably felt six
months ago that eight on-site in-
spections would be too few to pro-
tect the integrity of a test ban
treaty. Progress is slow and "ade-
quate" is relative.
Aside from any possible political
considerations, one reason for the
increased leniency in American
demands has been technical break-
throughs in the field of seismo-
logical detection. Western science
has been working on a way to as-
sure themselves of the difference
between natural underground blast
waves and underground waves
caused by nuclear explosions.
When this is perfected, the
United States can safely eliminate
its demands for on the spot in-
spections. Even if some under-
ground blasts can still go unde-
tected, they could not be of any
real importance or magnitude.
There is general agreement that
atmospheric tests are by far the
most important. And they can be
detected for the most part by
national systems.
Even if a combination of tech-
nology and political strategy
should eliminate the on-site in-
spection hurdle to a peaceful solu-
tion of the test cessation question,
many other questions still rage on
before any major advances to-
wards realarms control of dis-
armament can be made.
ONE QUESTION which cannot
be discounted is what will be the
action taken by the members of
the nuclear club who are not
bound by any decisions reached in
Geneva. The capricious French
President Charles de Gaulle and
the out - of - the - fold Communist
Chinese leader, Mao Tse-Tung
could very easily assert their in-
dependence and refuse to sign a
treaty. And without their signa-
tures would the United States
Senate ratify the treaty?
The possibility of these embar-
rassing political considerations is
very likely to be the real, though
undiscussed reason why a truly
meaningful resolution banning nu-
clear testing seems doubtful In
the imminent future.
However, there seems to be no
real reason why there couldn't
e another de facto moratorium
on testing-which at least is a
cessation of progress towards a
nuclear end.
BUDAPEST:
Joyful
Concert,
TrHE PENULTIMATE concert of
this year's Chamber Music Fes-
tival proved to be a thing of abso-
lute joy. The three members of the
Budapest String Quartet gave a
demonstration of magnificent en-
semble and gorgeous string tone
throughout the evening.
The program began with an ar-
rangement by Mozart of Bach's
Prelude and Fugue in F minor. The
work was well performed and the
arrangement was an interesting
idea, but to me it was neither Mo-
zart nor Bach.
The high point of the concert
was Mozart's Divertimento for
String Trio in E-flat major, K.
563. This wonderful work contains
six movements of heavenly music.
The Budapest players gave. it all
they have and no one could ask
for more.
The concluding work was Beet-
hoven's Serenade in D major, Op.
8, a very mature, splendid piece
from the composer's early period.
Throughout the work, the perform-
ers displayed uncanny responses
to each other in nearly perfect
ensemble.
It would be impossible in a
short review to point out even a
few of the remarkable things about
the performances of these .three
men. Let it suffice that this re-
viewer now regrets even more his
inability to hear the previous con-
certs in the series.
-Robert Jobe
TNIRER 6ZAI1ANO IOA.ES, TEROR OF TAlE RIN60 SHRIM F.T.
IS THE SOVIET SOFTENING?:
Frozen Base Under the Thaw
By BARBARA PASH
CAN THE Soviet Union be mov-
ing toward capitalism when
its basic institutions are still
Communistic? From all outward
indications, it would seem that a
mellowing of society is occurring
in Russia.
Certainly Soviet society has be-
come more liberal since the death
of Joseph Stalin. It is common
knowledge' that thestate is al-
locating more money and ma-
terial for the production of con-
sumer goods rather than stressing
industrial products exclusively.
BY AMERICAN comparison, the
Soviet Union has a low standard
of living, but free health and edu-
cational services are expanding at
a faster rate than consumer goods.
In 1955 there was an increase in
the wages of Soviet workers. Coup-
led with this was a cut in direct
taxes.
However the Soviet standard of
living is higher than figures would
indicate. The distribution of in-
come is more even-less rich and
less poor. Their standard of liv-
ing is somewhere between Italy
and France, and they could catch
up with us if they wanted. The
question for us is whether we
choose to run in the "catch up
and surpass" race.
Thus the overage Soviet citizen
has more free time and rubles to
spend. There has been an increase
in government housing projects,
but the housing situation in the
Soviet Union is still acute. It
should be 'noted, however, that
approximately half of the hous-
ing facilities were destroyed dur-
ing World War II
In the Soviet Union the con-
sumer is faced with a seller's mar-
ket in which the manufacturer has
a chronic demand for his pro-
ducts. The United States has a
buyer's market, in which the man-
ufacturer is constantly attempting
to attract customers.
The major premise of full Com-
munism is that each person will
work as much as he wants and
in turn receive as much food,
clothes and other goods as he
needs. In order to accomplish this,
the people will be "re-educated" in
the lower stage (Socialism) so
that bourgeois ideas are eradicated
and a new society, based on men
who are intrinsically good (the
"new Soviet man"), will occur.
* * *
THE DIALECTIC argument con-
cerning Stalin is that he was a
necessary product of the 1917 Rus-
sian revolution and it was he who
built the industrial base upon
which Communism, by its very
nature and maxims, must be con-
structed. Thus Stalin's actions be-
come explainable, even justifiable.
Had it not been Stalin, then it
would have been another leader
who would have been forced to
industrialize and collectivize the
Soviet Union.
Within Russia now, although
the regime has declared that So-
cialism has been passed and the
country is on the road to full
Communism, this will never be
attained unless some basic changes
occur.
The Soviet Union has entered
to Lenin, who found it impossible
to institute the factory and ad-
ministrative management by the
workers that he had desired. It
was he who originated the highly
disciplined Bolshevik revolution-
ary who would unquestioningly
obey orders from the top. And in
1921, during the New Economic
Policy retreat, Lenin severely re-
affirmed the need for absolutely
no factionalism in the party. It
is a logical extension to pass from
Lenin's words to Stalin's action.
The Soviet's circle stems from
the regime's need to raise indus-
trial production rapidly. This has
been accomplished. From 1950-'58
the Soviet economy grew twice as
fast as the United States economy.
The Soviet Union produces almost
as many military goods as Amer-
ica. And most impressively, the
average annual gross national pro-
duct growth rate of the Soviet
Union is 5-7 per cent, whereas
the American rate is 3-4 per cent.
Since 1957 the Soviet leaders
have attempted to decentralize
their industrial organization for
the sake of efficiency.But they are
faced with the problem of wish-
ing to decentralize for efficiency
and yet wanting to maintain
strong control from the center
The two sources of flexibility in
Soviet planning are the surplus of
manpower and the low priority
given to consumer and agricul-
tural goods. These are now chang-
ing-a higher priority is being
awarded to the two goods (al-
though industrial production is
still given first priority) and a
decrease in the number of work-
ers available because of the sharp-
ly decreased birth rate during the
war.
We must be aware, however,
when comparing Soviet and Amer-
ican GNP of the numerous sta-
tistical difficulties and concep-
tual problems involved. In com-
puting our GNP, we omit some
services which are included by the
Soviets. Also we usually use prices
and costs for weighing each item,
but the Soviet price scale isn't
available. And it is questionable
if we can use published Russian
prices because they are arbitrarily
assigned and have little relation to
supply and demand in society.
However, in order to accom-
plish this high rate of growth, the
Soviet leaders have instituted sal-
ary differences as an incentive.
The managers, white collar work-
ers and "shock" workers of the
factories (men who are sent to
various factories to act as cat-
alysts in speeding production rec-
ords) receive more pay, and they
want to spend it on consumer
items.
The state is forced to appease
them by producing more "soft"
(consumer) goods, which in turn
diverts materials from "hard"
(heavy) industries.
THUS IT cannot be claimed
that the bourgeois elements in so-
ciety were completely eliminated
in 1917; or if they were eradicated,
then it must be admitted that
supposedly middle-class drives are
an inescapable part of society.
The major fallacy in Soviet doc-
trinaire thinking is that elimina-
tion of private ownership nees-
the institutions of higher educa-
tion and technical schools, the
managerial class and intelligent-
sia, the former being created in
Stalin's era and the latter being
holdovers from the tsarist years,
have tended to perpetuate them-
selves and have become almost
a closed class.
* * *
THE MOST telling evidence of
the failure of the regime to build
a communist state are the oc-
casional reportsofaworkers' strikes
that seep through the Iron Cur-
tain.
Even in its foreign relations
with the bloc countries and the
West, there has been a major
change in policy since Stalin. The
recent Congress of the CPSU took
the peaceful coexistence line and
noted that revolutions are not
exportable. A peaceful takeover o
non-communist nations by obtain-
ing a majority in Western parlia-
ments is preferable to violence!
Where is the old revolutionary
doctrine of the necessarily violent
overthrow of bourgeois dictator-
ships? Where is the Marxist idea
of absolutely no cooperation with
bourgeois political parties? Where
is the Stalinist concept of capital-
ist encirclement?
THERE ARE two views on this
dispute of Soviet mellowing: the
pessimists and the optimists. The
latter tend to view the develop-
ment and recent, post-Stalin con-
cessions which the Soviet leaders
have made. Soviet society, they
note, is becoming urban and
monolithic. The population wants
rationalization in society.
Above all factors which make
Stalinist-style control impossible
now is the rising cost of living. It
is historically inevitable that there
be a liberalization in society. This
view is connected with revisionism
-that Marxism is really a West-
ern democratic system and that
Stalin obscured this liberal Marx-
ist heritage.
The pessimists survey the in-
stitutions of the Soviet Union
rather than its society. And in
these institutions they can find no
liberalization. Rather, the regime
is totalitarian, which they say,
cannot mellow. Totalitarianism is
a unique phenomenon that will
either be overthrown or remain in-
tact. The men at the top will not
accept changes just because the
masses want them. The pessimists
usually refer to Nazi Germany as
an example that a scientific, ra-
tional society is not necessarily
progressive and non-totalitarian.
* * *
THE MAJOR question still con-
fronting us is whether the Soviet
Union, because of all the factors
mentioned above, is moving closer
to capitalism. Unfortunately the
answer is no. Regardless of pay
differences, of society's liberaliza-
tion, of more consumer goods, of
a softer line in foreign policy, the
USSR remains the bastion of the
Communist world.
To abandon this position would
be to deny the religion of Marx-
ism-Leninism. This the Soviet
Union will never do. No matter
how it may appear to change out-
wardly. it hasic institutions re-
DETROIT SYMPIJONY:
From Variety Show
To Impressive Music
FRIDAY NIGHT the Detroit Symphony Orchestra gave a benefit con-
cert for "Detroit Adventure," an organization which aspires to be
the master plan culture co-ordinator for Detroit; To justify the full
house (and $15,000 profit) there were two soloists, and a calculated,
condescending program.
Werner Torkanowsky, an energetic and confident conductor of
wide experience, led off the gala evening with Arthur Luck's ar-
rangement of the George Washington March attributed to Fran-
cis opknson wh wa a geatfanand ried o Mr.Wasing
I
Precarious Position
THE UNIVERSITY is not, and should not be
an institution that actively works towards
political ends.
The disappointment and difficulty that the
Human Relations Board has experienced in
their attempts to insure fair housing in Ann
Arbor has been caused in part, if not in
essence, by their inability to recognize this
fact. By asking President Harlan Hatcher to
have the University take a "strong public
stand" towards the effecting of Fair Housing
legislation in the Ann Arbor City Council,
Chairman David Aroner of the Human Rela-
tions Board has put the administration in a
position where they must either violate the
function of a university or decline support of
an issue with which they are in sympathy.
~J~gAir14tuu at
Business Staff
LEE SCLAR, Business Manager
SUE FOOTE.....................Finance Manager
RUTH STEPHENSON.............Accounts Manager
SUE TUJRNER......... .. Associate Business Manager
THOMAS BENNETT............Advertising Manager
Editorial Staff
MICHAEL OLINICK, Editor
JUDITH OPPENHEIM MICHAEL HARRAH
Editorial Director City Editor
The statement of the Board puts the ad-
ministration in this precarious position: "By
saying that the University cannot take a posi-
tion on legislation in the community of Ann
Arbor, President Hatcher has in effect said
that the University has no public interest in
Fair Housing legislation in Ann Arbor." This
is a misinterpretation. The University may,
and has implied, that it is "interested" in the
elimination of discrimination in Ann Arbor. But
the term "interest" has been misleading.
Although President Hatcher's statement de-
plored "the fact that there have been cases
of discrimination in the community and sym-
pathizes with students and staff members who
have been embarrassed by incidents," it is
not in a position to take political steps.
The reason that President Hatcher's state-
ment has been considered unsatisfactory by
many sympathizers is found in the last para-
graph, which states that the University does
not subscribe to attempts to "dictate legisla-
tion in Ann Arbor or any other community in
the States of Michigan in which we, as a
state-wide institution, have interests."
THE FUNCTION of a university is to educate
students and conduct research. The State
of Michigan has a governmental system de-
signed to deal with these matters. This does not
-..__.-..-. -
cis Hopkinson, who was a great
ton. Arthur Luck, on the other
hand, is a percussionist and li-
brarian to the Symphony, and al-
though his arrangement (for
string orchestra) was thin and
mechanical, it was, after all, a
display of local talent in a city
which desperately wants things
to be proud of. And besides, it was
Washington's birthday.
The second half of the program
was devoted similarly to another
Detroit luminary, Mischa Kottler,
who played the Rachmaninoff C
minor piano concerto with ele-
gance and a curious sort of world-
weary restraint. I suspect that
Mr. Kottler has been playing this
piece since he was 2 years old,
and he must therefore be excused
if he didn't appear exactly to be
throwing his heart into the ring.
There are more ways to play
Rachmaninoff than the flamboy-
ant contest-winner style so popu-
lar today.
* .*.
IN BETWEEN George Washing-
ton and Mischa Kottler, Jennie
Tourel sang an assortment of
works by Purcell, Rossini, and
Tchaikovsky. She sang with more
spirit and vocal finesse than pre-
cision, but did, of course, a highly
polished job. When the audience
encouraged her to an encore, she
sang the Habenera from Carmen
and, throwing all caution to the
winds, gestured, laughed,. and
could, indeed, be seen to be exe-
cuting an inspired little dance step
deep within her vast white ball
gown. It was a fine moment.
Just after that, Mr. Torkanow-
sky had a stage hand remove his
music stand and he whisked the
orchestra through Roussel's Bal-
let Suite No. 2 from "Bacchus et
fan and friend of Mr. Washing-
AT THE MICHIGAN:
Filmus
Flubbri
FABULOUS Fred MacMurray flys
again in "Son of Flubber."
Feathers fly, footballs float, finan-
ciers fall, faculties flounder. But
faithful Freddie doesn't fail. He's
no fink.
Freddie, a Medfield College fac-
ulty-fellow, formulated Flubber, in
a former film, "The Absent-
Minded Professor." Flubber forces
Ford flivvers to float, fly or, at
least fail to fall. After the Federal
five-sided fortification fails to
fortify Freddie financially for his
Flubber, he ferments a further
Flubber formula from the first
Flubber to form fog.
But fortune frustrates Freddie.
The Flubber flashes out a freakish
frequencyrwhich fractures the
"fenetres." Freddie feels forlorn.
Fortunately, his fortitude figures
the phase is foul and he finds the
fabulous force that forms fog.
A FORMER flame familiarizes
herself with Freddie again. The
phenomenon frets Freddie's "fem-
me" and the family fractionates.
Further folly follows. Flubber-
formed fog floats a floundering
frogman in a flooded Ford. A fall
fiasco finds a Flubber-filled foot-
ball flung forward for the final
field goal, flattening the foul foes.
Finally, Freddie finds that his
first Flubber formula, further-
more. has a fantastic feeling for