0 OPINION. Page 4 Wednesday, December 10, 1980 The Michigan Daily Edieb tuigan aile Edited and managed by'students at The University of Michigan Red Squads Were they watching you? 0 Vol. XCI, No. 80 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, Mt 48109 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board The prophets were wrong' SH, WHAT horrible predictions they made. Prospective professors wouldn't want to come to the University to teach. Professors already here would be embarrassed and would pressure their superiors. The public wouldn't understand. Haven Hall (and any other haven of professors' offices) was abuzz with such dire prophesies one year ago, as the University prepared ,to comply With a state law requiring public disclosure of faculty and staff salaries. Fortunately, none of the predictions appears to have become a reality. The public has seen the wide differences in salary levels between medical school professors and English professors, and has understood those differences are justified in terms of the marketability of the educators in the business and professional world (notwithstanding, Robert Tisch's oft-heard rantings about cutting President Harold Shapiro's salary to pay for program costs). We have heard no horror stdries of professors from other universities declining job offers here for fear their salaries would be disclosed. And professors here have not flocked to their department chairpersons demanding raises because they feel they are underpaid, thus undermining the University's salary system based upon raises for merit. Indeed, not much at all has happened since faculty salaries were first published a year ago. Initial curiosity died quickly, and no real negative ef- fects of any kind have been felt. We are happy that no problems have arisen, for salary disclosure was a long-needed step at this public, state- supported university. Both those inside and out of the University community have a right to know how their tax dollars are being apportioned to professors, who are state employees. And, if there exist any unjustified discrepancies in the faculty salary schedule, what better method than salary disclosure to ferret them out? So look through today's Daily to see how much your professors earn, if your curiosity gets the better of you. But don't be surprised if your favorite professor earns less than your least favorite - the research of the latter might be far superior to that of the former. Salaries are based upon merit, as well they should be. The better teachers and researchers deserve more than their less outstanding colleagues. Last month, the Michigan State Police began informing some current and former state residents that they were the targets of police spying by police surveillance units referred to as "The Red Squad." The Red Squad illegally collected information on more than 38,000 individuals and organizations engaged in legitimate political activity. The men and women listed in the surveillance files, compiled between 1950 and 1974, will be given the chance to request their files upon notification. The Red Squad, now disbanded, was set up in the 1950s by Michigan under a law which made it possible to create a special state police surveillance unit. It was established to investigate suspected communists and sub- versives but it was eventually found in violation of the U.S. Constitution. Before it was eliminated, the Red Squad was respon- sible for inexcusable tactics used in spying on people exercising their democratic rights and freedoms. THE EVENT THAT brought the house down on police intelligence abuse in Michigan was the 1974 state police investigation of the Michigan Association for Consumer Protec- tion. The group filed a class action lawsuit that eventually revealed- a vast network of political spying that included not only state By Steve Berkowitz and local police, but federal agencies and large corporations which used the infor- mation to harass and fire potentially active employees. Files were kept on students, professors, journalists, union members, attorneys, politicians, and others, and, in some cases, the Red Squad supplied information to private employers and government officials. Those who became the targets of these flagrantly illegal activities may have unjustly lost job possibilities, been denied credit ap- plications, refused educational opportunities, etc. Red Squads across the United States have been known to infiltrate groups in order to disrupt their day-to-day work and sabotage their successes. They have propagated false and damaging information on those in- dividuals and groups that have spoken out against the government on such issues as busing, women's rights, high ulitity rates, the Vietnam War, environmental and consumer protection, and an economy run by a'nd for big business. Many times, the police would copy license plate numbers from cars parked in the vicinity of demonstrations and citizens, meetings even though the, owner of the car might not have been involved in the demon- stration or meeting. HAVE WE REALLY gotten rid of McCar- thyism, or has it just been replaced by secret police organizations that go around using Big Brother tactics, at the taxpayers' expense, on people exercising their human and civil liber- ties? The shocking, covert actions by the Red Squads have made the work of people in- volved in the movement for social change more difficult and dangerous than necessary. We must voice our concern now over these and similar actions or face the potential for further abuse by our city, state, and federal governments. Richard Sobel, president of the National Lawyers Guild, will be the featured speaker at a forum on police surveillance to be held tonight at 7:30 p.m., The forum, entitled "Was the Red Squad Watching You?," will also feature the documentary film, "The In- telligence Network." The event will take place at the Friends Meetinghouse, 1420 Hill Street, Ann Arbor. Steve, Berkowitz is an LSA senior working as an investigator in the Student Legal Services office. I I LETTERS TO THE DAILY: Profs must share frugality, too The other Lennon legacy W HEN JOHN LENNON was felled by an assassin on Monday night, he left behind a magnificent legacy of music-certainly the greatest gift the 40-year-old musician and songwriter left us. But he touched the world in other ways, too. He was not the first ar- ts figure to get involved with political issues, but he was' often among the most vocal and visible. Some ten years ago, Lennon was asked his opinion about capital punishment. He said he thought execution a bad idea; he didn't see how it solved anything to turn such violence against criminals. Yet Lennon's feelings on the matter didn't stop law-and-order types from voicing their own objectionable views on the issue, even as many Americans were first hearing the terrible news. New York City's Mayor Ed Koch, once known as one of the nation's most liberal congressmen, renewed the crusade he began during his election campaign suggesting that citizens have a right to see the perpetrator of such violent crimes killed by the state. As has been repeatedly demonstrated in public opinion polls, most Americans agree. What has also been repeatedly demonstrated-not through polls but through history-is that a majority (even a vast one) can sometimes be wrong. Most Americans, after all, sup- ported slavery, U.S. involvement in Vietnam, and Richard Nixon. Capital punishment will not solve the problem of violence in America; it will contribute to it. If we are sick of living in such a perilous environment, we ought to start about the difficult task of disarming the dangerous, rather than slaying them after the fact. Just as we mourn Lennon, we mourn to see so many of our countrymen stooping to embrace a base part of human nature-the desire for revenge-as political principle. We ought to be fighting that element of the human personality, not touting it as a tool of public policy. John would have been the first to agree. To the Daily:, There is something disturbing and beautiful in the joint statement by R. S. Ganapathy and David Robbins on "Sharing Scarcity" (Daily, November 21). Disturbing because it calls for personal sacrifice now; beautiful because it goes straight to the heart of the matter and addresses the moral problem: Faculty is the privileged group and it should be able to see how badly affected are those who are less privileged. 'I think the time has arrived for a more serious discussion that goes 'beyond mere economic arguments and beyond the usual cliche: We must keep our com- petitive edge. We are entering times of scarcity, not only at this univer- sity but as far as the whole nation is concerned. A faculty that holds the torch of enlightenment should be enlightened enough to provide an example of unselfishness and by exemplary restraint pave the way towards the path of shared frugality. Only then we can en- courage others to do likewise. I think "shared poverty" is a bad phrase. I much prefer the idea of shared frugality: I would be interested in the opinions of other faculty members, par- ticularly in view of our larger responsibilities as the custodians of the social order. I hear that there are some professors in this university who earn $100,000 and more annually. No teacher/researcher deserves this kind of money, particularly in view of the salaries of other teacher/reseachers and in view Sof our contribution to society. Our knowledge is not that important; I should like it to be otherwise, but it isn't otherwise. Medicine is no exception; indeed, medicine is increasingly becoming a major liability to this society. I also hear that there are lots of people employed by the Univer- sity who fear for their future. Here is a letter I recently received from a secretary: "I wish to applaud your courageous stand on "Shared Frugality: Time for examples" appearing in today's University Record. I hope other faculty members will join you in your view. As a person who is self- supporting and getting a little older, it's quite scary to wait and wonder if the funds in your area will be cut and you will be out looking for work again; and if you manage to hold on to your job you still know that there will be no raises for some time while in- flation eats into your cash supply steadily. Thank you." . I just don't think it is right or just, or indeed, even sensible that some people would earn $100,000 a year and others would be fired so that fat cats can become fat- ter. We are not only a repository for knowledge. We should also be the possessors of some wisdom. Our wisdom should inform us that if we sow injustice we shall reap the bitter harvest of strife, misery, unhappiness, and ultimately, violence. Our wisdom should also inform us that this country was founded on the premise of giving a chance to all, especially those less privileged. -Henryk Skolimowski - Professor of Philosophy Dept. of Humanities College of Engineering December 8 6 I Teaching not all pleasure x ^ .:x' «.t To the Daily: It is a bit annoying to be asked mildly silly questionsby a -newspaper reporter ; but one ' wants to be polite and give honest answers. It is much more an- noying, though, to be misquoted. When your reporter, Greg Davis, asked me what I would do during Christmas vacation, I told him that, among other things, I would be grading exams and papers and preparing for next term's courses. I also made a general remark about enjoying my work. But those two remarks were not connected, whereas in his article in your .Sunday issue he makes it appear as if they were. I want to emphasize that there is nothing enjoyable about grading papers and exams. It is mean, degrading work, which as a teacher I resent having to do; Nor is there anything enjoyable about preparing syllabi, book lists, and similar administrative chores that- precede the pleasant activity of teaching: that, too, is sheer drudgery. It is important to me to let your readers know that even a professor's pleasant life requires some loathsome tasks. -Alfred G. Meyer Professor of Political Science December 8 A world government 4 Review acfailed stunt To the Daily: Many people support the United Nations hoping thus to better the world. My contention is that they must now begin to prepare for the next step, which is a world government under con- stitutional law, agreed to by all nations, with a world court to which all international problems must be taken, and whose edicts can be enforced by an inter- national police force. This the United Nations cannot do, not being a government, though it has been, and will be, of the greatest value until such an in- ternational government can take its place. Peace may be the opposite of war, but the only alternative to war is the rule of law. Since modern technology has drawn the countries of the world into a single, global community, that community must be gover- ned not by some self-serving in- terest, but by a world gover- nment under constitutional law. That is the only way we can ever achieve a lasting peace. - Our present efforts toward agreement not to use poison gas in World War I? It worked only until the crunch came. Further- more, when we, as pacifists, ask our nation to disarm, or limit ar- maments, are we beingfair to all the non-pacifists (who have an equal right to their belief) when we ask them to give up their only protection? We don't even tell them how disarmament can be safely accomplished. We may be willing to' be martyrs to the cause, but we are asking them to be victims of our belief. Again I ask, is it fair? Also, any suc- cessful peace plan must be able to control, and direct into accep- table channels, the violent element latent in all society. The only fair and practical way to disarm is to have a world government under constitutional law with an international police force capable of protecting the nations, large and small, as they completely disarm. Since such a police force would cost so little compared with the present ar- mies of the world, think of the money saved for worthwhile pur- poses. Greed and lust for power may r/ . 's . t 1 y. . f . " To the Daily . What is wrong with reviewer Dennis Harvey? His review of The Stunt Man (Daily, December 2) contained several glaring inaccuracies. He continually refers to the title character as Burt, although we never learn his actual name. "Burt" is merely the name of the dead stunt man whom actor Steve Railsback por- trays. There is no scene in which "the helicopter lands menacingly" and the director "gets out to yell 'Cut!' " In their misrepresents his meaning, since the comment is meant as an in- sulting response to the director's potentially racist enthusiasm for the violence of the Vietnam.war. I'll let other flaws pass to con- clude with this one: The Stunt Man is not Richard Rush's first film. He directed Thunder Alley, Hell's Angels on Wheels and Psyche Out (both with Jack Nicholson), Getting Straight, and Freebie and the Bean, among others. When one considers Dennis