Page 4 - The Michigan Daily - Tuesday, February 27, 1990
Ch e 3i ign iait
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS
AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
420 Maynard Street
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109
ARTS 763 0379 PHOTO 764 0552
NEWS 764 0552 SPORTS 747 3336
OPINION 747 2814 WEEKEND 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.
r
You a t LoLEIA, W T -rNTof I
R) L IULL 4tO(
;f. /
v 6 4u
{W\~N QQU\
ht7G7TZ.
Economic sanctions
Pressure should continue until apartheid falls
TORM VAN lfJ;hL N OL / Wil 46
5 TO -p
t~
WHITE MINORITY RULE IN SOUTH
Africa, in the face of overwhelming
'international pressure, continues to
totter. Its racist foundations are slowly
but° surely being undermined by the
unrelenting struggle of the anti-
apartheid movement. But as the white
elite seeks to cling to its monopoly of
land-ownership, education and the
right to justice, it must comfort the
leadership of South Africa to reflect
*that it has at least one ally from the in-
ternational community: British Prime
Minister Margaret Thatcher.
k The overall economic impact of
Thatcher's unilateral lifting of restric-
tions on business investment and
tourism in South Africa may be rela-
tively small, but at least some white
hotel owners will reap immediate fi-
nancial benefit, and a few more busi-
nesses will be able to extort dispropor-
tionately large profits at the expense of
a'ti'ade union movement that continues
40 be violently repressed. Thatcher's
gesture offers no incentive for change;
'it legitimizes an economic infrastructure
stacked against the poor -- and black
- in favor of the white - and rich.
That Thatcher's stance contradicts
those taken by other leaders of the B ri-
tish Commonwealth, the leaders of the
European Community, and even the
U.S. Congress, is bad enough. That
she deliberately ignores the advice of
the African National Congress, which
has persistently requested that sanc-
tions continue, is unjustifiable.
Thatcher's belief that she under-
stands the situation better than Nelson
Mandela, a man who has witnessed the
constant degradation and humiliation of
his community, is arrogant in the ex-
-treme. That she is willing to side with.
an undemocratic and inhumane gov-
ernment against him is a simple refusal
of -Black South Africans' right to self-
determination.
Thatcher is, of course, more com-
fortable dealing with a powerful and
rich elite than a leader who represents
the interests of the poor and disem-
powered. The broad socialism of the
ANC, which seeks a wiping out of
white economic privilege and a fair
distribution of wealth, is an anathema
to a prime minister who has single-
handedly created a British underclass.
In the last decade of supposed in-
creased prosperity, the British rich
have indeed got richer; meanwhile, the
poorest 10 percent of the population
has seen its income fall by six percent.
Likewise, Thatcher's dislike of the
"armed struggle" of the ANC does not
come from any deep-rooted hatred of
violence; it stems from an absolute faith
in the rule of law and order, regardless
of how obscene the law, and how per-
versely it is enforced. As evidence of
the cold-blooded killings by the secu-
rity forces in Northern Ireland mounts,
and as more instances of police corrup-
tion and beatings in the mainland come
to light, Thatcher's faith in her own
forces appears dubious at best. To have
any faith at all in the integrity of the
South African police force is patently
ludicrous.
For years, anti-apartheid activists
have focused their attention on the re-
lease of Nelson Mandela. However,
his release does not remove the need
for sanctions; rather, it vindicates their
use in the past, and demands their con-
tinued use in the future. Sanctions
should only end with the election of a
government chosen by all the people of
South Africa. The recent changes have
been only a first step; sanctions should
persist until apartheid falls.
In the short term, as South African
leader F.W. de Klerk's illegitimate
government continues to rule, Thatch-
er's voluntary isolation may do her
little harm. In the long term, with the
inevitable outcome of majority rule, she
may have to pay a price for her political
insensitivity and diplomatic blunders.
BU,
By Jame
officials conspire to 'trash the bash .
as Marsh
In the early '70s, long before "just say
no" and the Reagan Revolution, White
Panther Party leader John Sinclair was
sentenced to 10 years in Jackson prison for
giving away two joints of marijuana. In
response, Ann Arbor's $5 pot law was
adopted as a city ordinance in 1971 by a
Democratic-controlled city council. It was
and is viewed as a law to protect students
from harassment - not many yuppies are
prosecuted under the $5 law.
Later, in 1973, a Republican-dominated
council overturned the ordinance. The next
year, the radical Human Rights Party de-'
signed a strategy to remove the issue from
any future city council interference. They
proposed an amendment to the city charter
which required a vote of the citizens of
Ann Arbor. After a massive voter registra-
tion effort and a huge student turnout, the
amendment passed.
In 1983, another Republican-dominated
council led a new fight against the pot law
and issued a referendum on the $5 fine.
Another heavy turnout on election day re-
tained the law with 61 percent of the vot-
ers against the repeal.
In June, 1989, Republican mayor Ger-
ald Jernigan decided that it was again time
to reconsider the $5 pot law. He proposed
a change, not a repeal, of the 1974 ordi-
nance. The Republicans fear the voter
backlash, as expressed in lost Republican
seats on council, that past pot law referen-
Marsh is a third-year Law student and
the Democrat/Green Party candidate for
Ann Arbor City Council in the Fourth
Ward.
dums have produced. Instead, the current
proposal to change the pot law is touted as
a mere "inflationary" adjustment, a sign of
changing times, a message to our young
people.
Never mind that youth under 18 are
prosecuted under the harsher state law and
sent to juvenile court where the punish-
ment, if any, is the sole discretion of the
judge. Never mind that marijuana and all
activity" is known to have taken place at
previous bashes. The real reason the per-
mit was revoked is because reactionaries
on city council, along with food barons
and "just say no" fanatics, have collabo-
rated with University officials, including
President Duderstadt, to trash the bash.
Why? Heavy student turnout for this
year's April election will hurt Republi-
cans, defeat the new "improved" pot law.
9
The rally to save the $5 fine will still be held on the
Diag April 1. The Chinese students didn't need a
permit for Tiananmen Square and we don't need a
permit for the Diag.
drug use has been dropping for the past 10
years. Never mind that alcohol, as the
mayor himself admits, is the most abused
drug in Ann Arbor. Never mind that crack
presents the most serious controlled sub-
stance problem in Washtenaw county.
Never mind that pot law is not a drug law
at all, but a free speech measure, created to
prevent harsh government treatment of
dissenters, protestors, and radicals.
Several days ago, University official
Frank Cianciola, after consulting with
"colleagues," revoked the speaking permit
which was issued last semester to the stu-
dent group organizing this April's "Rally
to Save the Five Dollar Fine." The rally,
which is scheduled for Sunday April 1, is
a political forum which is being held on
the same day as the traditional "hash
bash." I and many other political leaders
were planning on speaking.
The alleged reason that the University
cancelled the permit is because "criminal
and tarnish the University's reputation. No
rally, no visibility, no turnout. Everyone
wins - except the students.
Once again, the pot law is being used
to stifle student dissent, control free
speech, and assert the status quo. This
time the rhetoric is anti-drug. Twenty
years ago it was anti-radical. Both are the
same, both are dangerous, and both hurt
students. Students, however, still have a
chance to preserve their right to assemble
and assert their voice. Voter registration
does not close until Friday. You still have
the chance to be heard on election day.
Register today.
The rally to save the $5 fine will still
be held on the Diag April 1. The Chinese
students didn't need a permit for Tianan-
men Square and we don't need a permit for
the Diag. Hopefully democracy will pre-
vail. If not, we can all cast our votes from
the Ann Arbor city jail on Election Day.
Greens stress more
than environment
F6 the Daily:
We of the Huron Valley Greens NN
T4eased to see your article on Feb. 6
. porting that the local branch of the Mir
*gan Green Party has unanimously endo
4be.candidacies of James Marsh and Val
'Ackerman for positions on the Ann Ai
City: Council. We would, however, lik
cxn'ect two factual inaccuracies contai
inghat article.
Nost important is the misrepresei
too of the Greens as being "a party
stijsses environmental issues." It is
Concerne
B$ Elizabeth Anderson,
DOn Coleman, and
,ohn Vandermeer
{ -On Nov. 20, 1989, James Dud-
; erstadt sent a letter to the Acting
:R2 tor of the University of Central
A ierica in El Salvador partly at the
Suggestion of Sociology Professor
Jetfrey Paige and other members of
EZ;cerned Faculty. This message
:expressed "heartfelt sympathy" with
;;tl acting Rector and "outrage" at
- murders that had recently oc-
'-curred on the San Salvador campus.
President Duderstadt urged the gov-
ernment of El Salvador to punish
those responsible and to "restore the
university autonomy and academic
freedom that has been so grievously
damaged."
The Duderstadt letter, while not
''asmwel-nnhliied ac it -,hnnid have.
tainly true that we Greens see ecological
issues as being extremely important.
However, we also see them as being
bound inextricably with other political,
economic, and social concerns, so that to
characterize us as simply an environmental
party would be inaccurate.
There is no such thing as a "typical
Green." We reflect diverse backgrounds and
interests. What unifies us, however, is a
joint belief in certain basic ideals, as
summarized in our Ten Key Values, which
we believe can form the foundation for a
just and sustainable society. These in-
clude: grassroots democracy, personal and
social responsibility, nonviolence, postpa-
triarchical values, community-based eco-
nomics, decentralization, respect for diver-
sity, global responsibility, and future fo-
cus/sustainability, as well as ecological
wisdom.
It should also be stated for the record
that Marsh and Ackerman were both en-
dorsed by the local chapter of the Green
Party, not by the Huron Valley Greens,
which is a separate organization.
Henry E. Kandrup
member of the
Huron Valley Greens
Why criticize Engler?
To The Daily:
Just when you thought it was safe to
read the Opinion page, it is struck by huge
amounts of silliness and prints "The
wrong man" (2/21/90).
The jist of the article, that the Daily
editorial board thinks Republican guberna-
torial candidate John Engler is the wrong
person for the job, is not surprising, as he
is Republican. But their reasons for this
condemnation are quite amusing.
The first reason given is that he is bor-
ing and uninspiring. Geez, a politician
who is boring and uninspiring? That's
odd. There aren't very many of those. Just
because a man (or a woman) is boring
does not mean that they will not make a
good politician.
This brings us to the Daily's second
point, that Engler's campaign slogan "the
right man for the job" is sexist. Folks,
Engler is a man. It'd be kind of silly to
call Lana Pollack sexist if she said that
she was the "right woman for the job."
Engler is a man, Pollack is a woman.
He shouldn't have to say "man or woman"
for the job because he is referring to him-
self, a man. Likewise, Lana Pollack
shouldn't have to say "woman or man" if "
she is referring to herself, a woman.
Come on Daily, if you can't think of
any good reasons, make some up like the
old editors did with Pursell. Don't resort
to silliness.
Brian Jendryka
LSA Sophomore
d Faculty to discuss the wider role of universities
tonomy in El Salvador. Neverthe-
less, we believe that a question re-
mains regarding the responsibility
of the University community.
Should it be limited to urging the
restoration of "university auton-
omy" and "academic freedom"?
The situation in El Salvador is
especially well-known by now.
Decades of U.S.-supported military
dictatorships have suppressed all at-
tempts at peaceful reform, leading
to an armed rebellion that has
grown at a steady pace for the last
10 years. "Demonstration elec-
tions," highly suspect as true
democratic exercises, have supplied
a superficial facade of civilian con-
trol over what most analysts con-
U.S. withdrew its multi-million
dollar political, military and eco-
nomic support.
Just how isolated from the "real
world" of blood, guts, and human
suffering produced by mistaken
U.S. foreign policies should our
university be? Are we really so
much "above the fray" that a letter
of condolence is an adequate re-
sponse to a nationwide slaughter
and mayhem that is in large part
"made in the USA"?
On Wednesday, Feb. 28, at 8
p.m. in the Kuenzel Room of the
Michigan Union, Concerned Fac-
ulty will sponsor a public forum
called "Faculty Speak Out on Cen-
tral America." At that time mem-
man suffering.
During the Vietnam War, critics
frequently pointed out and docu-
mented that university "autonomy"
was largely a myth serving to mask
the institution's intimate intercon-
nections with the national war ma-
chine. We do not see that such in-
terconnections have significantly
waned.
At its most subtle level, the
University trains the campus popu-
lation to develop skills and values,
and to deploy technology and re-
sources, in ways that make Central
American wars possible. More bla-
tantly, the university still houses a
school for military officers
(ROTC), helping to pave the way
for current and future interventions,
and a number of faculty shuttle be-
sity "independence" serves to dis-
guise its relationship to the U.S.
government, and thus to miseducate
and disempower people who might
otherwise do something to change
the violent course of history and
humanize the planet..
On the other hand, we do recog-
nize that the University is not
monolithic. While the preponder-
ance of the academic empire and
technological resources are aimed at
reproducing the status quo, there
has evolved over the decades some
"liberated space" in the interstices
of the institution.
A small number of programs
and activities run counter to the
overall institutional thrust of silent
partisanship on the side of the rul-
ing elites. Personal collaborations
these efforts, and we presume Presi-
dent Duderstadt does, too.
Yet these very same faculty
and students are the ones who vig-
orously voice objections to U.S.
policy in the region. Their concerns
are many. For example: the current
congressional bipartisan support to
persevere in the destruction and
destabilization of Nicaraguan soci-
ety; the possibility of the Panama
invasion serving as a trial run for
additional military adventures; the
unconscionable U.S. policy of sup-
port for the Death Squad govern-
ment of El Salvador, conditional
only on minimal cosmetic reforms.
Should such issues be a matter
of concern for only individual fac-
ulty and students, or do they require
4
At its most subtle level, the University
trains the namnu nnniulatinn tn deveInn