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