Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue


Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

March 10, 1961 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1961-03-10

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

"Here, Little Boy, Pull The Nice Horse In With You"


I r ir1 t t' iIJ

Seventy-First Year r
orials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staf writers'
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

Amendment Games:
Intent to Subvert
Daily Staff Writer
RARELY DOES A MAJOR motion come through a Student Govern-
ment Council meeting unscathed. There are arguments about se-
mantics and there are amendments that clarify or pinpoint meaning.
Wednesday night's meeting demonstrated a new and deplorable
technique: the amendment to subvert. Several attempts were made to
attach amendments to the motion condemning "Operation Abolition"
which would have substantially altered the intent of the action. Per-
sons who opposed the motion completely, instead of debating against

ARCH 10, 1961


Union Board Should Define

'Undesirable' In Future


esirability of conditions in the Michigan
Grill raises some quite delicate issues
nt to the University community.
er some months of thinking 'and discus-
Union officials have indicated a dissatis-
n of sorts with the aura, clientele and
oning within the MUG. They have em-
I the ambiguous terms "unpleasant" and
sir'able" have been used to describe all
of individuals and/or incidents-card-
g, conversation, studying, activities and
, legal and illegal. Recently, the Union
ecome involved in a survey in connection
-he faculty to determine the "best use of
. facilities." They have' held it is their
io determine the acceptability or unac-
bility of individuals using Union facilities.
have avowed that any person is welcome
the facilties properly, so long as he or
>es not "disrupt" the service to students,
ti and other members of the University
r, and guests.
[HIS POINT, hackles have begun to rise:
ho was the Union out to get? Who were
idesirables? Clarification was sought, but
ag very helpful was forthcoming. The
had placed itself in a difficult situation
s reference to MUG atmosphere but,
y for security reasons, would go'fo farther
now, in the midst of all the mystery and
various members of the community wait-
r more accurate information from' the
1 groups' assigned to research the "at-
ere" question for the Union, it has been
ed that Union General Manager Frank
;el has asked- four persons to leave the
n the last two weeks-because they were
atdents, and excessively utilizing time and
in the MUG. They can return for meals
rently) but not for excessive periods of
T OBVIOUSLY the expulsions are linked
the study of "undesirables," "unpleasant-
"best possible . atmosphere," etc. This
so, it must also be true that the Union
y has a pretty clear conception of at
brme of the goals it is seeking-the goals
which it has been so ambiguous, the
which the research is supposed to define.
r so much reticence to communicate-
' and precisely-these goals to the Uni-
'? The Union and its Grill are integral
of this educational community and, as
have obligations to be exact about the
of contributions they want to make. Do
want a MUG atmosphere conducive to
conversations, long, personal interactions
n persons of all kinds? Do they want
G* atmosphere which fosters more haste
'ficiency, which emphasizes primarily the
of meals-the business function of the

of operation or ambiguity of purpose-it
is legitimate if the Union wishes to apprehend
persons engaged in illegal activity within the
Grill. But it seems probable, unfortunately, that
the Union is using the term "undesirable" to
indirectly mask intentions far broader than
its intention to dispose of whatever actual crim-
inals may be in the Grill. If this is the case,
then the Union is facing a somewhat ominous
organizational dilemma that the whole Univer-
sity ought to consider. On the one hand, the
Union (or any other adjunct of the University)
ought to be committed to policies of complete
openness of its facilities to absolutely anyone,
and, it ought to organize its facilities and
operation in a manner consistent with the
broadest educational ends of the University.
More bluntly, it is ridiculous to argue that Un-
ion facilities should be primarily open to stu-
dents and "life members"-such a position is
ritual and tradition-oriented and not at all
consistent with the conviction that a Univer-
sity ought to promote freedom, equality and
openness and set up its facilities accordingly.
It is also ridiculous to argue that the Grill is
just an eating place-it is one of the few en-
virons around this University conducive to the
personal kinds of association so vital to the
process of education.
On the other hand, the Union is faced with,
a practical problem-certain persons apparent-
ly behave in an undesirable and sometimes il-
legal way, thus alienating prospective cus-
tomers, enraging alumni and disturbing local
police. Now the question of desirability is some-
thing which ought to be handled quite delicate-
ly: if the Union thinks someone undesirable,
they ought not abridge his right to eat, think,
talk in their Grill, even though they have a
legal right to do so. The Grill is not simply a
private restaurant and ought not reflect, tle
private restaurant's arbitrariness of customer
PROBABLY THE UNION Board of Directors
will not agree with the outlook expressed
here. This being the case, communication, that
is, frank concise communication, is much
needed as the Union continues to pursue ques-
tions which are by now relevant not only to
its own internal operation but also to the best
operation of the University community.
Hopefully the research being done will pro-
vide some insight into community sentiment.
In the meantime, there are people who want to
know now, and have a right to know now, what
the Union Board of Directors has meant-in
full-by its language, particularly "undesirabil-
ity," and its actions, particularly the curious
and very vague expulsion of these four "non-;

The President and the People:

it and registering their complaint
by voting against it, tried instead
to make it senseless.
The section of the motion con-
cerning a statement on academic
freedom by the United States Na-
tional Student Association orig-
inally urged students to see just
the film.
IT WAS AMENDED to include
listening to the unedited tapes of
the San Francisco hearings and
a recording based on the tapes,
and reading other relevant mater-
ial. The motion then would have
read, "SGC holds that the film
'Operation Abolition' unfairly ac-
cuses students of subversive ac-
tivity . . . SGC urges all students
to view the movie . . ." which
would have been asking students
to'make judgments without a two-
sided presentation of the issue.
Another proposal amendment
said, in effect, that SGC realized
it didn't have the factual infor-
mation to'offer an accurate opin-
ion on the issue, but had made up
its mind anyway.
Fortunately, Council members
were quick to see that one very sel-
dom has all of the relevant infor-
mation, 'and that on this particu-
lar issue no one, including the
House Committee, had the full pic-
ture. This was much of the point:
HUAC, either intentionally or
through ignorance, was making an'
accusation not supported by fact
and evidence
terous of the defeatist amend-.
ments suggested was the removal
of the sentence, "SGC holds that
the film 'Opertion Abolition' un-
fairly accuses students of subver-
sive activity." Removal of that
sentence would have radically al-
tered the substance of the mo-
The point of an opinion motion
is the expression of a specific opin-
ion. People who don't like the
opinion should vote against the
motion. They make fools of them-'
selves and the Council as a gov-
erning and policy-making body if
instead they play games with
In contrast to the petty politick-
ings two amendments were added
to the original ,motion which
greatly clarified and expanded'
SGC's position.
* C C ,
ONE, ADDED at last week's
meeting, clarified the point 'that
SGC did not condone violence ion,
the part of the students.
Wednesday, that statement was
expanded into what it probably
the most important policy state-
ment in the entire motiot

The Daily Official Bnuetin i n
official publication of The Univer-
sity of Michigan for which The
Michigan Daily assumes no editorial
responsibility. Notices should be'
sent in TYPEWRITTEN form to
Room 3518 Administration Building,
before 2 p.m. two days preceding
General Notices
The General Library will be open ad-
ditional hours on weekends beginning
Fri., March 10. The following hours
have been added to the schedule: 6 to
10 p.m. Friday, 1 to 6 p.m. Saturday,
and 6 to 10 p.m. Sunday. During these
added hours, the library cannot offer
professional library service.
The new schedule of hours for the
General Library will be 8 a.m. to 10
p.m. Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to
6 p.m. on Saturday and 2 to 10 p.m.
Faculty, College of Literature, Science
and the Arts: The freshman five-week
progress reports will be due Fri., March
17, in the Faculty Counselors Office for
Freshmen and Sophomores, 1213 Angell
Physical Education--Women Students
All women students who were medically
excused from physical education for
the first season of the second semester;
but who will be able to resume activity
for the 'second season, should fill in
registration forms in Office 15, Barbour
Gym immediately.
The following student-sponsored so-
cial events have been approved for the
corming week-end. Social chairman are
reminded that requestse for approval
for social events are due in the Office
of Student Affairs not later than 12
o'clock noon on Tuesday prior to the
Ftriday March 10-Phi Delta Phi, Sig-
ma Alpha Mu.
Saturday, March 11-Acacia Prater-
nity, Alpha Chi Sigma, Alpha Delta Phi,
Alpha Epsilon Pi. Alpha Kappa Lambda,
Alpha ,Sigma Phi, Beta Theta Pl. Chi
Phi, Chi Psi, Chicago House, West
Quadrangle, Delta Kappa Epsilon, Delta
Sigma Delta, Delta Sigma' Phi, Delta
Tau Delta, Delta Upsilon, PletcherHal,
Frederick House, South Quad, Gomberg
House, South Quadrangle, Greene
House, East Quadrangle, Hayden House,
Est Quadrangle. Kappa Sigma, Lamb-
da Chi Alpha; Phi Delta Phi, Phi Delta
Theta, Phi Kappa Psi, Phi Kappa Tau,
Phi Sigma Delta, P1 Lambda Phi, Psi
Allen' Rumsey House, west Quad,
Scott.House, South Quadrangle, Sigma
Alpha Epsilon, Sigma Chi. Sigma Nu,
Sigma Phi, Sigma Phi Epsilon, Tau
Delta Phi, Theta Chi, Theta Delta Chi,
Theta Xi, Trigon, Van Tyne House,
South Quad, Wenley' House, West Quad-
rangle, Zeta Beta Tau, Zeta Psi.
Sunday,'March 12-Phi Delta Phi
Summary of Action Taken''by Student
Government Council at its Meeting of
(Continued on 'Page 8)

SGC Exploits Confusion

C NIGHT'S SGC meeting demonstrated
phically how confusion on the part of a
ative body can be exploited to achieve.
dacity, appeasement, compromise - in
all the trappings of vituperative partisan
s-were the order of the day. Center of
was a motion to condemn Operation
on, a film on the San Francisco student
strations against the House Committee
-American Activities last April. The film
g circulated by the House Committee.
CONTROVERSIAL part of the motion
illy read, "SGC holds that the film Op-
1 Abolition unfairly accuses students of
sive activity,
C endorses the right of individuals to
ully and legally protest the activities
.istence of the House Committee on Un-
an Activities and SGC expresses concern
ossible inhibition of such activity.
e students, in so far as they participated
ue breaches of order, were not acting in
with the precepts of democratic non-
e. SGC cannot condone the actions of
students. Nor, however, can it condone
ion of the committee which in its distri-
of a distorted film has also failed to act
ing to the traditions of honest analysis
ie process which are necessary to the
inctioning of a free society."
TIONS on the issue, which were initially
mn-cut and diametrically opposed, para-
ly grew more entreched as information
ilated and both sides went through the
s of give-and-take. One 'faction, which
e described as "conservative," originally
iat the film was legitimate 'propaganda
part of a well-meaning group acting in
st interests of thinking Americans. The
faction, known as "liberal," b6elieved the
!pres ente,,a ilful a+ mnt fa.hat

tended over a two-week period, the "conserva-
tives" conceded that the film was distorted-
but that the degree of this distortion placed it
outside the right (nay, the responsibility) of
the House ,Committee's mandate could not be
proved to their minds.
THE "LIBERALS,' however, made concessions.
on a far more crucial point: they made
what seems to me a fundamentally untenable
distinction between Berkeley students who pro-
tested the House Committee's activities on May
13, 1960 and individuals who may wish to
protest such actions, "peacefully and legally."
This distinction helped their cause but dam-
aged their position. They attempted to separate
the issues of the San Francisco incident and
the validity of the'film-a specious distinction,
since the question of the film's validity rests,
entirely on the facts of the San Francisco
Members of the "conservative" opposition,
however, were vocal in their disturbance over
the actions of the Berkeley students, whose
dress, posture and ideas elicited pejoratives.
On the other hand, "conservatives" were ready
to concede the right of more judicious, clean-
cut, moderate students to pass on the methods
and mandate of the House Committee-they
did so several times in the two-week debate.
With this before them, "liberals" begged the
question and made the distinction, without de-
fining the terms involved.
THE MOTION passed 10 to four. Both sides,
all individuals concerned, .probably think
they acted responsibly as political entities. If
politics implies clouded issues euphemistically
termed reasonable compromise, delay and ob-
structionism ostensibly in the interest of fair
consideration, neglect in information-gathering
by SGC members in favor of heated factional
verbosity, then all acquitted themselves grace-
fully. And the end was achieved.

W HILE President Kennedy's
popularity, as measured by
the Gallup Poll, is high, he is still
a long way from having behind
him a reliable and effective ma-
jority. The narrowness of the elec-:
tion is still registered in Congress,
particularly in the House, and the
general upsurge of good feeling
in the country has not yet crystal-
lized as practical support of his
One might describe 'the public
mood as one of growing good will
and confidence without the excite-
ment and enthusiasms of a crisis.
This will do very well for a time.
But while the Kennedy mission
is not to resolve a crisis such as
confronted Roosevelt in 1933, his
mission, as he made amply clear
in the campaign, is to arrest and
reverse a decline in American
power, influence, and progress
which could over a period of years
produce critical and dangerous re-
sults. If the excitements of a
crisis are uncalled for, a convic-
tion of national purposes and
necessities is for the long run in-
AS OF NOW, there are many
more people who like John Ken-
nedy, and his appointments, and
his style of operating in office,
.than there are people who under-
stand and believe in what he is
committed to doing. He will have
to close this gap: he will have to
persuade the large majority who
like him that they must also be-
lieve in him. Until this is done, the
important construction measures
of his administration are headed
for serious trouble in Congress.
.For Congress is not now feeling
the pressure of a large convinced
Kennedy majority,
Such a majority cannot, I ven-
ture to think, be rallied wholly or
in the main by personal popu-
larity, As measured by the Gallup
Poll, Mr. Kennedy probably is
about as popular as was Gen.
Eisenhower after his first month
in the White House. But his situa-
tion is radically different from
Gen. Eisenhower's. He is com-
mitted to positive programs that
require new laws and new appro-
priations and perhaps new taxes.
His predecessor was primarily in-
terested in undoing rather than in
doing. High personal popularity
with a passive and negative pro-
gram make for an easy life. But
personal popularity is not enough
'to carry with it an active and
innovating program.
* * *
THE PRESIDENT will have to
find ways of communicating his
own convictions to a working ma-
jority of the people. Is he not do-
ing that? Not adequately, so it
seems to me. There is a missing
element in his press conferences,
his speeches, and his public ap-
pearances, and for lack of it he
receives much approval without
creating sufficient conviction.
That missing element is, I think,
the willingness to take the time
and to take the trouble to explain,
to expound, to describe, in a word
to teach. John Kennedy is already
proving himself to be an extra-
ovrinrv Chief Exeutive He has

himself understood because he has
explained himself, has not, yet
shown itself in the President. I
say not yet because I have no
doubt th~at this instinct to teach
is in him. It is in every man who
has deep convictions and a pas-
sion to realize them.
* * *
HIS PRESS conferences illus-
trate what I am trying to say.
They are conceived on the 'as-
sumption that the use of a Presi-
dential press conference is to pro-
vide spot news. The President
makes announcements and the
correspondents ask him questions
in order to get stories, Perhaps
even scoops, that have not yet
been published.
This Is I believe a basically false
conception of why it is worth-
while to have the President submit
himself to questions from the
press. It adds nothing to the spot
news to have the President, rather
than Mr. Salinger, announcing it.
As for the hidden stories and
scoops, there is never enough time
to go deeply into any of the back-
ground which make them signifi-
cant. As compared with what

To the Editor:
BY NOW IT should be clear that
the recent formation of a com-
mittee by the Michigan Union to
study ways and means of chang-
ing the atmosphere of the Michi-
gan Union was not the disinterest-
ed investigation it was made out
to be by statements attributed to
the Directors, but instead it was
the beginning of a campaign to
discriminate against certain in-
dividuals. I will not go into a dis-
cussion of events which, are no
doubt reported elsewhere on these
pages, nor will I consider hair-
splitting questions of who has the
technical right t do what. Suffice
it to say, that without so much as,
an announcement of the com-
mittee findings, the Union Board
of Directors has acted-and acted
in such a manner that certain in-
cidents, perhaps innocent in them-
selves, when taken together make
one a little uneasy about the at-
mosphere on this cafpus.
Some months ago, a friend of
mine who sports a full red beard
was approached by a union official
and interrogated as to why his
"kind of people" come to the union
and warned that "we are going to
get rid of you people."
A few weeks ago, the Michigan
Daily printed 'a photo of some
people in the Michigan Union
Grille right under a headline
about "undesirables."
* * *
A LIST HAS been compiled and
is in the hands of, the above men-
tioned union official. These people
are beng told that they may no
longer come to the Union.
No one knows the full contents
of this list nor the reasons for
putting any ndividual on it. None
of these people have been warned

the sins of guilt by association,-de-
famation of character, star cham-
ber proceedings and aborgation of
the right to face one's accuser, in-
dividual persecution, summary ac-
tion without explanation or warn-
ing, strong-arm police state tech-
niques, and racial prejudice, might
perhaps be going a little too far.
One can only button up one's coat
against the winter that is still here
in Ann Arbor and look hopefully
ahead to the spring.
-Ed Dubinsky
Mathematics Department
Persecution .
To the Editor:
THE DRIVE ON the part of the
Michigan Union management'
to rid the Lunch Room of "unde-
sirables" is typical of the proce-
dure commonly used in our society
to curtain the actions of certain
individuals deemed undesirable by
the power structure of the com-
munity. This procedure consists of
taking a law or regulation "on-the
books" which is very rarely, if ever,
enforced in relation to'the general
public and using it against a cer-
'tain individual.
A sociologist would consider such
a law (such as that of the state of
Michigan which prohibits people
under the age of 21 from smoking)
as being quite antiquated and a
result of "cultural lag." He would
not consider such a law a current
societal norm (for to be a norm,
a law must have universal accep-
tance and enforcement). However,
since the law, antiquated or not, is
still on the books, it can still be
used or enforced in specific cases,
against a specific individual when

anyone who knows anything about
the situation can clearly see that
such a regulation is not and could
not be (short of financial disaster)
universally enforced as to mem-r
bers of the general public.
If this rule was so enforced, this
would mean only full-time male
students and, life members (and
their guses) would be allowed to
use Union Grill facilities. The fact
is that hundreds of non-members
use these facilities every day (vis-
itors to the campus, high-school
students, faculty members, Uni-
versity empolyees, and members of
the general public), and to think
of uniformally enforcing such a
regulation is ridiculous. Therefore,
it is unjust and unfair to the in-
dviduals who ar being persecuted'
by the specific application of this
rule, and I sincerely hope that the
steps now being taken to correct
this injustice are successful.
-John Erfurt, Grad. ,
To the Editor:
IT HAPPENED *o be my misfor-
tune to be present Wednesday
afternoon during the Harrison in-
cident and although my acquaint-
ance with Mr. Harrison is 'slight I
do know him as a responsible
member of ' Ann Arbor's middle
class society. He is active inDemo-
cratic politics both at the local
and state level and is a property
owner and taxpayer as well as a
respected businessman.
Possibly I was in error when I"
assumed the Daily's past observa-
tions' regarding "objectionable"
characters in the MUG were di-
rected at non-conformists (as to
dress and appearance) but it is
my feeling that ,-Wednesday's ac-

To the Editor:
S A 100 per cent loyal Ameri-
can, I have deep reservations
about criticizing the Fathers of
our Republic, but I think that
even the staunchest patriot will
agree that the authors of the Con-
stitution showed a considerable
lack of foresight when they in,
cluded those provisions regarding
religious freedom and equal op-
portunity. Iam certain that they
did, not realize thxat a group of
radicals would pervert those
clauses and use them to destroy
Christian morality.
I am sure that the sympathies of
everyone are with the members of
Alpha Tau Omega, a group of
Christian gentlemen, working to-
gether to'help each other live the
most virtuous Christ-like lives,
who are being forced to contamin-
ate their group by accepting a
non-believer. They do not object
to a member being Jewish, but
only to the fact that he has not
fully embraced the Christian
positions is 'undeniable. An ATO
has always been, and must con-
tinue to be the very epitome of
Christian manhood. Never have
the lips of an ATO uttered a woid
stronger than "Golly," or tasted a
drink stronger than root beer. We
can be sure that the letter writer
complaining about the scene in
front of Markeley at closing time
was not, talking about ATO's.
It is heart warming, indeed, to
know that there is one nouse on
this generally atheistic campus
that does not maintain an exam
file or engage in any activity that
might conceivably be construed as
cheating, that has never had an

rmight be done with the President's-
brief time before the television
caneras, a very large number of
the questions are a waste of time.,
Moreover, unless I am greatly mis-
taken, the use of the, time to dig
out hidden news and to reach for
scoops is not endearing the Ameri-
can press to the American public.
The real use of the Presidential
press conference is to enable -the
President to explain his policies
and, if necessary, to compel him
to explain them. In any event, ex-
planation, not announcements or
scoops, is wanted in this extremely
public but also very intimate en-
counter between the President and
the public.
conference can be reformed or
transformed, or whether it should
be supplemented, are questions
which can be answered only after
some experimentation. But these
questions need to be answered.
For President Kennedy with all
his political genius is not yet in
full effective communication with
the American people.
(c) 1961 New York Herald Tribune, Inc.

What Are Union Undesirables'?

Back to Top

© 2022 Regents of the University of Michigan