Seventy-Third Year EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNvERSITY OF MICHIGAN UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS W7here Opinions A re STUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG., ANN ARBOR, MICH., 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 be noted in all reprints. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1962 NIGHT EDITOR: ELLEN SILVERMAN "Indeed, Suh! Some Of Mah Kinfolk Are Yankees" POLITICS IN PERSPECTIVE: Republican Liberals Bite the Dust Campus Responds To Vigorous Election THURSDAY was probably the calmest day the Unive':sity campus has experienced in the past two and one half weeks. It was a day of wistful smiles, broad grins, and pen- sive expressions of disappointment. The United States National Student Asso- ciation referendum coupled with the Student Government Council elections resulted in one of the most vigorous campaigns in University history. The record vote of 7,193 students at the polls and Council president Steven Stockmeyer's im- pressive 1,711 first place ballots gain in sig- nificance when one remembers that the elec- tion was held on just one day this year. Indications from the tremendous voter-turn- out are both encouraging and discouraging. One fourth of the student body participated in balloting, making the seven elected candidates more representative than candidates have ever been in SGC history. THE RESULTS indicate that at least a quarter of the campus can be stimulated when a meaningful issue is forcefully brought to the student body. Actually, however, to fully understand, this election it must be split into two distinct aspects: the election of SGC candidates and the referendum. The election of candidates went rather smoothly, but was completely subordinated by the referendum issue. Apparently, the candi- dates were much more aware of the election and petitioning rules in this election than candidates were last spring, and on the whole it was a clean election. However, it cannot be said that political chicanery was excluded from the election pro- cess. Candidates are requiredto submit pe- titions to SGC by a given deadline. The word petition has always been interpreted to mean all election materials, including the signed ,petition for non-incumbents, a statement of candidacy, a platform and a couple of other items. This year two of the incumbents applied a strict interpretation of the word "petition" and failed to submit their platform by the established deadline for petitions. Technically, they were within their rights, since the Rules and Credentials committee and election direc- tor had not realized the legal loophole pre- sented by the phraseology of the petitioning rules. This loophole has existed in past petitioning regulations but incumbents and new caldidates alike have always met the deadline or been disqualified. Certainly there is no reason why incumbents should be given preferential treat- ment. In fairness to the other candidates the platforms of the incumbents must be sub- mitted at the same time as all others. The rules governing future elections must clearly state that all materials from incumbents and new candidates alike are due by the specified deadline. ALSO, THE ILLEGAL distribution of dittoed sheets with statements explaining the anti- USNSA position and endorsements of five candidates in some of the quadrangles repre- sents an attempt by some organized group to get certain people elected. Certainly these points are minor compared to the infractions of election rules which oc- curred last spring. The .three most deplorable aspects of the election, however, were the candidates them- selves, the usual apathy of the campus towards the candidates, and certain parts of the ad- ministration of the election. SGC needed a group of informed, interested and dynamic candidates to bolster its prestige and power. Instead, excluding the incumbents, those campaigning were either mediocre or extremely uninformed. Fortunately, the campus selected the better candidates from those who were poorly qualified. AN IDEAL GROUP of candidates would have recognized the significance of the USNSA question but not rested their campaign on it. Several of the candidates had other points in their platforms but tried to clinch their case on the issue. The USNSA question was in part an artificially created campaign issue handed to the candidates by a few campus leaders. A really good candidate would have used the USNSA issue as a point of departure for some concrete suggestions for new areas of Council action or inquiry. These suggestions necessarily must be backed up by a substantial knowledge of the academic and administrative structure of the University. On the whole, can- didates in this election were not aware of such basic aspects of the University as the new Office of Academic Affairs, the actual content of the new speaker bylaw or the Reed Report and Council's evaluation of it and there- fore were not able to offer well thought-out areas for potential Council consideration. Agood SGC member should have an inquir- ing mind open to ideas encompassing all view- points. However, often it appeared that each tings with candidates. The other campus-wide attempts to allow candidates to express their views were flops. The Union-WCBN radio forum was attended by 22 students, and it is doubtful that a great percentage of the campus would have listened patiently to the two-hour program over the radio. Another campus-wide opportunity for the student to hear the views of the candidates is Hyde Park, yet both -of the Diag sessions were unsuccessful because only a few of the can- didates had enough conviction to get up and talk to a militant crowd. Several of the can- didates circulated in the audience but refused to speak even when asked to present their views. Other candidates never even put in an appearance. Campaigning at the individual residence halls and other housing units is not only te. dious for the candidates but the attendance is usually a small percentage of the total num- ber of inhabitants. Face to face campaigning in these units is, of course, the best way to win votes, but the effect of this form of cam- paigning is limited by the apathy of the in- dividual student. CERTAINLY, large, campus-wide gatherings where the candidates can present their views to many students are an important part of any campaign. Yet both the student body and the candidates themselves seem to have been unwilling in this election to grasp the opportunity of listening to all the candidates together, where positions can be compared and contrasted. The administration of the election was good up until count night. Only one real criticism can be leveled at the polling process itself and that is that student identification cards were not punched after voting. Instead a grease pencil was used to mark the card. Students with long fingernails or creative minds could easily have removed the pencil mark. Count night was doomed to confusion a full week before the actual election. The new per- centage process, incorporated into the Hare system of voting, supposedly to remove the randomness of ballot redistribution, was not thoroughly thought out by the Council. Even the election director and the executive vice- president, who are in charge of count night, did not understand how often the percentages had to be computed and how the invalidated ballots fit into the computations. Consenquently, it took about two hours to figure out the first and second ballots. At times it was doubtful if any one from Thomas Moch, who ran the desk computer, to Thomas Brown, was conceived the percentage system, under- stood exactly what was going on. THE SECOND and distinct part of the cam- paign concerned the USNSA referendum. This is the issue which provided the entire impetus of the election, which was clearly demonstrated by the fact that 7,193 students voted on the referendum while only 6,654 students cast ballots for SGC candidates. The USNSA campaign, thought much clean- er and more intelligently handled than at other campuses, left much to be desired. In- jected emotionalism and "do-as-I-sayism" rather than do what is logical, or rational in the face of personal conviction lowered the level of the referendum campaign. Students were told to vote in a certain way because campus or national leaders were voting that way, not because the student had substantive reasons for or against the association. And often the students followed this dubious ad- vice. The Daily and the Michigan Union also played significant, but somewhat questionable roles. The Daily's duty to adequately cover the USNSA issue was overdone and perhaps news judgement was a little too closely linked to partisanism. At least the campus was aware that the Senior Editors were publically- committed to the support of the association. The Daily's position can be partially justified on another ground. The paper has always given USNSA exten- sive news coverage-it did not just discover the association two and one half weeks before election day. THE UNION'S ROLE, led by its president, was also extremely partisan, especially for and organization that was not publically com- mitted to an anti-USNSA position. The wide- spread circulation of "The Michigan Union Reports" which contained a biased article on the association without a disclaimer is one indication of the injudicious role the Union played. Actually, the only criticism one can levy at the tactics used in the referendum campaign is that they were "injudicious." There are no rules governing referendum and initiative pro- cedures. Certainly, existing residence hall rules should have been observed. However, one of Council's projects in the im- mediate future should be to develop a concrete too of _tls a 1 . r--, ,,n f « r..~w..... PROBLEMS OF INDIA: A Country Divided (EDITOR'S NOTE: This isr fourth of a five part analysis ofl dia's problems.) the In- By PHILIP D. SHERMAN Daily Guest Writer MADRAS-With even the Dravi- dia M u n n e t r a Kazagham, strongest secessionist party of all, supporting the Indian govern- ment, the border crisis is creat- ing at least a facade of unity. Despite this, strong forces exist and will continue to exist that threaten the unity of India as a national state. India is, in many ways, more than a collection of rather auton- omous regions, and regional feel- ings, notions that one's own area is markedly different and better than the rest of the country, can often outweigh national allegi- ance. Local politicians, including the Communists, stand ready to exploit and encourage regionalism. EXPERTS are divided about the effects on India of a regionalism much greater than that existing in the United States. Some for- see the breakup of the union, oth- ers minimize the problem or say the regional differences are nat- ural and a democratic state is de- signed to permit them. Here's a quick non-evaluative survey of various disunifiying forces. In many ways, the most impor- tant is language. Fourteen Indian languages are listed as "national languages" in the constitution, and (leaving out Sanskrit) the terri- tories of 13 of these form the basis for India's states, the structures, the political and cultural arenas for regional feelings. TO ASSESS the language prob- lem, consider the following: The United States is divided in- to several language regions. The largest, the middle west, wants to impose its particular language as the nation's tongue in preference to all others. This is strongly, even bitterly, opposed in otner areas which can't understand mid- dle western. This is especially true of the Deep South whose people prefer Russian to the national language. New England, whose language is most developed, and other areas speak different lan- guages than either the south or midwest. Now for "middle west," substi- tute Uttar and Madhya Pradesh, Bajasthan, and Bihar; for "Deep South," South India; for "Rus- sian,' English, and for "New Eng- land," West Bengal. This is a very rough approximation of the situa- tion in India where one's language is a matter of principle. Regional groups unite behind their own language and fight to uphold its place. * * * THE NET RESULT is inevitably i n c r e a s e d fragmentation and greater difficulties in inter-region- al communication. Universities can serve only a limited area, for instance, and government workers and politicians may find areas of opportunity and perspective limit- ed to their own language areas. With increasing literacy in re- citizen of central Indian Hydera- bad remarked of the south: "Oh, they're darker down there." Ne- groes in India have complained of color prejudice, too. The fascist-like DMK answers the fairer people with a vengeance. As its name implies, it attempts to base itself on "race"-the dark- skinned; broad-faced Dravidian population of the south, alleged descendants of India's original in- habitants. The Dravidians sup- posedly stand in opposition to the lighter, taller, "long - headed" northerners, who are very vaguely connected with the Aryan invaders of centuries past. Color, caste, and economic inter- ests combine to create a general sense of ill feeling between north and south. Some southerners com- plain the "northern dominated" central government discriminates against them in planning. Pres- sures from every region have in fact forced political rather than economic decisions on investment allocations. Southerners complain northern- ers unfairly dominate their eco- nomic life. When the DMK touch- ed off a recent riot in Madras city, many northern shopkeepers, likely targets of any uncontrolled violence, immediately shut their shops. s + . THE BASIS for the partition, religion remains a potentially dis- turbing factor. Forty million Mus- lims live peaceably in India's sec- ular state, but communalism could flare again. There are a number of militant Hindu parties in the filed. Beyond these broad factors, there remains the well-nigh inescapable localism of the average peasant farmer. A middle view of what these forces will lead to is as follows: they will continue to exist, though it is unlikely they'll be strong enough to break the union into small parts. The desire to enforce national unity might lead to much more authoritarian all-India gov- ernmental institutions. Unquestionably, however, re- gional strains will distract atten- tion from the national effort to move forward and will make the task much more difficult. # s . THE UNITY picture's other side can be sketched quickly: actual separatism, except in a couple of places, has shown little strength; the constitution provides adequate means to deal with a secessionist movement; the Hindu way of life unites Indians (though historical- ly this hasn't worked in the past):; the Congress and the independ- ence ideal still unit most people and most regions within them- selves; economic development can lessep regional grievances (though it can also stimulate them by in- creased expectations); no region could go it alone. The central government is not taking any chances on natural evolution, however. It is making a broad effort at "national integra- tion," using all the propaganda re- sources at its command to draw the nation together, to turn eyes JUST AS THE FUTURE of In- dia's new-found unity is unclear, so is democracy's. Ignoring the basic question of its suitability, i, may be said that, albeit with a low level of participation, democ- racy is operating. But can it sur- vive? It has to work in an unfriendly climate of illiteracy, poverty, apa- thy, limited personal horizons and an authoritarian political tradi- tion. There are either mountainous economic expectations the present order can't hope to meet or enough indifference to negate efforts at democratic mobilization. To counteract the latter, the government has started "panchay- at raj," a program to create a vi- able system of local governments across the land to spearhead local development. One of the most mov- ing sights I've seen was a meet- ing of one such group to explain its program. Speaking in fractured English of the virtues of local con- trol, the groupilisted the wells, schools, and irrigation canals it was building. The local group, they said, suggests a local plan, and higher authorities approve it rnd provide some funds. The local area provides the balance, either in cash or in labor, hopefully involv- ing the people in the projects their representatives proposed and they carried out. But this panchayat group was the only effective one for 70 miles around. *'I* * ANOTHER BARRIER to effec- tive democracy is lack of an effec- tive, nationally-based opposition to Congress whih, although it doesn't command an overall majority, vastly overshadows its divided op- ponents. Like American parties, the Congress contains all shades of opinion, and some give-and- take goes on, but this is no substi- tute. The Congress itself must find further support as the party of national development and not merely as leader of the Freedom Movement. Parliament itself needs to gain stature. At present, most decisions are made either by Nehru or the Congress party executive and not hammered out in the legislature. Another constitutional problem: since the center must work through state governments, and since Con- gress is likely to lose control of some state government before pow- er in Delhi, what will be the rela- tions between center and state when, as in Kerala under the Communists, the opposition takes over? * * AND THERE IS the cliche, "after Nehru, what?" Has India depended too much on one man to provide unity and make the big decisions? Panditji's charismatic hold on India's masses has been a big unifying factor. So has his leadership of Congress, where he reputedly unites right and left factions. Will Congress hold together aft- er he goes? Some say its organiza- tional strength will keep it togeth- er. Others suggest it would be preferable for it to divide to form the nucleii of two new national parties. The resulting turmoil By MICHAEL HARRAH City Editor AT FIRST glance, last week's elections would seem to have dealt the Republicans a severe set- back, and, taking the word "Re- publicans" to encompass everyone who ran on the ticket, perhaps this is so. But on closer scrutiny, we find it was not real "Republicans" who lost out, but the pseudo-Republi- cans, the modern Republicans, the liberal Republicans. NOW THIS is not to say that the GOP's misfit fringe has been exterminated. Not by a long shot. But it was Republicans of that ilk who suffered the overwhelming majority of the campaign setbacks. Of the conservative Republicans seeking re-election in the House, 85 of the 88 were returned to Washington. Those who were de- feated - Reps. Hiestand, Rous- selot and McDonough, all of Cali- fornia - were hopelessly gerry- mandered out of their seats. In the South, not one Republi- can was dislodged and the GOP gained five seats. In addition, the GOP sent a to- tal of 32 new congressmen to Washington. Practically to a man, they campaigned as conservatives, within the party organization. * * * i ON THE other hand, long-time GOP liberals were, in many cases, rejected. Sen. Alexander Wiley of Wisconsin, long noted as a liberal in his party, was bounced soundly by Gov. Gaylord Nelson, a Demo- crat who, more often than not, has veered to the right of the party line. In Indiana, Sen. Homer Cape- hart, whose conservatism is some- what fuzzy except around election time, was also edged out. Same goes for Rep. Perkins Bass in New Hampshire. By and large, the "moderate" and "libeal" Repub- licans got their lumps in districts where they should have been safe. On the other hand, the conserv- atives, placed in jeopardy by al- most every pollster, were returned in grand style. Witness Sen. Thruston B. Morton in Kentucky, Sen. Wallace F. Bennett in Utah, Sen. Len B. Jordan in Idaho, Sen. Frank Carlson and Sen. James Pearson, both of Kansas, Sen. Bourke B. Hickenlooper of Iowa. * * * AND CONSERVATIVE chal- lengers on the GOP ticket won out also. Oklahoma wheat farmer Henry Bellmon captured the Sooner statehouse for the first GOP victory in that state's his- tory. Political novice John A. Love bounced incumbent Gov. Stephen McNichols in Colorado, and he carried fellow conservative Rep. Peter Dominick to victry over New Frontier Sen. John B. Car- roll. Wyoming removed two Dem- ocrats, Gov. Jack Gage and Sen. J. J. Hickey, in favor of Republi- cans Clifford P. Hanson and Mil- ward Simpson. True, there were exceptions to all these cases. Gov. Rockefeller was re-elected in New York along with Sen. Javits. Sen. Aiken re- turned to the Capitol from Ver- mont, George Romney became the first GOP governor in Michigan in 14 years. But these deviations, notable though they be, are only a handful, when stacked up against the number of Republican conservatives that were elected and the number of Republican "moderns" that were defeated. In these results, the Republican Party itself can take hope. For years, since the Eisenhower era that began in 1952, the GOP has been plagued by self-styled in- dependents and moderns, who sought to enter the political arena on the general's coattails. * * * IKE HAS a universal appeal. Basically he was a conservative, but his luster as a war hero tend- ed to obscure his political philoso- phy. He was not, in fact, a poli- tician. When the so-called "Eisen- hower Republicans" -a t t a c h e d themselves to him, he did not clear up the confusion. Only after his heart attack did he chance to make himself clear. "Ike is not an Eisenhower Republican," he said. Hopefully, the result the GOP has suffered at the polls will dis- courage some would-be politicians within its ranks. Hopefully, the parasites will desert the ship, de- fect to the Democrats, or put in their time furthering some pursuit other than politics. Only when the GOP has rid it- self of those people who are not really Republicans, can it hope to win again, for the electorate, when faced with the choice of electing a real Democrat or a kind-of-a- Democrat, will almost invariably choose the Real McCoy., That's human nature. But when given a clear-cut choice between the Democrats and real Republicans - well, let the situation in Oklahoma, Colorado and Kentucky answer that. * * , NOW THIS is not to say that the GOP cannot make room for the Javits, the Rockefellers, and the Romneys. It can, to be sure. But they must accept the Republi- can principles and campaign on them, not in spite of them.. And coupled with this, the GOP must realize that times have changed. The population in this country has shifted around; the complexion of the various com- munities across the nation has changed. And the places where Re- publican principles were sacred 50 years ago are, in many cases, no longer GOP sanctuaries. Yet, everything must be in bal- ance. For almost 200 years, our nation has remained faithful to a two-party system, and there is no sign it will stop now. Republicans must seek fertile soil in the Demo- crat strongholds, just as the Dem- ocrats have usurped the en- trenched GOP. * * * THE SOUTH and the Southwest offer excellent replacements for the New England and Atlantic states which seem to be slipping away. On the other hand, if they keep up an offensive where they are losing ground, the combination of the two should spell victory and a Republican majority in America once again. The Republicans were cast aside during the 30's and 40's because they failed to keep up with the times in terms of their own prin- ciples. Rather they attempted to water down the Democrats' pro- gram and present it as their own. The voters, understandably, were not impressed by a half-hearted substitute when they could have the real thing. Now, in the second half of the century, the GOP finds itself cast off from the protective coattails of Gen. Eisenhower and it stands at the crossroads. The record of the 30's and 40's shows what "me- too" Republicanism leads to. The record of the 1962 campaign shows what real Republicanism leads to. The question remains: Will the Grand Old Party be smart enough to "spin the right platter" or will it continue to let the Democrats "call the tune." LETTERS to the EDITOR To the Editor: MOST OF our parents raised us with a number of slogans; one of these was "Don't trust strangers; don't talk to strangers." For a while I thought I was the only honest person around, aside from my parents, relatives, and friends. Then I began to think about the slogan; I decided it was untrue-I was no different from most other people and therefore the majority of people were hon- est, kind, and considerate. I be- lieved this naively until this year. Since school started, some slick gal in Couzens Hall has been de- pleting other dorm inhabitants of their wallet money. Unfortunately, while I Was away from my room one evening for fifteen minutes, I became one of the fifteen-or-so victims. .* * * LAST WEEKEND I lost my purse in back of Couzens Hall near the bike-racks. The purse, with all the identification that any twenty-one year old girl car- ries with her, has not been re- turned to the desk, the house- mothers' office, or to my room. Just think-some honest sweet cheap college student who prob- ably lives in' one of the dorms near me is using my money, my identification, my semi-expensive sun glasses, etc. May she have nightmares for the rest of the year! I now believe my parents' teaching. --Cathie Platt, '63 CANDY IS DANDY: 'Alice inwonderland'. N OW LISTEN carefully children. Be good and I'll tell you about something better than candy and bubblegum and chocolate and pull- ing your sister's hair and all those other fun games. At the Architecture Auditorium (you know, the building where they play with mud pies), Donald Duck and Pluto and Goofy (char- acters not made out of mud but out of full-blown Disney colors) are cavorting across the screen Cheshire Cat and the Queen of Hearts, and the flamingos hit the curly little balls of fur like cro- quet sticks and croquet balls and all the other silly wonderful char- acters that people the screen. * * * JUST THINK. Alice will give you a guided tour of a dream, DonaldvDuck will show you that true love wins in the end (be- lieve it or not) and Goofy will give vn, A t w ,,,v c in