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