0

Page 4 -The Michigan Daily - Monday, February 26, 1990

abe firidyarn &dIu
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS
AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
420 Maynard Street
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109

IssuesForum

Shanties...

ARTS
NEWS
OPINION

763 0379
764 0552
747 2814

PHOTO
SPORTS
WEEKEND

764 0552
747 3336
747 4630

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.
From the Daily.
Cokely
BSU should not defend anti-Jewish statements
STEVE COKELY HAS A NOTORIOUS Saxon Zionist world conspiracy," and
history of making bigoted and inciteful said "Jews control the banks, Wall St..
statements about Jews. Cokely, an aide and Hollywood."
to former Chicago Mayor Eugene Members of the BSU present at
Sawyer, was brought to campus last Cokely's Fishbowl speech were quick
week by the Black Student Union, to defend the man and would not dis-
where he continued to preach his hate- agree with Cokely's blatant anti-Jewish
ful message. Though campus groups remarks, an extremely discouraging
have the right to bring speakers of their development in Black-Jewish relations
choosing to the University, BSU's on campus. One BSU member com-
defense of Cokely's anti-Jewish re- mented, "I didn't view the comments
marks is as surprising as it is scary. as anti-Semitic. He didn't say anything
Between 1985 and 1987, Cokely condemning Jews, he was just proving
made a series of four anti-Jewish a point. He was just giving out facts."
speeches at the Final Call, the Chicago A member of BSU's executive
headquarters of Louis Farrakhan's Na- board - the group's designated
tion of Islam. Cokely accused Jewish spokesperson on Cokely - went fur-
physicians of injecting Black babies ther, saying Cokely "gave a better ar-
with the AIDS virus, attacked Jesse gument than any Jewish student could
Jackson and then-Chicago Mayor give." Regarding Cokely's comment
Harold Washington for retaining Jew- concerning the Hitler-Jewish conspir-
ish advisers, and said Jews have cre- acy to kill Jews, the BSU member said
ated a "secret society" for the purpose she was "not well-enough educated to
of forming a world government con- say" whether his remarks are true, but
trolled by Jews that would oppress "has heard it from different sources...
Blacks. "The Jew," Cokely stated, He's got documents to back it up so
"hopes to one day reign forever." you can't really argue with that."
Cokely also criticized the U.S. gov-
ernment for expressing concern over a When confronted with a bigot such
neo-Nazi window-smashing of Jewish as Steve Cokely, it would be comfort-
businesses and synagogues on ing to be able to say he is an extremist
Chicago's North Side. The media pub- with no following, therefore posing no
lished many of Cokely's remarks in danger. But it's scary when University
May, 1988, when he was an aide to of Michigan students, among the
then-Mayor Sawyer. After an outcry brightest in the country, accept and
led by the Anti-Defamation League, defend the bigotry Cokely preaches.
Sawyer dismissed Cokely. The ADL Instead of affirming and defending
did not protest Cokely's right to make Cokely's outrageous statements, BSU
such comments, but insisted he not be should display more sensitivity toward
a paid employee of the city. other groups of people. No one has
In an appearance at the Fishbowl denied that Blacks have had a painful
Wednesday, one not sponsored by history in this country, but no group
BSU, Cokely continued to speak his has a monopoly on pain.
hateful message. He said, "There was a Blacks and Jews, both victims of
conspiracy of Jews and Hitler to kill oppression, have in the past fought for
Jews for the purpose of ethnic purity each other's rights and have struggled
among Jews." He also called Jews a to end bigotry of all kinds. Steve
"violent people," defended his accusa- Cokely's apologists on campus violate
tion that Jewish doctors inject Black the spirit of opposing all forms of dis-
babies with AIDS, spoke of an "Anglo- crimination
10C
Committee should not reinstate South Africa
ALTHOUGH NELSON MANDELA athletics, the comments made by
has asked that world leaders continue Samaranch indicate a dangerous and
sanctions against the apartheid govern- impending change in IOC policy.
ment of South Africa, some prominent The sanctions against South Africa
international figures have taken steps to should not be lifted by the IOC, and
relax punishments against the regime. athletes shouldncontinue to respect the
In the sports world, International United Nations ban on international
Olympic Committee President Juan An- athletic competition within South
tonio Samaranch has suggested that Africa. Paid exhibitions, either by in-
athletic sanctions might be lifted. dividuals, such as track stars, or by
Samaranch is toying with the idea of teams - like the recent tour of a Bri-
welcoming South Africa back into the tish cricket team which sparked rioting
world of international competition. The two weeks ago - must also cease.
IOC banned South Africa in 1970 be- South African President F.W. de
cause of Rule 3 of the Olympic Charter, Klerk has made long-overdue steps by .
which states that no nation can compete releasing Mandela and recognizing the
in the Olympics if it discriminates on African National Congress, but the ad-
grounds of race, religion, or politics." vances are few and have done little to
But in December, well before the dismantle the racist system of
release of Mandela, Samaranch invited apartheid. The "state of emergency" in
officials from the South African Na- South Africa continues, civil rights

tional Olympic Committee to IOC have not been instituted, and state
headquarters in Switzerland to present racism persists. Mandela's freedom did
their argument for readmission. not end apartheid and it should not mo-
Samaranch has said that the IOC tivate the international sports commu-
would not readmit South Africa until nity to reinstate South Africa.
apartheid is lifted. Last Monday, how- Sanctions must remain until
ever, Samaranch said in Kuwait that it apartheid is totally dismantled. By sug-
might be time to readmit South Africa. gesting to South Africa that minor steps
"Something is moving in South Africa, are acceptable, there will be no incen-
and we who are responsible for sport tive for the de Klerk regime to end
and the Olympic movement also have apartheid. The sports world must stand
to move," Samaranch said. "I think it is behind its sanctions. Athletes should
time, not only for words, but also for not go to exhibitions in South Africa
deeds and facts." and the IOC and other international or-
Though the IOC maintains apartheid ganizations should not include South
must be completely lifted before South Africa in their competitions until
Africa will be readmitted to worldwide apartheid ends.
Correction

Yes...
By John J. Miller
For four years the shanties have occu-
pied their obtrusive positions on the Diag.
But less than two weeks ago, Regent Tho-
mas Roach proposed to remove the aesthetic
menaces for good, and he received the sup-
port of at least two other regents. His argu-
ment - that the shanties detract from the
beauty of the Diag and hurt the University of
Michigan's reputation - is an obvious one
that requires little explanation. There are,
however, three other reasons justifying the
shanties' removal.
First, the shanties' creators assume that
they somehow enhance campus debate by
haphazardly constructing large, wooden
boxes and then decorating them with vacu-
ous slogans. The only debate the shanties
have inspired, however, regards their very
existence- should they stay or should they
go? Besides, the objectives they have set,
the end of racism, the abolishment of apart-
heid, a stop to violence in the Middle East,
are, at least in their most abstract forms,
almost too virtuous to criticize. Indeed, an
economical solution to the shanty dilemma
might be the construction of a single shanty
with a single slogan: "Bad things are bad."
This, of course, would be juvenile and un-
necessary.
Second, the shanties lack real definition.
One would assume that when a particular
shanty's objectives are met, it will be re-
moved and celebration will begin. But this is
not the case. The original shanty was built to
protest the University's investments in South
Miller is an LSA sophomore and editor in
chief of the Michigan Review.
No...
ByNikita Buckhoy, Pam Nadasen,
Liz Paige, and Tim Scarnecchia
The motivation for the regents to take the
shanties off the Diag is the same as their
motivation to invest in South Africa -
money. If the University is a clean, white-
washed environment, the donors are more
likely to give.
But if there are shanties which represent
the violence and inequity of South Africa's
apartheid system, racism in the United States,
and Israeli state terrorism -then the bubble
bursts and the University community (stu-
dents, faculty, administrators and alumni) is
reminded as they walk through the Diag of
their privilege and complacency in the
struggles against apartheid and racism. The
regents fear that alumni and rich donors are
less likely to give money to an institution
which does not keep an aesthetic peace.
The first anti-apartheid shanty was built
in the spring of 1986 to protest the
University's investments in South Africa
and to stand in solidarity with the South
African anti-apartheid movement. The sec-
ond shanty was built in the winter of 1987 to
The writers are members of the Free South-
ern Africa Committee and the United Coa-
lition Against Racism.

Africa. When the regents fully divested two
years later (not because of the shanty, but on
their own will), the shanty continued to
stand. Its creators attempted to revitalize
their socially-conscious pile of lumber by
redefining its mission - today it condemns
apartheid, a related but separate cause. This
incident set a poor precedent and raised an
important question: will the shanties stand
forever, transferring their protests from one
injustice to the next?
Third, the proper place for protest and
political discourse is on the pages of the
Daily and the Michigan Review, at rallies on
the steps of the Grad, and in late-night bull

Should the 'U'
remove them?
the Diag.
Ultimately, what is at stake in this debate
is not various campus organizations' fights
against evil in the world, but the image of the
University. Rational, enlightened, and edu-
cated individuals do not need to promote
their views by scrawling graffiti on the walls
of buildings - this is called vandalism and
there are laws against it. Yet by constructing
what amounts to physical graffiti, the shan-
ties' creators unwittingly become vandals
themselves. Clearly, both campus debate
and the University's image will improve
when the shanties' creators clean up their act
and the University cleans up the Diag.

session
lished
haps
conc(
This is
sible f
ties on t
where
way to
one s
accusa
to bu
other,
pened
T a g
bus-si
reactio
Palesti
d a r
Comn
shant'
type o
ior
plishes
except

is. Here,
and per-

a dialogue can be estab-

a truth
eived. .
impos-
or shan-
theDiag,
the only
answer
/K
hanty's
tions is
ild an-
as hap-
with
a r ' s
hanty, a
n to the
ne Soli-
ri ty
iy
nittee's
y. This
f behav-
accom- I .,
s nothing
for the - -

undesirable
congestion of

Illustration by Kevin Woodson

protest the University's refusal to give Nel-
son Mandela, the then-jailed anti-apartheid
leader, an honorary degree and to further
make the connection between the local anti-
racism struggle and the international anti-
apartheid movement. The third shanty was
built to symbolize Israeli state apartheid
policies against Palestinians.
Since their original construction in 1986,
the shanties have been vandalized over 100
times. They have been torn apart, turned
over, burned down by students and removed
from the Diag by the University. Although
they have been the target of such violence,
progressive students continue to rebuild them
as a constant reminder that the struggle
against racist violence continues.
The South African regime originally held
the futile belief that if they could move the
entire Black population, 32 million people,
out of South Africa and into the "home-
lands," so whites could then live in peace
and international criticism of the apartheid
system would end.
Regent Thomas Roach espouses the same
viewpoint- if the University could remove
the symbols of anti-racism activism on this
campus from the center of the University,
then he will curb the criticism, silencing the
opponents of the University's policies which
exclude people of color.
The shanties will not be removed from
the Diag by the University. The release of

Mandela does not end apartheid. We must
intensify public pressure on the U.S. gov-
ernment, corporations, and universities to
boycott South Africa economically and
culturally.
British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher,
coming to the rescue of white minority rule,
has lifted the ban on British investors in
South Africa. Bush hopes to end U.S. sanc-
tions in 3 months, so as not to lose the U.S.
share in South Africa's wealth. So much for
Bush's commitment to ending apartheid.
People will not invest where there is
unrest. De Klerk's hand was forced by the
defiance campaigns (for example through
labor and rent strikes, and commercial boy-
cotts) and the effectiveness of international
divestment. Roach and the other regents are
ruled by the same principle: remove the "un-
sightly mess" of the shanties, the symbols of
progressive student anti-racism activism, so
that alumni, etc., will give to the University.
Apartheid has not yet fallen. Israeli state-
sponsored violence against Palestinians is
escalating. The University has still to meet
the 20-year-old demand of national pro-
protional representation of students of color
at the University. Plans for an aesthetically
sterile Diag do not weaken the resolve of
anti-racistactivists on campus to continue to
symbolically squat on the property of a
university which has historically shown little
commitment to anti-racist policies.

Genocide is very real Clean air isn't a right,
We' hili a np~cit

To the Daily:
I applaud the Daily's editorial, "U.S.
should not forget the Armenian genocide"
(219/90).
Raphael Lemkin, a Polish Jew who
survived the Jewish Holocaust, coined the
term "genocide." Genocide is defined as
"The systematic extermination of a racial
or national group." Lemkin applied the
word to the horrendous atrocities the Turks
perpetrated when over 1.5 million Arme-
nians were killed in the years 1915-1917.
The National Archives in Washington,
D.C. contains thousands of daily reports
from U.S. diplomats in Turkey during the
years 1915-1917. These reports vividly re-
count the savage acts of violence the
Turks were committing against the Arme-
nians.
The archives of the British, Germans,
and Russians also contain documents sub-
stantiating the acts of violence the Turks
were committing. The U.S. Ambassador
to Turkey during this period, Henry Mor-
ganthau, fully detailed the extermination
of the Armenians in his memoirs.

IL s a iiuman1e1s iy
To the Daily:
In response to the "Pollution" editorial
of 2/19/90, I have two requests. First,
please continue to advocate a clean envi-
ronment for all. Second, please do not do
so in a manner inconsistent with our
goals.
You mainly argue that a clean envi-
ronment is an "inalienable right." That
position may hold some amount of truth,
but it is not a productive way of looking
at the situation. The fact of the matter is
that a clean environment is a necessity:
anytrights are inherent in and taken care of
by that statement. This means we should
do all we can to clean it up and keep it
clean, and not delude ourselves with empty
rhetoric about "inalienable rights."
In the past, President Bush himself has
been party to plenty of empty rhetoric
about the environment, and this should
make us wary. It should not, however,
make us thoughtlessly reject everything he
says. There are sound economic reasons
for adopting a pollution-permit approach

great deal of money and hassle, and can
produce equally good or better results than
the present system.
Presently, most pollution control is
done by one or both of two ways: the
government either imposes limits on the
amount of pollution allowed, or it requiresO
the use of specific pollution-reducing
technologies, such as stack scrubbers,
across the board. Unfortunately, although
this system does not conflict with the idea
of environment as a right, it is immensely
costly. It also does not work. If it did, this
debate would be unnecessary.
What this system ignores, and what the
writers of the editorial forget, is that all
pollution reduction is not equally costly.
Some firms can very cheaply reduce their
output of some types of pollution by sig-
nificant amounts. Others would have great
trouble doing so. By allowing those for
whom pollution reduction is very easy sell
their excess capacity to others who find it
difficult, one gives them a powerful incen-
tive to reduce a great deal.
The government can then spend less
time and money setting limits and mandat-