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