1ge Artian dal
Eighty-two years of editorial freedom
}
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan
420 Mornird St., Ann Arbor, Mich. News Phone: 764-0552
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1972
Death in Baton Rouge
VIOLENCE AND death have again struck
an American campus. Two students
have been killed in a dispute between
black students and a black administra-
tion at Southern University in Baton
Rouge.
Even before a credible, detailed account
of yesterday's events became available we
admittedly jumped to the conclusion that
the police, who claim not to have fired a
shot, did discharge the weapons that
killed the students. And our suspicions
grew when the East Baton Rouge Parish
County sheriff suggested that the stu-
dents were trampled to death, since
"their faces were swollen," and then
mentioned that he did hear pistol shots.
Then the coroner's reports indicated that
the two had been fatally wounded by
buckshot or shrapnel from grenades or
bombs.
Nevertheless, we hope we are wrong in
suspecting the Louisiana law enforcement
authorities.
THE ISSUES at Southern are painfully
familiar-increased student voice in
curriculum and other academic concerns
within the three campus system. Students
also demanded resignations by Southern
presidents at both the Baton Rouge and
New Orleans branches.
The students had been boycotting
classes for two weeks, and had taken over
the New Orleans branch administration
building a week earlier, before giving it
up when that campus' president sub-
mitted his resignation.
The pattern of yesterday's violence was
also familiar-a rally at the administra-
tion building, followed by a takeover
leaving most of the 2,000 person crowd
outside; a police order to disperse and
then volleys of tear gas . . . Only this
time, when the smoke cleared two stu-
dents were dead.
The students, however, weren't fin-
ished. The school's music building was
burned to the ground and at least one
dormitory set on fire. The sale of fire-
arms has been prohibited.
The prospects for a mutually acceptable
settlement now seem dim; Gov. Edwin
Edwards announced yesterday his plans
to dismiss the blue ribbon committee that
was working on the university's problems.
IT IS STILL unclear who was being more
unreasonable as negotiations pro-
ceeded on the students' demands. The
governor says he "bent over backwards."
Baton Rouge Mayor W. W. Dumas said
yesterday, "There is a price for appease-
ment, and if you appease people, you can
expect the worst."
"Two have been shot and there may be
more if necessary," he added. "We are
going to take back . .. the building at any
cost."
If the mayor's attitude is any indica-
tion, the atmosphere in Baton Rouge for
a student power movement, or even an
evenhanded investigation, seems bleak
indeed.
-ARTHUR LERNER
GERALD NANNINGA
EUGENE ROBINSON
Letters:
To The Daily:
IN THE LIGHT of his own kaw-
ledge as to the doings of the Ward
Boundary Commission, Tom Wie-
der's attack (The Daily, Nov. 16)
on HRP leaves his own honesty
and motives in serious doubt.
One of my roommates, David Ca-
hill, is an HRP Ward Boundary
Commission member. Wieder,
knowing this, placed a phone call
to me at noon Sunday, November
12, three days before his letter
was written.
In that call, he expressed the
same concerns as in his letter. He
was told, in no uncertain terms,
that our "tentative approval" of a
GOP ward plan was a device to
move negotiations off dead center
by holding a public hearing on their
proposal. It committed HRP to
nothing more than holding t h a t
hearing. Our members felt that
the GOP plan was the first really
significant movement in redistrict-
ing negotiations, and that a public
hearing would help spur these dis-
cussions.
Apparently, Democratic Commis-
sion members agreed, because af-
ter the hearing last Saturday, chief
Dem. honcho Ted Beals called Ca-
hill at last offering serious nego-
tiations. That first meeting t o o k
place at the very moment Wieder
called me, and I informed him that
it was going on. By the time Wie-
der wrote his letter, he c o u I d
or should have known that HRP
and the Democrats already ne-
gotiated anotherpreliminary plan
(based incidentally on the GOP
map for most of the student areas).
This plan allays all of Wieder's
fears. His dishonest attempt to ex-
ploit a delicate and difficult nego-
tiating situation, in which all par-
ties have at last shown willingness
to talk, casts serious doubt on his
sincerity.
Honest Democrats should ques-
tion Wieder about what he hoped
to gain by such a letter. I can
only hope that these important and
delicate talks have not been sabo-
taged by his well-planned public
hysteria.
-Frank Shoichet
Nov. 16
HkPci
To The Daily:
I AM ONE of the Human Rights
Party members on the Ward Boun-
dary Commission, and am writing
in reply to Mr. Wieder's letter ac-
cusing HRP of "selling out ' the
city.
One reason why the HRP mem-
bers voted to tentatively approve
a Republican-supported plan was
that the Democrats had simply re-
fused to deal with anyone else on
the commission. They insisted that
the only plan they would accept
would be their own plan, which was
drawn up last spring and rejected
by the City Council. This p 1 a n
would destroy the Human Rights
Party by the simnle means of di-
viding up its voting strengtn al-
most equally among all five wards.
The central campus is the point of
division, neatly destroying any pos-
sibility of unified student political
action, whatever the party.
And the likely o t come in three-
way elections under the Demo-
cratic scheme would be Republican
victories in all five wards n e x t
April. (Note Wieder's careful use
of the phrase "combined HRP-
Democratic majority".) This is in
line with Democrats' attempts to
destroy us by characterizing HRP
as solely a "spoiler".
The HRP members have been in-
structed that they should approve
a plan which gives us a fair chance
of winning in two wards. And af-
ter all, since we are still a minority
party, it is a bit bizarre to expect
us to win in more than two wards!
An understandable considerat.on,
then, is our own party's survival.
Once we have been given a fair
chance, however, then we would
prefer a plan which would not
insure a Republican majority.
If Mr. Wieder had kept in touch
with his own party's members on
the commission, however, he vould
have learned that the Democrats
and HRP are working on a new
plan which has a posibility of both
allowing HRP to survive as a via-
ble force and also not giving the
Republicans a majority. It is .oo
bad - and all too typical -- that
he has instead chosen a public
diatribe.
-dDavid Cahill
Law '74
Nov. 16
To The Daily.
BOB FABER'S discussion of
HRP duplicity (The Daily, Nov. 14)
was interesting and probably ac-
curate (though I have no independ-
ent knowledge of the lettuce boy-
cott maneuvering). But it is also
a little hysterical in at least one
respect.
He cites esteem for "the law"
as the only argument for rejecting
HRP's proposals to deny city serv-
ices to corporations whichrcontri-
bute to the war, and to create a
sanctuary in City Hall for draft
evaders and deserters.
He should be reminded that many
persons, including at least a few
legal experts, view the draft as an
unconstitutional coercion to parti-
cipate in a war that has no legal
basis. The U.S. Supreme Court, as
Mr. Faber surely knows, has never
declared either the draft or the
war legal or constitutional. It has
refused to rule on either question.
He should also be reminded that
many corporations in this country
may be violating international con-
ventions by producing weapons
which inflict undue suffering and
which cannot discriminate be-
tween combatants and civilians -
international conventions which
have been signed by the United
States and ratified by the U.S.
Senate.
The HRP proposals are obvious
and reasonable attempts to restore
the rule of law to the citizens of
Ann Arbor, not to "tear at the
basic fabric of the law," as Mr.
Faber charges. There may be dif-
ferences of opinion about whether
the HRP proposals are themselves
legal, but they are certainly n o t
"dangerous and irresponsible."
-Tom Rieke
Nov. 15
Child care
child care programs that are not
just custodial day careservices.
Children and their parents a ri'e
looking for alternatives to the ex-
pensive programs already existing;
alternatives that provide a sup-
portive environmentafor aschild's
natural curiousity and desire to
learn. We need to also free fam-
ilies from restrictive roles, enab-
ling them to participate in their
child's education. Our intentions
are to involve all segments of this
community, and to use the whole
community as our 'classroom.' And
finally, we are ready and wantirg
to begin immediately.
We want to find a space where
we can care for approximately 10-
20 children, 2/-6" years, Monday
through Friday from 8 a.m. - 5:30
p.m.
We will fund the Center through
tuition (on a sliding scale), bene-
fits, donations, and grants.
We have a staff, including par-
ents, of six full-time educa*ional
workers, plus an overabundance of
student and community volunteers.
We anticipate being responsible
for some rent if necessary, insur-
ance, building maintenance : in d
utilities, etc.
We have many supplies and sone
good educational equipment on
hand. We also plan on preparirg
lunches and snacks, so use of a
kitchen would be desirable.
The Center's operations will be
determined by all involved, with
children, staff and parents design-
ing philosophy and making decis-
ions cooperatively.
The Children's Community has a
short history. At the Ann Arbor
Blues & Jazz Festival, we success-
fully operated a free child care tent
in conjunction with the Tribal
Council Education Committee -
the first of its kind at a major
festival. We are presently oper-
ating a free child care programin
conjunction with "UM Project Coin-
munity on Friday and Saturday
nights together with the People's
Ballroom in space provided by the
Free Clinic at the Community Cen-
ter at 502 E. Washington.
We trust that this initial propos-
al makes our need clear, and that
you will find it possible to help us
grow.
-Skip Taube
Children's Community
Center
Nov. 10
ritics create controversy
To The Daily:
THERE IS A
community for
crying need in our
low-cost quality
IM: Misguided priorities
RECREATION IS an integral part of
university life. Unfortunately, neither
the University nor the Athletic Depart-
ment see it as such.
It is clear that campus recreational
facilities are totally inadequate for a
University community of some 40,000.
Overcrowding and substandard facilities
have made recreation nearly impossible
for a large segment of the University
community. I
This situation is being perpetuated by
the misguided priorities of the University
and the Athletic Department.
The Athletic Department, which pres-
ently has jurisdiction over the Depart-
ment of Intramurals and Recreation, had
revenues last year of $3.1 million gen-
erated by intercollegiate athletics. Of this,
only $160,000 was allocated to intra-
murals and recreation. Meanwhile, every
varsity sport, excluding football, lost
money.
What justifies the expenditure of over
$2.9 million on intercollegiate athletics
when the University's students and fac-
ulty suffer such a critical lack of recrea-
tional facilities?
The existence of three sports-football,
basketball, and hockey-can be justified
by the appeal they command within the
University community. Support for these
sports is evidenced by large ticket sales
and high attendance.
This is not the case, however, with
other intercollegiate sports that maintain
varsity status. Since, student support for
these minor sports is minimal, the high
budgetary priority that they receive is
unjustified.
Sports such as track, wrestling, and
gymnastics eat up sizeable chunks of the
Athletic Department budget, which, if
redirected, could vastly improve the sag-
ging recreation program.
The number of athletes and coaches
that a cutback in minor sports would
affect is far smaller than the large num-
ber of students and faculty who would
benefit from routing funds toward im-
provement of recreational facilities.
FOR IMMEDIATE purposes, the vast
sums of money generated by our very
Today's staff:
News: Laura Berman, Ted Evanoff, Mar-
ilyn Riley, Gene Robinson, Ted Stein
Editorial Page: Linda Rosenthal, Martin
Stern, David Yalowitz
Arts Page: Richard Glatzer
Photo technician: Tom Gottlieb
fir3xdligau al
successful football program would make
a reallocation of funds from minor sports
to recreation a viable solution.
In the long run, however, the Athletic
Department cannot be expected to pro-
vide these necessary revenues. Presently
the department is one of the few self-
sufficient athletic departments in the
country but it is not known how long it
will remain so.
It is the obligation of the University to
keep recreation on a high enough priority
to fill the needs of its students. The
University currently contributes only
$75,000 from its general fund to recrea-
tion. Though this sum is clearly insuffi-
cient, the University has no qualms about
funding such superfluous activities as
honors convocations and the underused
Radrick Farms Golf Course, which is
available to faculty and alumni only.
THE NEED for a general reassessment
of both University and Athletic De-
partment budgets is imperative. Not until,
then can an adequate recreation program
be realized.
-MICHAEL OLIN
RANDY PHILLIPS
JOHN PAPANEK
In Memoriamr
MANY OF US who knew Dave Gordon
had no idea how old he was or what
he did for a living. To us, Dave Gordon
was THE anti-war figure in Ann Arbor,
and that was enough.
Gordon died of a heart attack Wednes-
day, but the war he fought against for so
many years lives on, an ironic memorial
to his work and a reminder that the work
must continue without him.
There has been no major national
anti-war action, no small local rally, that
has not felt Gordon's presence since he
began protesting the war in the mid
60's. Either as an organizer or an" in-
volved participant, he was there, work-
ing and believing.
He'd come to tell people weary of
marches about yet another march, to en-
courage a discouraged populace to rally
one more time. He'd help plan and push
through an anti-war half-time show at a
1971 football game, and everyone would
shrug 'so what' until the black balloons
rose over Michigan Stadium and close to
100,000 people stood silent and remem-
bered.
More than a year after the massive
national actions had become passe', and
small campus actions unfashionable,
Gordon worked tirelessly to keep anti-
raculty comment
The university: Revelant
to our changing times?
By WILLIAM MEDLIN
THE DISCUSSIONS, controversies, and just plain rhetoric that fill
academic airs concerning the organizational forms of what we term
"the university" consist of a lot of fuzzy or mistaken concepts con-
cerning what we are and what constitutes the raison d'etre of the
institution. There are at least three distinct concepts about the uni-
versity which are often confusedly mixed up in our attempts to at-
tribute certain unique characteristics and roles to university educa-
tion. It is high time we reexamine openly and seriously such con-
cepts in terms of how well they serve to render the university a mean-
ingful and effective learning instrument for the kind of society in
which we find ourselves.
Three concepts frequently tossed about are: the university is the
embodiment of an idea, an idealization held by a college of scholars,
the university is an association of individuals sharing some common
commitments and goals, and the university is the express agent of the
State (or Church), functioning to perpetuate its purposes and will.
Each of these concepts finds its articulation through constituencies
related to the university as "community", "union" (or asociation), and
"bureaucracy". Until we know what we mean by the university and can'
organize to be effective, its various constituencies will make poor ad-
justments to the exigencies of these times. Let's examine a few
essentials of the three concepts.
THE IDEA. Many accept the university's existence as a given,
as something we've always known. They think it a natural part of "the
heritage", even in the face of the considrable diversity that marks
the ivy halls across the land. The embodiment of this idea of the higher
learning is seen often to reside in specific curricula, in hallowed cer-
tifications, and in prestigious degrees whose various sponsors insist
on the essential traditions thatdhavesalways underlain the university
itself. They fail to recall that the idea has taken ever so many forms
and pursued such varied purposes over the last thousand years. Re-
collection ought to unleash the grasp that some unquestioned sense
of embodiment arbitrarily holds over us. Typically, we find the fruits
of research and philosophical criticism fail to loosen those cords of trad-
ition and convenience.
ASSOCIATION. The act of association based on common motiva-
tions and values expresses the community of interests that originally
gave rise to theidea and practice of the university. The often referred
to "collegial" organization of the medieval scholars, to which many
are wont to claim affinity emerged over a period of time out of the
necessity to protect and promote the practice of social requirements in
law, medicine, and theology.
The employment of notary, physician, and cleric by medieval towns-
people and institutions to minister to their day-to-day needs led those
in apprenticeship to the masters of a "profession" to form their own
gilds or trade unions, the Latin term for which was universitas.
Legally organized in this way, students made contracts with their
teachers, set curricula, established fees, regulated examinations, se-
cured housing, etc.
Teachers in turn organized to protect their interests and so the
universitas took on multiple forms as legal, medical, clerical, and later
liberal arts associations forms as legal, medical, clerical, and later lib-
eral arts associations responsive to their several social clienteles. As
a primarily urban institution, then, it had been created stone by stone
to satisfy some very real interests and problems in a changing social
environment. Scholars' productivity related directly to the functional
tasks to be performed on completing studies.
After the associations (gilds) lost their autonomy, major 'changes
in their learning systems occurred through social protest and revolutions,
largely because of the loss of free interactions with the market and
of innovative initiatives. The great religious revolts, and then the sweep-
ing secularism under French republican influences with their droits
de l'homme, did not grant university associations their freedom but
exchanged one authority for another. Scholars and teachers no longer
negotiated contracts, but were agents of large corporate bodies.
AGENT: As they fell under the jurisdictions of Church and State,
both of which claimed sovereign rights to charter and supetrvise the
gilds' educational operations, the communities of scholars became
official agents of the Estates. Based on ancient Roman law, the legal in-
corporation of university scholars and masters took form, henceforth
(from the 13th century), by virtue of the political power of the supreme
authorities. The early models became organizational examples and were
replicated across Europe and Britain, but now by administrative fiat,
so to speak.
This proces was so obviously manifest in the founding of the
University of Vienna, where decrees of prince and pope formally es-
tablished legitimate faculties. The chartering of American colleges and
universities followed this bureaucratic pattern, with a flavor of English
collegial spirit enhancing somewhat the sense of intellectual indpend-
ence of scholar and teacher.
QUO VADIS? Can controversy over the proper forms of university
governance, and also over the vital matter of student roles, be resolved
in satisfactory ways without raising and dealing with basic issues about
the university's raison d'etre: the ideas and values that motivate
us toward or away from professional expertise, higher productivity,
etc.; the character and functions of* our associative ties and their rela-
finn to sncety: and the find of State Aeencv that we are' or shnuld
A
V
-s
"No, Mr. .Perfection' didn't vote because neither of the
candidates met his high standards!"
Old-line Dems regroup to cut
veal
MC ovTr 's nolitiCal thTroat'
By DENISE GRAY
NOW THAT the election is over;
it is time for the country to re-
evaluate its goals and place itself
back on the well-travelled road of
everyday politics. The Republicans
must prepare for their next four
years in office, while the Demo-
crats must try to reconstruct the
party that shattered with George
McGovern's ignominious defeat.
Obviously, the Democrats have the
harder task, for their's is a strug-
gle for recognition and renewed in-
fluence.
TheDemocrat's first big move
was the establishment of the Coali-
tion for a Democratic Majority
(CDM). This group is made up of
party conventionals, or the so-
called "old-line" Democrats, who
want to disolve McGovern's influ-
ence in the party. Realizing the po-
tential of McGovern's liberal be-
liefs, CDM intends to be the major
voice in party structure and the
to set the Democratic party back
into the rut of conservative, "hard
hat" politics. Many wonder whether
the Democrats would have fared
better with a less liberal candi-
date such as Humphrey or Muskie.
Perhaps they would have won a
majority in a few more states, but
it is dubious as to whether anyone
could have defeated Richard Nixon.
Nixon had shrewdly manipulat-
ed domestic politics so that his
promise of "imminent peace" was
paramount in the voters' minds on
election day. Many Americans er-
roneously felt that voting Nixon
out of office would endanger the
chances for peace in Vietnam. What
they failed to realize was that
keeping Nixon in office may pro-
long the negotiations for another
four years.
THE DEMOCRATS, infected with
a chronic case of post-election
blues, are overlooking the fact
closing of the Democratic conven-
tion. Humphrey and Jackson were
among those "losers" who stood
hand-in-hand with McGovern and
urged the people to "come home
America." Unity was the central
theme then, but where is this un-
ity now?
The large number of "Demucrzats
for Nixon" is evidence that many
Democrats did not adhere to this
pledge for unity, McGovern was
strong enough to win the nomina-
tion, but he could not carry the
general election without the party's
support. And now that he has been
defeated, the party is trying to
blame McGovern entirelytfor dis-
gracing the party.
Those same men who supported
McGovern openly on rational tele-
vision, are now trying to politically
cut his throat, from behind b i s
back. Pre-election support n a s
turned to post-election adversity.
mI