a

i I

OPINION
Wednesday, November 30, 1988

Iage 4

The Michigan Daily

0


3br £icbigau aij
Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan

Giving up

the dictator

r .
V.'4

Vol. IC, No. 56

420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109

- Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board. All other
cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion
of the Daily.
The University ignores the demands of Hispanic students:

...

Skip the Record

THE ADMINISTRATIVE philosophy
which produced the University Record
drticle "Hispanic community airs frus-
trations," is the same logic which went
Into the fabrication of the report One
Year Later... Commitment to Leader-
ship: The administration misrepresents
the context of its student interactions to
remove racism from the agenda.
: The November 21 article claims that
"members of the University's Hispanic
community last Monday asked Presi-
dent James J. Duderstadt to recall One
Year Later." This omits the crucial
context in which the asking took place.
Hispanic students and student orga-
nizations first brought the errors in the
report to the attention of the Office of
the President, the Office of the Provost
and Vice President for Academic Af-
fairs, and the Office of the Vice
Provost for Minority Affairs, the three
offices which put out the report. These
students were met with apologies, sur-
prise, and job offers, but nothing was
done to correct the errors or recall the
report.
Next, students called a rally in Re-
gents' Plaza to publically voice their
objections to the University's lies about
funding and organizations which were
alleged by the report to be available,
but were no where on campus. When
some of the Hispanic students entered
the Fleming building to "ask" Duder-
stadt about the report, they were pre-
vented from ascending to Duderstadt's
office. University Public Safety offi-
ders locked some students in a stairwell
and slammed others arms in a door.
In printing that the administration met
with students and omitting the protest
which forced the meeting, the Record
makes the administration appear rea-
sonable in correcting its own lies.
Further, this makes the actions of the
Public Safety officers seem justified in
the protection of a reasonable president
Who deals with problems.

The Record attributes the citation of
errors in the report to the President of
the Socially Active Latino Students As-
sociation (SALSA) without bothering
to establish that the problems articu-
lated are indeed errors of fact.
This is the same diversion strategy
which Duderstadt used in asking the
student groups to submit all errors to
his office so that an "errata sheet" could
be compiled. Not only do the students
have to do all the work, but the
authority and resources of the
administration is not used to verify the
facts.
Duderstadt never acknowledged that
the errors were indeed fabrications by
his office. Rather, he passively ad-
dressed, "errors will be found," "flaws
will be corrected," while at the same
time saying "We do not want you to
feel betrayed" to pacify student con-
cerns.
"Feeling betrayed" is the central issue
to the administration. If the University
issues a cosmetic report containing lies,
erroneous information, and omissions
and there is no student outcry, the
administration will let it stand. There is
still no indication that One Year Later
will be recalled.
As the final coup de grace, the
Record article distorts the demands
which SALSA repeatedly forwarded to
the administration, omitting some de-
mands and adding other which were
not even on the list.
The administration has a proven
inability to deal with racism and its
manifestations in recruitment and
support. The One Year Later incident is
further evidence of the futility of
appealing to the administration to deal
with the problems of racism.
In action, Duderstadt's apology
means nothing. He has not indicated a
willingness to correct the report himself
or withdraw it and only allotted a half
hour meeting for the concerns of the
Hispanic community.

By Mary Beth Doyle
On October 5th, the people of Chile
went to the polls to cast a "yes" or "no"
vote in the nation's plebiscite. A "yes"
victory would have granted eight more
years of rule for the nation's dictator,
General Augusto Pinochet. The fact that
opposition won does not guarantee that
Pinochet will leave power. It means only
that there will be an election in March of
1989, when Pinochet will run against a
candidate put forth by the opposition.
Pinochet's regime has been infamous
for its widespread violation of human
rights, including kidnapping, torture and
murder. It has also - dissolved congress,
repressed the nation's unions, and virtually
dissolved all political parties. Pinochet
maintains that these measures are a
necessary part of his "transition to
democracy."
The Christian Democratic party was a
member of the opposition that aided the
overthrow of President Salvador Allende in
1973. This coup led directly to the present
military regime. Yet, the "No" coalition
will most likely choose a Christian
Democratic candidate to run in next year's
election. To understand why the Christian
Democrats are now working against the
regime they helped establish, one needs to
examine the troubled rule of Allende.
Salvador Allende was elected in 1970,
promising "a peaceful transition to social-
ism." In many ways, his platform was
similar to that of his predecessor, the
Christian Democrat Eduardo Frei, who
proposed a "Revolution through Liberty."
Both men stressed land reform, national-
ization of industry, and the mobilization
of Chile's workers, peasants and
"forgotten poor." And both were plagued
by opposition from the Right and the
Left. The Right was disturbed by the
extent of the reforms, especially
concerning nationalization and land
reform. The Left felt that these changes
were insufficient and implemented too
slowly.
While both Frei and Allende had to
contend with the widespread political
disillusion of their followers, in Allende's
case this led to violence. The extreme
Left, united under the Revolutionary Left
Movement (MIR) organized illegal repos-
session of farms and small businesses.
Mary Beth Doyle is a member of the
Coalition for Democracy in Latin Amer-
ica.

Street fighting was prevalent in 1972 and
1973. The Right pointed to these devel-
opments to support their claims that the
Allende administration was dangerous, in-
tent upon creating a strictly Marxist state
in which all business and agriculture
would be nationalized through force if
necessary.
The United States helped pave the way
for the coup. Where Frei had had U.S.
support for his land reforms, Allende was
deprived of U.S. credit, though the United
States continued its generous support of
the military. The CIA also mounted a
major media campaign denouncing Allende
and promoted anti-Communist hysteria.
Despite U.S. involvement, the over-
throw of Allende was, finally, a popular
coup. Opposition to Allende had been
mounting in 1972 and 1973. The short-
ages and violence during these years led
the people to believe that Allende was an

return to the disorder of Allende's rule.
Others back Pinochet because of the eco-
nomic improvements he has made. Chile
now has a rate of inflation that is below
15 percent, and a positive trade deficit of
1.5 billion dollars.
The people of Chile have paid the price
for this prosperity. Cutting social services
has deprived much of the populace of
needed health care. Worker's real wages
have decreased since 1983. Foreign in-
vestors are enticed by Chile's cheap labor
and low corporate taxes. Therefore, while
some of Chile's people have benefited
from her strong economy, the poor have
gotten poorer, often depending on church-
run community soup kitchens for their
food. The minimum monthly wage of $48
is one of the lowest in Latin America. The
government maintains that poverty has
decreased by 33 percent under Pinochet. In
fact, it has increased. According to a

It may seem surprising that "yes,' i.e. Pinochet, received 43
percent of the vote this October 5. Despite the human rights
abuses and political repression that mark his regime, many peo-
ple are afraid that without his strong leadership....'

ineffective leader unable to control the.
country. Massive foreign debt and rising
inflation added to their fears.
The military junta that took power after
the coup was expected to remain in com-
mand only as long as it took to restore
order. Allende had warned that it would be
easier to put the military in power than to
get it out, and, thus, he was very
prophetic. During the coup, 30,000 of
Allende's supporters were killed. Many
more were imprisoned or exiled.
It soon became apparent that Pinochet
himself planned to govern Chile. His rule
was made official by the plebiscite in
1980. Called the "grand farce" by the
people of Chile, this was an undeniably
fraudulent election. Once "legitimately" in
power, Pinochet instated a new consti-
tution in 1980. It sanctioned the continued
recess of congress, dissolution of political
parties, exile of political enemies, and the
jailing of people for up to 20 days without
charges (facilitating the regime's use of
torture). It is also called for the plebiscite
of 1988, which Pinochet felt certain he
could win.
It may seem surprising that "yes," i.e.
Pinochet, received 43 percent of the vote
this October 5. Despite the human rights
abuses and political repression that mark
his regime, many people are afraid that
without his strong leadership, Chile will

United Nations report, the average standard
of living in Chile fell by 2.5 percent from
1980 to 1987. Some reports claim that up
to half of Chile's population is now
affected by poverty.
Pinochet continues to have the
support of a significant segment of the
population. To defeat him,, the "No"
coalition--made up of 16 parties--will have
to put aside their differences and present a
united front. Winning the plebiscite is
only the first step; now the coalition must
work toward winning the election. Many
fear March's election will not be lawful,
or that Pinochet will refuse to leave
power. Now is the time for the world to
keep its eyes on Pinochet to ensure that
the next election is at least as fair as the
October plebiscite was. Pinochet's very
real economic improvements cannot
justify the continued political repression
and torture of hundreds of people each year
that have accompanied his "transition to
democracy." The dictator claims that the
people of Chile cannot afford to have him
give up power. The real question is, can
they afford not to?
CDLA, a student group at the Univer-
sity of Michigan, will be hosting the visit
of Carlos Dupre, a Christian Democrat and
one of the leaders of-the "No" coalition,
on Thursday, December 1, at 8 p.m. in
Rackham Amphitheatre.

t^efit ......
:<; ".;' ...'. .i?. . . .. >~ i~c''ii? Si ? c?'~ sc~ '>c 5iVii '< ? i i ~ i<:
:..:::::.:::::::. ::::. ::::::.:":::::::":::::::..:.........................................._ ....
.. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . ..

Sexism distorts news

LAST WEEK, PSYCHOLOGIST Dr.
Doreen Kimura and graduate student
Elizabeth Hampton from the University
of Western Ontario in London, pre-
sented results of their study which de-
termined ways in which women's skill
levels were related to their estrogen
levels. Though it is important for
women to have access to information
about their bodies and how they work,
such information is often used against
women.
The study involved 200 women who
completed tasks associated with verbal
and spatial skills. The verbal task was
to repeat five times in a row the tongue
twister, "A box of mixed biscuits in a
biscuit mixer" as fast as possible.
,On high estrogen days, women were
able to repeat the tongue twister on an
average of 14 seconds. On low estro-
gen days, women performed on an av-
erage of 17 seconds.
For the spatial task, women solved
40 problems in three minutes on a low
estrogen day as compared to 35 prob-
lems on a high estrogen day. Perfor-
mance differences on high and low es-
trogen days were a matter of three sec-
onds or five problems.
While hormones do affect perfor-
mance, many other factors influence
performance levels in individuals.
Anxiety, motivation, confidence, and
environmental conditions are all factors
involved in determining operative skill
levels for both men and women. These
imrv.d-n ont rtrr. 1,0,70 nral n nrfif

ones.
Studies which address differences
between the sexes are potentially dan-
gerous because of the ways in which
they are misinterpreted and manipulated
by institutions, including the media,
within our patriarchal society. Factual
proof of the differences between the
biological abilities of men and women
has historically been used to legitimize
discrimination on the basis of sex, and
to create gender determined roles. One
example of this is the way women have
always been responsible for primary
child care and more nurturing roles
simply because they are capable of
giving birth.
As an institution, the mass media has
encouraged discriminatory attitudes
toward women through its
sensationalist and inaccurate reporting.
The Ann Arbor News (11/17/88)
boldly stated, "If confirmed by further
research, the results could have impli-
cations for the time of month at which
young girls should take standardized
tests, such as the Scholastic Aptitude
Test taken by high-school seniors, be-
cause many of the questions on such
tests are of the same type used by the
researchers." These implications have
little to do with the reality of the study,
and are based on irresponsible conjec-
ture.
"News" stories such as these have
negative effects on women. By ma-
nipulating scientific research, institu-
tions further the oppression of women

Policy
bars free
speech
To the Daily:
When I got around to
thumbing through the copy of
"What Students Should Know
About Discrimination and
Discriminatory Harassment by
Students in the University En-
vironment" that was mailed to
me recently, I (unfortunately)
found it rather more interesting
than I had expected. In
particular, the following re-
marks caught my attention:
"YOU are a harasser when
you tell jokes about gay men
and lesbians."
"Freedom of speech does not
include the right to harass oth-
ers."
Presumably we are to draw
the inference that freedom of
speech does not include the
right to tell jokes about gay
men and lesbians.
Now while in some very
broad sense telling such jokes
might count as harassment, and
in some much narrower sense
harassment does not come un-
der freedom of speech, the im-
plied conclusion clearly de-
pends on an equivocation be-
tween these two senses. Have
we really reached the point
where our state institutions can
uncontroversially claim the

people may or may not express
in private. No one is forcing
gay men and lesbians to like or
agree with people whose atti-
tudes toward them are offen-
sive. It is entirely possible for
them to say what they think of
such people and to attempt to
persuade other to agree. As a
gay man myself, I feel per-
fectly capable of giving as
good as I get on the verbal
front, and neither need nor want
the "help" of state institutions
in enforcing my own point of
view.
As for the practical side of
the issue, anyone who believes
that the effect of such policies
is to decrease the amount or
intensity of resentment and the
prevalence of discriminatory
attitudes is living in a dream-
world. People very quickly
learn to play the game in ap-
pearance - reality they be-
come not less but more resent-
ful - hardly surprisingly,
since such policies provide
them with a perfectly legiti-
mate basis for resentment
which they previously lacked:

the abridgement of their free-
dom of speech. Simultane-
ously, stereotypes of gays and
neurotics, too weak to take a
joke at their expense, are rein-
forced.
-Steve Burton
November 20
Eligibility
'cut' is
outrageous
To the Daily:
Your editorial on social
security (11/22/88) struck a re-
sponsive chord. It is outra-
geous that the Reagan
administration should choose
to try to tighten eligibility for
benefits through the appeals
process as a way to "cut" the
scope of the program. And cit-
izens of all political persua-
sions will have to be vigilant
during the Bush administration
lest the political fight over
how to reduce the budget deficit
leads to fundamental changes in

social-security financing. But
your argument was flawed in
two ways:
1. The Reagan administra-
tion did not approve a 20 per-
cent increase in monthly old-
age insurance benefits; that was
the Nixon action in 1972.
Reagan team merely approved
the automatic increase in cost-
of-living adjustments which
were designed to ensure that
especially the needy elderly did
not become further marginal-
ized in the wake of inflation.
2. Social security will not
"wither away" despite the fond
hopes of millionaire moralizers
like Peter Peterson or academic
critics on the extreme left and
right. I doubt that future gen-
erations will be denied their
rights to entitlements -
though no student should ex-
pect to live on social security
alone when s/he reaches age
67.
--W. Andrew Achenbaum
November 22


\ WE RECOGNIZE YOUR
RIGHT T 11HE REST
OF IT

ZINN


i