Eighty-Four Years of Editorial Freedom Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan lettersletters lettersletters lettersleti 420 Maynard St, Ann Arbor, Mi. 48104 News Phone: 764-0552 TUESDAY, APRIL 9, 1974 SO FIRST CLASS MAIL WILL GO UP TO 10 CENTS AND AIR MAIL WILL AFTER ALL, WE BELIEVE IN RUNNING THE POSTAL SERVICE LIKE A BUSINESS ORGANIZATION! f I i.......... .... o. . I XI4,101VP THE MILWAUKEE JOURN4AL Fahms-HdSp'sdlcat..1914 Wycliffe To The Daily: "ONWARD Wycliffe Soldiers" (Michigan Daily, Tues., March 26, p. 4): What a curious combination of idealism and ignorance! Hart and Stoll seem ignorant of the tremendous population growth in such areas as Latin America - or they don't know this means that expansion into sparsely populated areas really is 'inevitable'. Is it fair to the millions of slum-dwel- lers in 20 Latin American cities to close off the jungles to agricul- tural projects when only a few thousand natives live there now? It's not a question of trying to bring them into societies that are pre- judiced against them: it's a mat- ter of giving them some pro- tection from the inexorable ex- pansion of the larger more pop- ulous societies. We Cant expect to bury our hearts in the sand and hope that all the nasty problems will go away and leave the native Americans alone. The real ethnocide is carried out by profit-hungry land speci lat- ors, who are trying to get rid of natives through disease, machines, alcohol, and guns. Governments are too far away and too beset with the problems of ciies to give the natives more than token pro- tectionaeven when they want to. IN ANN ARBOR we couldn't stop Briarwood or MacDonald's, yet the authors of this article seem to expect the largely illiterate and helpless natives to resist ;he so- phisticated white man and their companies. SIL people may be idealistic, but they are not as naive as this; they are trying to give native leaders the literacy and knowledge they need to deal with government and business. As the article pointed out, they train native leaders to be self sufficient in the 20th century; the. also bring medicines to protect natives from white men's diseases, teach improved agricultural methods to combat the prevalent malnutri- tion of the tropics, and help them to preserve their culture and lang- uage through writing. Would the authors like the natives to be de- prived of these proections? ?g- norance is no weapon. We have seen how the oil com- panies deal with 200 millio, Ame" icans; do Stoll and hart actually believe that these same comnanies were waiting for missionaries to clear the natives out of their way? The companies have the power and lack.of conscience to crush a few hundred Auca tribesmen vitb- out noticing them, and the Auca would have been finished if they 6adn't been warned to escape. BEHIND THIS article there seems to be a touching faith on the part of its authors that evP is- sued from Western Europe (or thereabouts). They speak of an idyllic time 500 years ago as if it were the paradise of Adam and Eve - and they speak of i with the fervor of Biblebeating fundamen- talists, telling us that the 'devil' is the 'centuries long cllusion be-. tween state, commercial and relig- ious interests to pa .'fv and de- stroy the last barriers to the world-wide worship of Mammon.' Yet they ridicule the Christian doctrine of the fall of man and his present depravity. Do they expect us to subscribe to their naive faith instead? Even though American schools don't talk about much be- sides European and recent Ameri can history, it is well documented that 500 years ago in South Amer- ica the jungle tribes weri slave laborers for the Incas, building tre- mendous palaces under the tender ministrations of the foremen's whips; while in Mexico the Aztecs were extracting the warm and beating hearts of human sacrific- ial victims from conquered tribes for their blood-thirsty rites. THIS IDEA of paradic and the Noble Savage are pro-i.cts of ig- norance, large fostered by the American schools' blindness to an- ope's history but our own. Combin- ed with Stoll and Hart's neo-funda- mentalist approach to world prob- lems, this ignorance produces some serious misinformation. I suggest that Daily readers try to find mere facts before they make judgments on this matter, and that Daily edi- tors insist on more accurate and less emotional reporting. -Laurence Krieg Dept. of Linguistics March 27 MR. KRIEG IS GUILTY of a great deal of ignorance himself. His statements are riddled with factual error, his blindness to the context in which the Summer In- stitute operates truly gross. The first of his erroneous state- ments is that "expansion" is "in- evitable" due to "tremendous pop- ulation growth," further that the interests of "millions of slum- dwellers" hinge on driving In- dians off their land. In fact, the fate of slum-dwellers no more de- pends on thin-soiled jungle land than it does on the next military regime. The poor settlers who come to the jungle aren't from the city, but from agricultural areas dominated by large estates. Population den- data, see K. Griffin "Coffee and the Economic Development of Co- lumbia," Bulletin of the Oxford University Institute of Economics and Statistics). IF THE ESTATES were broken up, many more people could sup- port themselves. Instead, regimes try to relieve popular pressure by packing peasants off to peri- pheral areas like the jungle. There they are settled on land often so unsuited for farming that it is nothing but red clay, within a few years. By blaming population pressure, Mr. Krieg also diverts attention from the real force behind expro- priation. These are the companies, usually foreign and often U. S., in search of petroleum, minerals and land upon which to graze livestock andl capital. Mr. Krieg's single most astonish- ing statement is that the "real ethnocide" is being carried out by someone else. When the Guahibo of Colombia revolted against just "profit-hungry land speculators" which Mr. Krieg mentions, did the Summer Institute come to the aid of the Indians? No, but it did come to the aid of the "land specula- tors," by helping the army sup- press the Guahibo revolt. "THE AUCA WOULD have been finished if they hadn't been warned to escape," Mr. Krieg says breath- lessly. In 1964 the Summer Insti- tute ferried the first of the oil com- pany prospectors around Auca ter- ritory, helping the oil companies plan the invasion against which it later "warned" the Auca. The Summer Institute is valuable because it stabilizes penetration, pacifying the inhabitants of invaded territories so they won't revolt and make a mess of world opinion. La- tin American governments now stipulate that corporations are re- sponsible for the "general social welfare" of the people living with- in their concessions, making the Summer Institute every bit as nec- essary as government troops. The "protection" which the Sum- mer Institute gives the Indians is a hoax. Ignorance may be no wea- pon, but a semblance of reading and writing, "improved agricul- ture" and medicine is no protec- tion against a vicious social order. EACH OF THE SUMMER Insti- tute's improvements come laden with outside values, which not only destroy traditional ways, but also develop into instruments of con- trol. "Literacy and knowledge" may help an Indian sign a con- tract, but it doesn't guarantee the fairness of the deal. Its terms are invariably the lowest rung in a class-stratified, racist society, a fate for which "self-sufficiency" is a curious description indeed. With some dubious anthropology Mr. Krieg tries to prove that the Indians weren't any better off be- fore anyways. It is not at all "well document- ed" that the Incas built "tremen- dous palaces" with "slave labor- ers" under "foremen's whips," however. The Incas did build tem- ples, did conquer a few jungle tribes and did have a system of rotating corvee labor, but Mr. Krieg colors the facts so luridly that his interpretation amounts to untruth. For an accurate picture of the Inca, consult the work of John H. Rowe or Alfred Metraux. ALTHOUGH IT'S TRUE that the Aztec wrought havoc among neigh- boring peoples for their sun ritual, the depredations they caused were nothing compared to those of the Spanish and their successors. For confirmation, see Stein and Stein The Colonial Heritage in Latin America. Comparative bestiality aside, the article "Onward Wycliffe Soldiers" was based on the belief that In- dians are best left alone and that they can be left alone. The Auca who managed to kill intrduers into their territory for decades, were no more helpless than the Summer Institute made them. Corporations and Latin American governments are sensitive to public reaction when wordvof barbarities on the frontier leaks out. Reordering of national priorities could leave the Indians with enough territory to save themselves. THE SUMMER INSTITUTE is only too willing to further the schemes of thoroughly unjust, thoroughly un-Christian L a t i n American oligarchies, however, just as Mr. Grieg displays a most un-Christian willingness to sacri- fice "a few thousand natives" to the onslaught of Western society. It should be obvious in whose coin the Summer Institute is paying. Al- though the Summer Institute speaks solicitously of the Indian, this is only double-talk for the pe- culiar conjunction of commercial, religious and academic interests which it actually represents. The ethnocide of the South Amer- ican Indian is no more inevitable than the Summer Institute helps make it; the University and the Dept.'s complicity in the Institute's operations is shameful, unneces- sary and inexcusable. -DAVID STOLL behavior mod posed to the practical applications of the theories he advocates. In his letter to :he Daily (2 April) McConnell streies that he is "opposed to the use of punish- ment to force change on prisoners (or anybody else)." However, in his article which appeared in Psy- chology Today, McConnell speci- fically cites the desirability of the manipulation of behavior through punishment: "Somehow we've got to force them [prisoners] to want to behave properly. I speak of psy- chological force. Punishment must be used as precisely and dispas- sionately as a surgeon s scalpel if it is to be effective." This is exactly the way in which behavior modification is being In- flicted on people in federal prisons. Physical brutalization has proved insufficient to deal with the ris- ing resistance to oppression by poli- tically aware prisoners; psycholo- gical punishment has become in- creasingly common. ONE OF THE most widely em- ployed of the new techniques is the use of drugs to 'modify' a prison- er's behavior. Some of the most powerful of these substances, such as Prolixin or Anectin (a deriva- tive of the South American arrow- tip poison, curare) reduce the pri- soner to a vegetaole and make him/her unable to think clearly or react with emotion. The prison- er's spirit is so drastically broken that he/she is more readily amen- able to behavior condi:,oning. Ano- ther type of behavinr conditi',n- ing which has been used consist- ently against prisoners who resist authority is that of negative rein- forcement. Electric shock, for ex- ample, has been used to "cure" women (particularly housewives), Third World, and Gay people of their socially "deviant" behavior. Perhaps the most frightening me- thod of "modifying behavior" is the use of lobotomy and electro- shock to the brain. This stops "pro- gressive behavior" for life by selectively destroying portions of the brain, leaving the victims in a totally passive state. THE ABOVE techniques used in behavior modification are becom- in increasingly common practice. All of them involve a complete de- nial of the human and legal rights of their 'captive audience'. McCon- nell was entirely correct when he stated . . . "But we ca no more prevent the development of this new psychological methodology than we could have prevened the development of atomic energy." Thus it is all the mre ludicrous that he himself seems to be im- pervious to the fact that his aca- demic theories have become a prime means of dealing with poli- tical and social resistance. The forum would have provided a ve- hicle by which to examine the im- plications of behavior modification, so blithely 'taught' at the Univer- sity, and its concrete ramifica- tions. Social and physical scientists must no longer be permitted to abdicate their social responsibili- ties. -The Ann Arbor Health Care Colective April 3 To The Daily: I WAS VERY excited to see your article, "Behavior mod de- bated," in today's Daily. Indeed I was pleased to see that you printed the letters of Professor McConnell and his teaching fel- lows which attempted to clarify their stand on the current behav- ior mod controversy. As one of those teaching fellows who has in Mr. Schwartz's words, "chosen to lap up the party line," I was very Disappointed with his response. Our letters were written for the purpose of clarification. We believe that we are teaching a very posi- tive approach to the use of behav- ior modification techniques. I sin- cerely believe that evidence of this can be seen by simply attend- ing any of Professor McConnell's lectures or by attending any of the recitations or lab placements. The proof is in the pudding. WHAT DISTURBS me most about Mr. Schwartz's reply is that he is misinterpreting the intent of Professor McConnell's 1970 arti- cle. The article is indeed a warn- ing: we have at our disposal the means for controlling human be- havior. Professor McConnell's lat- er article, "Feedback, Fat and Freedom," which Mr. Schwartz did not quote, provides the blue- prints for the careful, controlled use of those methods. I would recommend the reading of that article to anyone who would like to learn about the modern ap- proach to behavior modification. I could never explain it as well in a brief letter as Dr. McCannell has in the 1973 Encyclopaedia Britan- nica Yearbook. INDEED, EVEN in the earlier article, the use of punishment and aversive methods is not condoned or suggested, it is simply explain- ed. McConnell says that "we can . . . gain almost absolute control over an individual's behavior." He does not say that "we should." But if we can, then we should behaviorist approach is a p >sitive one, using rewards to achieve last- ing changes in behavior. -Art Rothschild Teaching Fellow Psychology 474 April 2 registration To The Daily: I am LIVID! Today I went to vote in the Fourth Ward to which I had legally been assigned some tw months earlier when I registered a ar Ann Arbor voter. No onehad turned in my regis- tration though - as l found out only after waiting in line while the clerk called City Hall. I felt strongly about the candi- dates in my Ward and the issues before all of us. To be denied a vote because of the registrato's in- competence and unreliabity is outrageous. This is a poor piece of propa- ganda for all the new voters de- sired. How are we supposed to support what we believe if we cannot rely on the faitn of those who execute the formalies TONIGHT I AM soel disan- pointed and wondering w'i I took the trouble to vote. Wondering why I almost was allowed the oportun- ity to vote, except for a blunder on the part of someone who did not value my right. This is a poor showing for tl e whole registration drive and I only hope no one in the future has to experience the ostracism I felt at that polling place today. -Martha Woodward April 1 audit To The Daily: THE FRONT PAGE Daily ar- ticle, "U" Threatens Audit - sev- eral student organizations object" is so full of inaccuracy that it's hard to know just whee to begin to set it straight. The contest and administrative slant in the article seems to indicate that its author did not attend the meeting, but relied on administrative sources for his information. It is this type of jaundiced coverage that serv- es the University's strategy of making student organizations so paranoid of their own initiative and right of self-regulation, that they will come crawling to them on their bellies to beg security and direction. "'U' Threatens Audit" - why this point was chosen for emphasis is impossible to .determine, since the overwhelming threat to stu- dent organizations at this time is the threat of Universiy appro- priation of all student organization finances by July 1, 1974. THEARTICLE would have been more aptly titled: "University Threatened by Audit", because af- ter the first hour of discussion, there was little doubt in anyone's mind that the University wanted control, not accountabili y, t h a t none of the University's vague slurs about student organizations were backed-up with evidence, and indeed seemed only to be base- less ;rumors designed to damage the integrity of self-regulating stu- dent groups. (A pretty low tactic considering the University has re- Fused to disclose its own salary list, let alone a financial statement, let alone an audit, to the Michigan public). Although it is true that some organizations objected to a Univer- sity audit and some didn't, none were against some form of public accountability, and non saw it as the central focus of the meet- ing. No one spoke in favor of a mandatory audit, howeve, and most were highly dubos of the University's legal and financial ex- cuses for forcing student monies into the University banK account, conducting an audit of student groups without firt showing cause or otherwise using arbitrary pow- er to influence student organiza- tions. THE ADMINISrRATtON'S basic contention, that it stands to lose its tax-exempt stitus if student groups refuse to subject thenselv- es to financial control and surveil- lance, was laughingly dismissed early in the mee'ing when some- one pointed out that the 'U' was one of the largest coatractors for the U.S. Government in the West- ern hemisphere, and har dly risked losing its tax-exempt status* be- cause student organizations insist on controlling their own finances. The reporter's ignorance of the recent history of "he conflict serv- ed to further diatort the article. Everything the University said was portrayed as a fGod-given fact ('U' Threatens Audi:), while all of the points raised by students in their defense were regarded as "charges" and "allegations". Let's look at some of the "allegations"- 1.) ". . . several . . . charged that this was a move by the University to extend control over groups which are now financially inde- pendent." This is hardly a charge or speculation. When one institu- tion controls the finances of ano- ther institution, it controls that institution, that's a fact 2.) ". . film groups charged that the Uni- versity had refuse the film groups use of auditorium faoilities . " it turned out, these regulations al- so threatened the survival of a number of film classes. This angered several of the Fa- culty who intervened on behalf of the film groups, forcing Adminis- trators to step back and tempor- arily release the auditoriums.) Stu- dent organizations spent a good portion of last summer ironing-out a new set of guide-lines that would be workable for student organiza- tions. These new guide-lines were submitted to the Administration by the Student Organizations B o a r d (S.O.B.) on behalf of the students. The Administration now claims that it has never received a n y guidelnes. This is no "charge" this is a fact. 3.) "This they charged was a deliberate attempt to drive them out of business". It is a well-docu- mented fact that New World lost 23 of its originally requested book- ings, the equivalent of 46 shows and about $10,000.00 during t h e "freeze". This certainly wasn't a friendly University feeler for ac- conntability; this was extortion. 4.) ". . . film groups charged that the University held lUrge in- terests in the Butterfield Theatre chain which owns the Michigan, State and Wayside theatres." The fact that the 'U' has large hld- ings in Butterfield has been con- mon knowledge in Ann Arno: for several years. The Daily itself do- cumented it in an article on film groups two weeks ago. IT MIGHT BE added that "film groups" in this sentence is not accurate. Ann Arbor Film Coop and Cinema II did not eipres their opinion. This was taken from a statement by New World Media. The other film group 'present, Friends of Newsreel, simply point- ed out that University holdings in Butterfield shouldn't seem imprit- bable because "the University is a multi-national profit comporation with $50 million investments in South Africa alone." 5.) ". . . (S.O.B.) board men- her Elliot Chikofsy termed t h e University a "benevolent dictator" in the matter. "In the past, he said, the University has often been forc- ed to pick up the tab for student organizations that had run up large debts and then dis-banded.' Elliot's description of the Uni- versity was. initially greeted with groans from the audience, and was later challenged by several groups who apparently viewed the 'U' more as an infringing monster than a "benevolent dictator" and wanted to know why the 'U' seemed to be out to get them. In the midst a fthis argument the University Auditor (Rinkel) stood- up an said that to "My knowledge, we have never covered any debts for student organizations." Which dissolves the University's key as- sertion that they are somehow lia- ble for actions of student organi- zations. It was also revealed in the meeting that the University is still holding money that belonged to groups who have long-since dis- banded. 6.) So much for his finishing statement: "This, combined with the suspicions that some student groups may be making a profit, could justify University interest in control of student accounts." FOR THOSE who would like to further investigate the accuracy of this article, S.O.B. has made a tape of the mieeting which is avail- able for general listening. -New World Media Project war tax To The' Daily: WITH ALL due respect to the usual clarity of Preston Slosson's judgment, I must object to the thinness of his arguments (To the Daily Feb. 21, 1974) against legi- lative provision for conscientious objection to war taxes. There is a big difference be- tween a preference, or a conscien- tious objection. In one case one says, "I think the government's decision to do something is wrong, stupid, unfair." In the other, "I cannot in good conscience have any part in this." ONE WOULD expect th i: many a German citizen disappruved of Hitler's expenditure of taxis in building the Autobahn; but one would hope that many a German would have had a conscientious ob- jection to the expenditure of taxes in building gas chambers. Their failure to think in such terms was a part of that monstrous tragedy. The meaning of the war crimes trials at Nuremberg was that the extermination of people and the conduct of war were put in a sep- arate categ'ry from otaer matters of national policy, and we.-e declar- ed to be crimes against .humanity, for which individuals who were in a major way responsible cauld be held personally accoun-dble. AT LEAST one of the purposes of providing in the law for con- scientious obje tion to war and to war taxes is to focus on this question, as well as on the ques- tion of whether our gove-amen-tl m.chinery rmakes adequ re - v'on for rrcuiring the consent of the people in the waging of war, l ou can ow choose whether S1 of your federal taxes s to go tc fi i ncing elecmons. If you could ,, * (Cs ,. .,", - 'a- fi