100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

February 07, 1985 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1985-02-07

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

4

OPINION
Page 4 Thursday, February 7, 1985 The Michigan Daily

I

be M ctdgan 1Bat1
Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan

The Draft: Resist or conform

Vol. XCV, No.106

420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board

A public document*

MORE THAN any other type of
institution, a university depends
upon the exchange of ideas to for-
mulate a responsible whole.
With that notion in mind, the ad-
ministration's actions concerning
associate vice-president Niara
Sudarkasa's report on minority
recruitment and retention seem par-
ticularly disturbing.
The first part of Sudarkasa's
report-dealing with undergraduate
enrollment-was originally to have been
completed in October, yet as recently
as two weeks ago she claimed it was
not yet finished. Two remaining parts
to the report are planned, but she has
not announced dates for their com-
pletion yet.
MSA, the alumni association, the
NAACP, the Council of Minority Con-
cerns, and the Daily have requested
copies of the report, but as yet the only
access that has been granted to
anybody outside the administration
has been viewing opportunities for
MSA and CMC officials. Those
viewings must take place within
Sudarkasa's office and are insufficient
in light of reports that the document is
over 200 pages long.
Administration officials claim they
are correct in holding back the report
because it is an internal communique
designed strictly for application
toward a final administration
proposal.
The document is a commissioned
report by a high-level University of-
ficial, however, and it concerns an
issue directly affecting the University
community.
Minority enrollment is a concern of
the entire community. In the 1970's
that concern manifested itself through
the actions of the Black Action

Movement which extracted a promise
of 10 percent black enrollment from
the administration. In more recent
years, the revival of the Black Student
Union and the creation of Sudarkasa's
position demonstrate that concern con-
tinues.
In addition, the Sudarkasa report
could alter the University's request to
the state for student financial aid. Ac-
cording to Roderick Linzie, MSA's
minority recruitment researcher, the
report calls for increases in financial
aid to minority students. Any such aid
increase could affect state government
reaction to the proposal and thus would
directly affect the significant part of
the University community that
receives financial aid. Those people
have a right to know what the ad-
ministration is considering.
Finally, the administration's claim
that the report is not yet finished is
simply unconvincing. It is currently
complete enough to allow MSA and
CMC officials to view it, but more im-
portantly, a report of its nature should
be made available to the public at its
earliest stages. If the report is indeed
incomplete then it will either require
additional ideas or parts of it will be
removed. If it still requires new ideas,
then the community at large is a vital
source for those ideas. If parts of the
report are to be removed, then the
community should have the right to be
aware of those parts that were con-
sidered and dropped.
Yesterday, MSA and the Daily filed
Freedom of Information Act requests
for the report. An issue of the
magnitude of minority recruitment
and retention is one that should receive
input from all parts of the community
and not just from high-ranking ad-
ministrators.

The following dialogue is the second part
of a conversation that Jerry Markon had
with Paul Jacob last week after Jacob ad-
dressed a meeting of the Ann Arbor
Libertarian League at Angell Hall.
Jacob, a member of the Libertarian Par-
ty, is a vehement opponent of draft
registration. He was arrested by FBI
agents last December and charged with
"willfully failing to register. " His trial
has been scheduled for May 6. Topics
covered in the first part of their conver-
sation, printed in yesterday's Daily, in-
cluded the reasons for Jacobs' opposition
to the draft-which he called
"slavery "-and his belief that the United
States should withdraw its troops from
Europe and all other global commitmen-
ts.
Dialogue
t,
D: Do you think Western Europe could
stand up alone against the Soviet Union and
Eastern Europe?
J: I think it could. If you look at the Gross
National Products' of Western Europe com-
pared to Eastern Europe and the Soviet
Union, the debate becomes a little more
weighted on our side.
D: What about World War II? If America
hadn't got involved then, all of Europe might
very well have a swastika hanging over it
today.
J: Well, we went over there when Hitler
declared war on us, and I don't think we
should have until they declared war on us-it
wasn't our war. I have nothing but respect for
any American who had the courage and the
foresight to go over to Europe and fight
against Hitler before we declared war. I'm
opposed to the government forcing them
to do it. People who today go over to
Afganistan and fight against the Russians-I
support them tremendously. But I don't think
the U.S. government should be forcing people
to serve in the military. If they object to
killing, if they don't want to be in the military,
if they think it's an unjust war...I don't think
we want those people in the military.
Daily: Let's talk about the Libertarian par-
ty. Can you describe some of the party's
positions, and how it helped shape your
feelings about the draft?
Paul Jacob: Our position is that we need a
free market at home, less government inter-
vention in the economy, lower taxes, less
government control... basically laissez faire.
And not the type of corporate statism that we
call free enterprise today. Not where you
have a few companies using the army over-
seas to control markets, but a true free-
market system where people get no subsidy
from the government. It's individuals being
free to do whatever they feel is right without
constraint from government, provided that
they don't injure or defraud their neighbor. If
you're in your house smoking a marijuana
cigarette, you're not hurting anyone else. If
you get in your car and drive out in the streets
smoking marijuana or drinking beer then I
think that's a real harm.
D: But wouldn't such a system make the
law somewhat vague and difficult to apply to
each individual case?

J: The point I'm trying to make is that
there shouldn't be a crime that doesn't have a
victim. Society shouldn't be deciding
morality for everyone, the majority shouldn't
be telling the minority how to live, how to
worship god or not worship god, how to eat,
what to read.. . There have been books cen-
sored in the United States. Liberatrians are
against that. There have been films cen-
sored; the drug laws we see as not only coun-
terproductive and causing more crime, but
also fundamentally wrong because you don't
have the right to tell someone else what to do.
We certainly don't believe you have the right
to take enough drugs to go crazy and to go out
on the town and smash things, and to do
something dangerous like get behind the
wheel of a car. We do believe in responsibility
and that you have the responsibility not to
harm your neighbor and that it's no excuse to
say you were high on drugs. The same is true
with prostitution. We don't see these as
crimes.
D: How can you legally define "harming
your neighbor?"
J: I think it's obvious that if your next-door
neighbor is in his house taking drugs, then
there's no real qualitative harm being done to
you. If, on the other hand, he pulls your
bushes out of your yard and carries them
across to his, he's stealing something. He's
causing a real harm. Murder is a crime, rape
is a crime. . . We believe in full civil liber-
ties-that you have the right to do anything
you want, provided you don't injure someone
else. Another thing we believe is that this
country should not be intervening throughout
the world. Let's trade with our neighbors, but
let's not try to control their internal affairs;
let's not send our soldiers out to try and police
and baby-sit the rest of the world. If we're
going to change the rest of the world, let's do
it by educating them. Let's do it by example,
let's not do it by force.
D: Can you describe the circumstances
that led up to your arrest?
J: I went to Westminster College in 1979,
and because of discussions with other studen-
ts, I decided to join the Libertarian party.
That year we formed a young Libertarian
group on a campus, and we started working
on the draft issue, because even then there
were bills for national service and for a
military draft before Congress. Then, I left
Westminster, and went back to Little Rock
Arkansas, where I reorganized the Liber-
tarian party. It had become pretty stagnant,
but I soon got it rolling again. I became the
chairman in 1980, and in 1981, when I was still
chairman, we had a demonstration, in Little
Rock, against the draft. As chairman, I spoke
out against the draft. I basically said that I
thought it was unjust and un-American.
When I was directly asked by members of the
media whether I had registered, I said that I
couldn't in good conscience and I urged other
people not to register. Six months later, I got
a threatening letter from the Selective Ser-
vice, saying basically to register or face
prosecution. I decided that since I couldn't
register, I had better things to do than face a
court and possible prison, so I left Arkansas
on July 4,1981, and went underground.
D: Can you talk about what you did when
you were underground?
J: Well, at that point I wasn't indicted yet
so I can talk about pretty much anything I did
without getting anyone in trouble. I went to
Washington and talked with Students for a
Libertarian Society and I traveled to other
parts of the country and spoke with Liber-
tarians and various college groups. I was in-
dicted in 1982, but I didn't turn myself in. In
December of 1983 I returned to Little Rock,
where my wife and I were expecting our first
child. I lived there for a year without being
apprehended. I had basically decided to live
where I wanted to and how I wanted to, and
that if they were going to come take away my
freedom and arrest me then they would have
to do it. But I wasn't going to turn myself in.
D: What about your arrest?

J: I was arrested in December of 1984.
They showed up at the door at the same time a
friend showed up in the driveway so I was
thinking it was a friend-but it was them.
There were 3 FBI agents, and I was handcuf-
fed and held overnight and denied bail for 24
hours. Then I was granted a $75,000 property
bond, for which my parents basically put up
their house. I was released on December 7
and I sometimes wonder if they didn't time it
to coincide with the anniversary of Pearl
Harbor.
D: What are you specifically being charged
with, and what is the maximum penalty?
J: I'm being charged with willfull failure to
register. The maximum penalty is 5 years in-
prison and a $10,000 fine. No one yet, I don't
think, has been given the maximum sentence.
D: What are your feelings about possibly
going to prison?
J: Well, I don't want to go. I've decided
that I'm not going to comply with what I think
is a very dangerous program, and whatever
they try to threaten me with to make me
comply doesn't really matter. If they
threaten me with the electric chair, then I'll
reconsider. But I can't allow their threats
and their punishments to intimidate me. I
hope that I'm sentenced to no time served or
to very little time served. If I think it's an
amount of torture that I can stand, then I'll go
ahead and get it over with. I'm hoping for
the best and preparing for the worst, but I'll
probably keep appealing.
D: What are your views on the Soloman
Amendment, which forbids students from
getting financial aid if they don't register?
J: I don't support and the Libertarian Par-
ty doesn't support taking money from people
who are paying taxes and giving it to people to
go to school. I don't think a student has a
right to expect money from the government to
go to school. I also think it's scary to see how
much control the military has over education.
They have ROTCs all over the campuses and
military research and military grants to
many colleges. The fact that the colleges are
helping to enforce draft registration is cer-
tainly another factor that shows that the
educational system and the military/in-
dustrial complex are not very far separated.
D: Many of the former radicals from the
1960's seem to have gone back on many of
their previous views and become much closer
to the status quo. Do you think this will ever
happen to you? Will you ever become a Yup-
pie?
J: I hope not. I don't think I have the same
values that some of the more famous 60's
radicals had. I don't see anything wrong with
owning a house or having a family. They had
the view that living in a house in suburbia was
a criminal offense. I think the Vietnam War
was criminal, but I don't think living in
suburbia is. . I'd like to increase people's
freedom, but not the amount of guilt they feel.
I don't think they should feel guilty for
striving to have a better life. I think that
freedom and peace are what's necessary to
allow people to build a better life for them-
selves. I don't think that's something that will
change in the next 20 years. I think I'll always
have that feeling, and the reason they
changed and they're doing things now that
they didn't once believe in is that their values
were not totally correct. They were socialists
and communists. I'm not a socialist or a
communist. They believed in revolutions and
taking actions against society because it was
totally corrupt. I don't view the people living
and working and trying to make it in society
as corrupt-I view the people in the gover-
nment as corrupt. I don't think there's
anything wrong with being rich, if you earn
that money fairly. So, in the end when they.
ended up having to make money like
everybody else, it made them look like they
were selling out, whereas if I end up making
some money it doesn't go against my values:
it doesn't look like I sold out. Someday, I hope
I will make a little.

Ambassadorial reform

IN THE midst of the process of selec-
ting a replacement for Jeanne Kirk-
patrick as U.S. ambassador to the
United Nations, the Reagan ad-
ministration has taken a positive step
toward reforming the position.
In the past, the U.N. ambassador
automatically has been considered a
cabinet member. The administration
has changed that part of the position,
however, and so made it less of a
political position and more of the ad-
ministrative one that it should be.
Many former U.N. ambassadors,
like Sen. Daniel Moynihan, have used
the position as a springboard to higher
office. Because they hold cabinet
rank, the ambassadors were frequen-
tly in the press and were put under ad-
ditional pressures.
The chief functions of the U.N. am-
bassador are communication and
compromise. Both of those functions
should be easier without the additional
pressures inherent in a cabinet
position.

In recent months the U.S. has ap-
peared increasingly isolationist with
its pullout from -UNESCO and its with-
drawal from the World Court over a
case brought against it by the
Nicaraguan government. Therefore,
the new U.N. ambassador must
demonstrate to the world that the U.S.
remains intent on establishing inter-
national networks of communication
and exchange.
Vernon Walters, the man proposed
by the administration to fill the
position, appears to be a good choice.
He has had a long, quiet career in
foreign relations and has established a
reputation as a patient administrator.
In addition, he is reported to be fluent
in nine languages-an ideal
qualification for such a post.
The Reagan administration's
decision to eliminate the cabinet status
associated with the U.N. ambassador
is a sound move. With diminished
political pressure, the new am-
bassador ought to be able to perform
his duties more effectively.

Markon is a Daily staff writer.

Letters
Cartoon showed poor editorial choice

- - -- -

To the Daily:
Your recent political cartoon
(Daily, Jan. 31) depicting an
Israeli tank leaving a family of
crippled refugees standing in a
decimated Lebanese street is a
blatant example of yellow misin-
formed journalism, unfor-
tunately all too representative of
The Daily's editorial policy. For
over a decade, the PLO
threatened civilian life in Nor-
thern Israel through in-
discriminate bombing and
terrorist attacks. Israel tried to
stem these attacks through
retaliatory air strikes against
PLO bases in Lebanon. Unfor-
tunately, due to the massive ex-
tent of the deployment of PLO
forces in Lebanon, these strikes
were unable to stop the
aggression. The PLO had stock-
niled hIsa mnts nf Soviet ar-

Under International law Israel
was under no obligation to wait
for a cooperative Syrian-PLO at-
tack against Northern Israeli
towns. Article 51 of the United
Nation's Charter clearly provides
the basic right of a nation for self-
defense. Israel's retaliatory
campaign came only after
numerous terrorist attacks as well
as over a 1000 shellings of 23 Nor-
thern Israeli settlements.
As far as the accusations of
killing innocent civilians, the
blame lies squarely with the PLO

who deliberately located their
bases in refugee camps,
hospitals, and other heavily
populated areas. As an example
of Israeli humanity, Israel drop-
ped leaflets before attacks on
Sidon and Tyre in order to warn
the population to flee to indicated
safe zones. This action was taken
at the expense of military sur-
prise and subsequently of Israeli
lives.
Your cartoonist Bering, is
either grossly misinformed about
Lebanon or reprehensibly biased.

In either case, by printing the
cartoon, you showed
frighteningly poor editorial
judgement. Before you jump on
the bandwagon condemning
Israel, take some time to avail
yourselves of the facts. Do some
journalistic research. Shock ef-
fect journalism based on the
flimsiest of propaganda and
rhetoric is better left to supel
market tabloids and not to
allegedly respectable
newspapers like the Daily.
-Bob Ablove
January 31
by Berke Breathed

---

BLOOM COUNTY

B/NKLEY! 015ASTER!
n .mrARRr .vw

I t5sre.JffYTO FWP
57W DALL(4AS..H'S

ARM HA. 5 4V F

SRIO
My /'r ,

i

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan