4r Alidigatt Bally
Seventy-Third Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
FUNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
Where Opinilons Are hi~eSTUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG., ANN ARBOR, MICH., PHONE NO 23241
Truth Will Prevail"
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

4 YEARS IN 4000 WORDS:
Impressions and Reforms

FRIDAY,=MAY 24,1963

NIGHT EDITOR: ELLEN SILVERMAN


Not A Farewell:

Just 'Passin
THIS IS NOT A SWAN SONG. It is the be-
ginning.
Each year as The Daily senior editors write
their farewell editorials, they attempt to tell
everyone what they have learned and what,
from their wise emeritus positions, they think
the University needs.
Somehow, I do not feel wise, nor bitter, nor
discouraged, nor enthusiastic in writing this. I
feel humble. For the Unive'rsity has given me
what I came here for; not on a silver platter,
but I found it here.
I found the opportunity to learn. I found the
materials, the books, the quiet and those more
learned than I. I found real people, people I
could be friends with. They were not plentiful,
but they were here. I found that once I
earned it, I could live as I pleased-.and I did,
making my own mistakes and learning from
them.
RIGHT NOW I would like to ask you to let
me be sentimental, a woman's privilege.
There are many things wrong with the Uni-
versity and I cannot try to cover them up or
pass them off. Perfection should be an insti-
tution's goal as well as a student's. I have
met pettiness here, in every student organiza-
tion as well as elsewhere-little politicians and
little minds. But they have been balanced by
persons with vision and by people whom I
hope to see running the nation in 20 years.
Loneliness is a part of every student's life.
It is a necessary part because real scholarship
must take place alone. Only the fruits of knowl-
edge can be shared. This is a lonely campus;
it is large and many come here and never meet
anyone but the person next to them in lecture.
Students cry on the campus benches under the
memorial trees, but they also laugh, and final-
ly walk home. Others leave here with only
friends; they will be the lesser of the two. Any
man can find friends of his own likeness but
few can make friends with thought.
HYPOCRISY, in both students and faculty as
well as the administration, has marred the
campus more than all the bureaucracy and
misjudgment. If a man is wrong, it is no sin
to admit it. He is just admitting that he is
human and other men, being human, should
be reluctant to cast stones. It is the deceit
that brings mistrust and secrecy, which is the
real peril in an academic world.
There are those who lambaste conservatism
as anything that keeps the world from being
their oyster. Conservatism is a valid point of
view. It says "show me that a change is better
and I will make it, but I will not change for the
sake of change." There is a place for initiators
and there is a place for those who refine
change. Nothing is done outs of context. Just as

ig Through'

the psychiatrist brings out the subconscious, so
it will not bring trouble and regression later, so
the conservative makes sure that nothing is
suppressed in change.
The liberal, the radical and the conservative
can all work together. They each represent a
valid point of view. It is only the obstructionist
that must be weeded out and these can be
found in too plentiful array on this campus.
UOW DID I COME to these conclusions? What
induced them. I suppose four years on The
Daily, with dips into other activities and groups,
made them.
Many times I have been asked why I decided
to work on The Daily and why I stayed. I did
so because I thought its work was worthwhile.
Communication is a major part of learning and
of civilization, and The Daily, as much as peo-
ple complain, is the major form of mass com-
munication on campus.
Although I did not make many friends there,
I found the people as well as the work worth-
while. No person can tell me that people who
put in a 40 hour week at The Daily for pittance
pay, and still keep up, however haphazardly,
their academic careers, are not worthwhile.
They compose a spectrum of politics, intellect,
ambition and background. They are neverthe-
less alike in their constant battles with fatigue,
informed constructive conversation, real con-
cern for the University and the world, and gen-
eral addiction to cokes and "all nighters." I
was "a Daily person" for four years. I am proud
of it.
LEARNED MUCH about the University, about
the way the world goes and about myself. I
learned how hard it is to live up to some of
' Kipling's "Ifs." I learned "To hear the truth
you've spoken,/Twisted by knaves to make a
trap for fools," and "Watched the things I gave
my life (here at the University) to broken," and
"stooped to pick them up with worn out tools."
I have tried, in my reportingt to live up to "If
you can talk with crowds and keep your vir-
tue,/And walk with kings-nor lose the com-
mon touch,/If neither foes nor loving friends
can hurt you,/If all men count with you, but
none too much." I not only tried, but every
person on The Daily tries: What more can the
public ask?
That is why this is not a swan song. I am
not leaving the University. No one can make
me leave or reject the things that four years
of this university have shared with me. I will
take all this with me. Swans only sing as they
die. I have sung here and I will continue to
sing. For I leave The Daily in good, competent
hands. As I leave, a new group goes in. That
is why this is a beginning.
-CAROLINE DOW
Personnel Director

By MICHAEL OLINICK
Editor
Y EDITORIAl. WRITING dur-
ing the last four years has not
been characterized by the personal
touch. I attempted to divorce my
personality from the arguments
and appeals I was presenting so
that my editorials might have a
greater general validity. When it
comes time to write final words
for publication before becoming
an alumnus of the University, one
can't help making this a personal
testament.
What follows will be approxi-
mately 4000 words in The Daily
Editor's traditional final remarks.
Those who have read my earlier
edits know that I am incapable of
summing up my entire impressions
of four years at the University in
anything as short as 4000 words.
I will try to present a flavor of
the thoughts that are uppermost
in mind today when I look back
at my experiences here.
* * *
DURING THE LAST five weeks
my editorial typewriter has gath-
ered dust and I have led, more or
less, the life of a typical student
at the University. Myname re-
mains in the staff box as Editor
simply as a tradition; The Daily
you have read since April 24 has
been put out under the direction
of an energetic group of young
people who are called the acting
senior editors.
I begin with this apparent tri-
viality because it symbolizes quick-
ly and with little effort the dif-
ference between those engaged in
work for The Daily and those who
are not. My life has been a rela-
tively relaxed, one for the last
month; I do things at a slower
pace, retire at a somewhat decent
hour, attend a respectable per-
centage of my classes. What is
amazing to note is that my day
is filled with things to do: read-
ing for course work, obligations to
my apartment, ice cream dates
with my fiancee. If someone asked
me to change my life suddenly and
find 60 to 70 hours of time each
week to put in working for a
campus newspaper, I would tell
him that he was crazy, that it
would be impossible for me to
find an extra 10 hours a week to
do anything.
Yet I spent the months from
April 20, 1962 to April 22, 1963
devoting 10 hours a day or more
o The Daily and almost that much
time from the day I joined the
staff to the night I was named
editor.
The intensity with which a
Daily staff member lives his life
cannot be understood or appre-
ciated unless one has been through
the experience himself. Daily
staff members, I am convinced,
work harder than any other group
of people. I have just completed
the most intense year of my life;
my only regret is that others
cannot share my experience.
WHAT DOES it all mean? Is
there a qualitative difference as
well as a mere quantitative dif-
ference? Is it worthwhile? What
does it all have to do with the
University anyway?
I saw some of thekdifference
last Friday when I picked up that
morning's issue of The Daily.
Across the front page splashed a
headline proclaiming that stu-
dents would have to pay $12 next
year if they wanted to see their
university's football team in com-
petition.
Now this decision was reached
by the Board in Control of Inter-
collegiate Athletics which theore-
tically is supposed to reflect my
interests. As a male student, I was
entitled to cast my vote for stu-
dent representatives on this board.
Unfortunately, however, the stu-
dent members have never sought
out any opinions from their con-
stituents nor did they report to

them that the charges were being
considered.
The board itself meets in secret;
its minutes are not distributed
publicly; its sessions are even
closed to the press. Vexing as the
decision was, it was even more
disturbing to note the secretive
manner in which it was arrived
at.
The question of whether or not
student football tickets should
cost anything is relatively trivial,
although it contributes to the gen-
eral trend of the University's driv-
ing away certain economic groups
from attending its campus. On the
same front page, there appeared a
small news article announcing
that final examinations next year
would be shortened to two hours
because administrative problems
made three hour finals impossible.
It was regrettable, announced the
administrator, that some students
were certain to have three finals
in one day.
I have never been one to cham-
pion the value of examinations as
learning tools, particularly final
exams as they are usually handled
at this University. It does seem to
me. however, that they have been

are definitely not going to be
able to utilize the final exam as
an opportunity to draw together
the material if they have three
exams the next day-especially
when the "reading perio" be-
tween the end of classes and the
beginning of finals is a single
day.
What is needed, of course, is
expansion of the examination
period or at least rearrangement
of it to provide a good sized read-
ing period between classes and the
tests, not telescoping the whole
period into five or six days.
You can argue the merits or
demerits of the final exam system
until you are blue in the face,
but most everyone, it would seem,
would agree that the question
ought to be settled not by what is
expedient but by what is most
educationally sound. And we would
expect that the decision would be
made by those involved in the
administrating and taking of the
courses and the exams, the fac-
ulty and student body.
* * *
UNFORTUNATELY, this uni-
versity doesn't always run this
way. One administrator (more
likely a committee so that respon-
sibility is diffused and the chair-
man can disavow the report even
if he signs it) made the decision
on the basis of an appeal to the
Expedient Ethic. With no regard
for or consultation with the' stu-
dents or the faculty members, his
simple decision will have great
effect on the structure of many
courses taught next year.
Now, the average student read-
ing his Friday Daily is apt to
choke on his coffee and Danish
when he reads those two stories,
mutter a bitter curse against
"them," and, realizing it is too
late for him to do anything about
it even if he knew how, accepts
the situation with a shrug and
turns the page to the personal
classified ads looking for laughs.
The Daily staff member, how-
ever, is in a different position.
He can rail at these manipulations
of the student publicly, focusing
the attention of those who can do
something about changing such
decisions on the problem. He can
exert an influence for correction
and reform. I find some comfort
in reading about such abomina-
tions in the knowledge that some-
one on The Daily will do some-
thing about it. Criticism of the
University will continue as long as
there are free and angry editors.
I HAVE NOT LIKED a great
many things that occurred at this
University since September, 1959
or that had their inception a long
time before that and persist an-
achronistically today. What I find
most disturbing, however-and
what probably led me to continue
to work on The Daily-are not
the things in themselves, but the
fact that they are allowed to exist,
even encouraged to exist in some
instances, in a community of such
intelligent persons.
I am frightened because I realize
that the universities are the spots
in the societies most devoted to
intelligent values and the most
open and honest of communities
and I realize how cheap and
shoddy and hypocritical univer-
sities can be.
There is little appreciation, for
example, for free speech in the
United States. Most Americans say
they support the First Amendment
in general, but a strong majority
would deny that freedom to Com-
munists or to neo-Nazis or to any-
one who departs too much from
the national consensus.
The demonstrations over the
past two years in protest of dis-
crimination here and in the South
have been accepted quietly by the
community because the consensus
is in sympathy with the picketers'
aims. Peace vigils, however, are
looked upon with a hostile and
suspicious eye. The march oppos-

ing the Cuban blockade last Oc-
tober drew violent and crude an-
tagonism.
Universities are supposed to be
institutions which help train young
people to have an understanding
and appreciation for basic human
rights. Yet how can a student at
an American university appreciate
free speech and free press if the
community in which he lives has
a speaker policy and a controlled
press? The norm encouraged by
the administration is docile ac-
ceptance of the muzzled campus.
This acceptance will obviously
continue when the student enters
the larger society.
I DO NOT accuse all adminis-
trators of consciously undermining
the educational base of operations
of the University, nor do I believe
they became institutional adminis-
trators so they could bait students.
With the execption of a few such
persons (which the Office of Stu-
dent Affairs refuses to discharge),
I think most administrators are
working in good faith.
What I do charge is that the
administration as a whole sees
itself as running the University,

OK, OLINICK, you're probably
thinking, why don't you ever sug-
gest anything positive or tell us
how you would like to see the
University run?
I would like to propose some
reforms grouped into six cate-
gories:
* * *
I GREATER FEEDBACK from
students in the educational pro-
cess. The faculty should know what
students are thinking about the
instruction they are receiving. A
student's semesterly talk with his
academic counselor should be us-
ed as an opportunity to discuss
the student's view of his own edu-
cation and what he thinks is go-
ing well with it and what isn't.
The counselors could transfer sug-
gestions and criticisms up the line
for possible implementation.
Students should be encouraged
to state their goals in a fairly sys-
tematic manner during various
stages in the University career.
Questions on admission applica-
tions should stimulate serious
thinking about why a student is
seeking a college education. His
answers should be taken seriously
and not used only as a test of his
composition ability. Half of fresh-
man orientation should be thrown
out and a good deal of that time
should be spent in discussing stu-
dent expectations about their edu-
cation and the University's expec-
tation from them.
S* M 4
GRADUATING seniors and other
degree candidates should be in-
vited to set down their thoughts
about their education in lengthy
correspondence with their dean or
department chairman.
Students, of course should be
included on all major policy mak-
ing or policy-advising groups that
are concerned with the academic
process. The issue of a vote is
irrelevant; faculty and. adminis-
tration committees rarely decide
anything by casting a ballot, pre-
ferring to talk until a consensus
is reached.
Conversely, students should be
receiving feedback from the fac-
ulty on the professors' worries
about the University, his discipline,
the performance of his students.
This is not a simple request for
"greater" communication among
the University's constituent blocs,
but an exchange of frank opinions
accompanied by a willingness to
listen and be convinced.
II A GREATER diversity in in-
struction. A university this large
with such a heterogeneous faculty
and student body should not be
pushed into a Procrustean bed of
credit hours, 15 week courses, min-
imum full-time programs.
Independent work of all degrees
should be available for students
who want it; the student who can
learn more and accomplish more
if he never has to be burdened by
attending a class should have his
needs recognized.
There should also be a greater
richness in the type of courses
taught. Students should have an
opportunity to elect a 10 or 12
hour course that offers a broad
and penetrating attack on a major
problem of a single discipline or
that examines the area from an
interdisciplinary approach. Sim-
ilarly, one or two credit hour
courses should be more frequently
available. What is needed is not
necessarily courses with every pos-
sible number of credits from 1 to
19, but an approach to thinking
about courses that realizes that
all subject matter is not equally
amenable to 45 one hour lectures.
Sabbatical semesters should be
available for students to do what
they want in free reading or free
research without loss of status.
Teaching styles could also use re-
examination, particularly from
the aspect of team teaching and
varying class sizes.
* * *

III RESPECT for the dignity
and integrity of the individual.
This is more of an attitude than
a set of policies, but it can be
reflected in all aspects of campus
life. It demands that faculty drop
their patronizing attitude toward
students, that the administration
level with faculty when explaining
the reasons behind policy deci-
sions, that students be willing to
defend the rights of other stu-
dents.
The student's integrity is largely
respected in the classroom, al-
though the nature of many aca-
demic assignments and the ego
bruising experience of being only
one of 1027 students enrolled in
Psychology 101 certainly do not
indicate respect.
THE MOST serious neglect in
this area rests with the Office of
Student Affairs and its systema-
tically ambiguous chief adminis-
trator, Vice-President James A.
Lewis. While pretending to be act-
ing in a slowly deliberate manner,
the OSA is deliberately slow in
processing proposals for reform
and does not hesitate to manipu-

when they get into college, their
professors will not give a damn
whether their students learn any
of the material or whether they
pass or fail the courses. Students
accept this sorry state without
questioning why it is so, and some
faculty members, feeling such an
attitude is expected of them, act
out the role.
Is this necessary at all? I don't
think so. Other than custom, the
reason that stands between an
exhibition of true concern for the
student stems from the under-
valuation of teaching in promo-
tions. It is hard to judge who is a
good teacher and research is con-
sidered more important. The re-
sult is that there is a higher pay-
off for spending one's time in the
laboratory.
UNDER THIS general point, I
would like to distinguish two sub-
cases. The first. is a plea that
teachers really care about what
and how they are teaching. Teach-
ers should want to know how the
course material is getting across
and what conceptual difficulties
their students are having. I am not
interested in coddling students,
but I don't believe a professor's
obligation ends in presenting lec-
tures and grading examinations.
The behavorial scientists tell us
that going to college has little
effect upon a student's beliefs
and values and that the under-
graduate years are largely regard-
ed as a parenthesis in one's life.
Much of this Is due to the stu-
dent's expectation; but a lot can
be attributed to the structure of
the educational environment in
the college. Few students have
their minds opened during the
process of earning a degree at the
University of Michigan.
* * *
THE SECOND CASE is the
treatment given to the student
whose mind has really been open-
ed, whose basic beliefs have been
shattered and who is groping to-
ward a better philosophy. I have
seen a few, probably too few, stu-
dents to whom the educational
experience has meant something
more than absorption of certain
knowledge and skills, who have
given their inner selves to the
process and have returned as
changed men.
For these students, the result is
often a cold treatment. Other stu-
dents resent questions which make
them uncomfortale and faculty
memibers frequently dislike stu-
dents who interrupt a carefully
structured lecture with a chal-
lenge.
I am asking for more than tol-
eration; I think that such stu-
dents should be taken seriously
and should be made aware of the
opportunities that are open to
them. The process of exposing and
altering one's privately held con-
victions has to be essentially a
lonely experience. The faculty can-
not solve every student's difficul-
ties. The comfort that derives
from knowing that other men have
passed through similar periods,
however, and a professor giving an
occasional steer away from false
starts is very helpful.
* *, *
V AN EDUCATIONAL commit.
ment from the top down. The cen-
tral administration,student affairs
directors and deans and depart-
ment chairmen should seek to
minimize the noneducational as-
pects of their work. Educational
considerations should always get
the ;top priority even if exper-
ience demands something else.
In a decentralized institution
like the University of Michigan,
the president cannot dictate pol-
icy. He can, however, set the tone
of the institution through his be-
havior, public statements and ad-
herence to principle. All-Univer-
sity policy can be forcefully as-
serted and it can be true to the
ideals of academic freedom.

* * *
LAST YEAR three faculty mem-
bers and three students sat down
to discuss strategy for forcing the
resignation of University President
Harlan Hatcher. This year an-
other group was concerned with
the same problem. The general
conclusion w a s that although
there was widespread faculty dis-
content (not limited, Mr. Radock,
to faculty traitors') with Presi-
dent Hatcher, it was next to im-
possible to get rid of him.
I have been accused of a path-
ological hatred aimed at the pres-
ident. I have nothing against Pres-
ident Hatcher personally; he has
always been gracious to me. I
think, however, that his continued
leadership jeopardizes the excel-
lence of this university, that the
value of his contributions to the
community have already been
realized and that newer, more
dynamic personalities are needed
at this stage in the University's
life.
Much of the faculty criticism
of the central administration was
assuaged by the appointment of
Roger Heyns as Vice-President for

presidency when President Hatch-
er retires in 1967.
* * *
OTHERS TAKE a more cynical
view, believing that overlong ex-
posure to the bureaucratic mech-
anisms in t h e administration
building will 'corrupt' Heyns and
that he was not a flaming lib-
eral to start with. Some see the
Executive Vice-President Marvin
L. Niehuss as replacing President
Hatcher and offering the same
style of leadership, slightly im-
proved.
There is also the school of opin-
ion that Secretary of Defense Rob-
ert McNamara would like the job.
It is clear that at least until
the state legislative districts re
reapportioned fairly and a state
income tax is levied, the Univer-
sity will continue to receive in-
adequate s t a t e appropriations.-
This will almost surely necessi-
tate the continued appointment of
a top administrator who can raise
funds from federal, industrial and
alumni sources.
It is equally clear that the Uni-
versity needs a strong educational
leader at the helm to guide it
through the perilous decade ahead.
Perhaps we will see a division of
the University's top position into
a presidency concerned with fund
raising, public relations and offi-
cial- ceremonies and a chancellor
to direct academics.
. . .
THESE ARE some of the spec-
ulations that editors of The Daily
make among themselves from time
to time and they ought to be
shared more in the public columns
of this newspaper.
In reforming the present admin-
istration, I would ask for a de-
emphasized Office of University
Relations. The task of the Uni-
versity in information and news
services is to acquaint the public
with the implications of research
findings developed at the Univer-
sity so we will have a better in-
formed citizenry. Its job isnot to
impress the public or woo its dol-
lars by the hard or the soft sell.
R R
VI REALIZATION that the
problems of the University cannot
be separated from the problems
of society. The Universitydoes not.
exist in Isolation from the rest of
the world. It reflects in microcosm
the society in which it exists. If
secrecy and evasiveness charac-
terize the relationship between
nations or between individuals at-
large, secrecy and evasiveness will
not be escaped in the conduct of
the affairs of the campus.
This is a publicly supported
university. It survives because of
the financial and moral support
given to it by the society. It dare
not go too far from the norms of
the society or it risks arousing
anger and withdrawal of support.
The University however, is in a
good position to influence changes
in the society, through its func-
tion of providing trained personnel
to fill vacated roles of service and
leaersi n the community and:
through its continued criticism
and analysis of these roles.
Those who wish to improve their
university must realize that the
job does not end with the physical
periphery of the campus. To work
for University reform demands
working for society-wide reform
as well.
Unless the schools are good d
honest and true ones, the society
won't be and life won't be either.
I think James Baldwin gave the
proper response when he was ask-
ed by a young student, "What
would you do if your teacher told
you that instead o picketing and
engaging in sit-ins, you should
get an education first?"
"I would tell my teacher that
it's impossible to get an education
in this country until you change
the country," Baldwin told him.
* . .

WHAT SORT of changes has
the last four years induced in me,
what does being the Editor of The
Daily do to an essentially intro-
spective mathematics major?
I'm not sure I can fully answer .
that question now even if I were
given as much space as I needed.
I can say that I have learned a
lot of things in my days and
nights at the Univeriity of Mich-
igan; that I put a tremendously
high value on the experience I
have just been through; that my
social consciousness has increased
to the extent that I know I can
never become an ivory tower pro-
fessor (if I make it that far up
the academic ladder).
* . .
I THINK I know better today
than I did four years ago just
what things should be regarded as
relative and which things abso-
lute, what I want to defend and
what I am indifferent to. I do not
think that I will be capable of
hypocrisy and duplicity as an adult
and I hope that I will be a demo-
crat and be just. I did not act
in a just manner in a dealing
with a fellow staff member this
year; the result was much self-

The Big 'Ifs'
InThe Shelter Program

THE UNIVERSITY is now facing the dilem-
ma of civil defense: how much money should
be poured into fallout shelter preparations
that will only work under certain nuclear at-
tack conditions and that no one wants to see
used in any circumstance.
There are too many "ifs" in the shelter plans
proposed for the University to justify the
"colossal" expenses involved in adopting a
technically adequate plan. For this reason the
University should take a few minimum pre-
cautions and do no more.
The expenses are monumental. Merely to
supply enough water for the 64,000 people
capable to using University shelter areas, the
administration would have to fill 26,000 17-
gallon containers. These would have to be
emptied and refilled periodically.
THE FALLOUT SHELTERS would provide no
defense against bombs falling in the Ann
Arbor area, fire storms or extremely high
fallout levels. The chances of a bomb falling
in the area are not so remote. Such an ex-
plosion would create a radiation cloud that the
prevailing winds would carry directly to Wayne
County and wipe out life in Detroit while pre-
serving the property.
Any question as to the usefulness of shelters
by definition revolves around the probability
of war. Fallout, especially in large quantities,
respects no international boundaries. It deva-
states friend and foe on its trips around the
world, regardless of political system, social
order or degree of industrialization. Thermo-
nuclear war is possible, but not probable.
THE FALLOUT PROGRAM will work if Ann
Arbor is not hit by a bomb directly but only
by an average amount of fallout.
In addition, the, University, with one-sixth
the resources of Detroit and more than twice
as many resources as the rest of Washtenaw
County, would have to overcome thousands of
technical details to work its shelters at "per-
fect" outside conditions.
For example. effectiveness could be impaired

If people are unable to break into the
shelter areas, most of which are locked at all
times;
If the warning system fails, as the Heating
Plant steam whistle, designed for the job, has
never been tested;
YIf the outside electrical sources fail, the
city water pumping system stops which the
heating plant relies on;
If the heat fails in winter, thus bursting
all University water pipes that would take
decades to replace;
If oxygen supplies in the air are depleted by
fire storms;
If there are insufficent shelter managers,
directors and doctors;
If not enough food is stored;
If the water supply is contaminated;
If a local "hot spot" develops near the cen-
tral coordinating control headquarters;
If too many people panic;
If special medical attention is unavailable
because of a high degree of radiation sickness;
If people do not apply their "ingenuity."
THE REPORT to the administration from the
Sub-Committee on Special Hazards of the
University Safety Committee presents the prob-
lems well. It graphically points out the dilemma,
the complexities and the underlying impos-
sibility of the shelter program.
The committee is well aware of the thou-
sands of details and complications facing any
civil defense plan. It has not attempted to
justify fallout shelters on any moral, political
or ethical basis, but has taken an assignment
from the administration and treated the prob-
lem as factually as possible.
It has not made any recommendations. Its
report is a well worked out analysis of the
technical problems of survival. The committee
has also pointed out that any safety measures,
as civil defense is made out to be, invariably
makes people feel more secure and therefore
more antagonistic to other solutions to the
problem, in this case peaceful negotiations of
inr-ns iti 1 nt'nwlemns