OPINION
Page 6
Friday, May 6, 1988
The Michigan Daily
I
Dishonorable degree
Unsigned editorials represent the majority views of the Daily's
Editorial Board. Cartoons and signed editorials do not
necessarily reflect the Daily's opinion.
A vitory for Bo
THE REGENTAL DECISION-TA-
give Bo Schembechler the dual
positions of Athletic Director and
head football coach creates a rare
opportunity to applaud the Uni-
versity administration. President
Robben Fleming offered Bo the
position he deserved, leaving the
University athletic department the
better off for it.
Bo has proven his integrity while
serving as the football coach. Al-
though he certainly has always
coached to win, Bo has never dis-
played the slimy traits of other col-
lege coaches, who ignore academics
and break the rules in order to save
their jobs. Bo has always played by
the rules, and has developed a great
program on his terms.
Schembechler has expressed his
intention to work towards the im-
provement of the women's athletic
department. He has proposed to
follow existing plans to embellish
the women's program by pursuing
better coaching, facilities, and
communication between the two
sub-departments. One can only
hope that B's stated intention to
continue the upgrading of women's
athletics at the University will be
followed through.
After Schembechler turned down
the AD job the first time it was of-
fered because he was told he would
have to stop coaching, the Univer-
sity alumni showed their over-
whelming support for Bo through
letter campaigns and calls to Flem-
ing and the Regents. Alumni sup-
port is crucial to the University as
it translates into financial contribu-
tions.
Giving Bo the job of AD creates
the potential for greatly increased
financial support, because of his
deity status in the alums' eyes. If
the administration had not conceded
and offered Bo the combined job of
AD and football coach, alumni
support stood at risk.
Bo will be assisted as Athletic
Director by Jack Weidenbach. Bo
will serve as a figure-head for the
department and Weidenbach will
handle the day-to-day operations,
with Bo having the final say. This
combination will accommodate
Bo's coaching and AD respon-
sibilities without either suffering.
Schembechler has already stated that
should a conflict arise between his
twin responsibilities, he would be a
coach first; thus, the inclusion of
Weidenbach is a wise choice that
will insure that department business
is not ignored during the football
season.
Bo takes over the position of AD
on July 1, hopefully representing
the continued strefigth of what is
already the strongest athletic de-
partment in the country. This move
is a natural promotion for someone
as integral to the program as Bo
Schembechler, and will only serve
to benefit University athletics.
THE UNIVERSITY administration's
choice of Jeane Kirkpatrick as an
honorary degree recipient is an af-
front to everyone in the University
community concerned about racism
and human rights.
Kirkpatrick,a former U. S. Am-
bassador to the United Nations, has
a long record of supporting oppres-
sive authoritarian regimes who co-
operate with the United States and
excusing or justifying their human
rights violations.
For example, in the years imme-
diately preceding Nicaragua's civil
war, more than 25,000 people were
killed by the Somoza regime.
Kirkpatrick's assessment of the
Somocistas was that they "featured
limited repression and limited op-
pression."
In 1980, when four American
nuns were raped and murdered by
Salvadoran guardsmen, Kirkpatrick
justified the incident: "The nuns
were not just nuns...they were po-
litical activists." To those who find
mass murder and other human
rights violations abhorrent even
when committed by regimes of
strategic import to the United
States, Kirkpatrick's receipt of an
honorary degree is a farce and an
embarrassment.
It is ironic that Kirkpatrick re-
ceived her honorary degree in law,
for she has so often supported,
condoned, or committed violations
of international law. For example,
in 1981 Kirkpatrick violated a U.N.
mandate to meet with white South
African General van der West-
huizen, chief of military intelli-
gence.
Her disregard of the mandate
caused the Congressional Black
Caucus to label Kirkpatrick's ac-
tions "a slap in the face of 26 mil-
lion Black Americans," and to call
for her resignation as ambassador.
Conferring an honorary degree on
Kirkpatrick displays complete in-
sensitivity on the part of the
administration to the struggle
against racism in this community.
If the administration is sincere in
its desire to fight racism on cam-
pus, then it should do so not only
when it conveniently coincides with
other policies, but in all areas of
University activity, including that
of selecting honorary degree recipi-
ents.
The administration cites Kirk-
patrick's "intertwining of scholar-
ship and political activism" as jus-
tification for giving her an honorary
degree. No matter how impressive
her credentials, however, her racist
attitudes and callous disregard of
human rights violations perpetrated
by "friendly" governments should
have stood as glaring obstacles to
her selection.
Also cited as a reason Kirkpatrick
deserved the degree is her
"commitment to the values of
democracy." The University admin-
istration should reexamine its defi-
nition of democratic values and
choose honorary degree recipients
who accurately represent the values
and concerns of the University
4
4
GRADUATION '88:
A polarized commencement
UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT Robben
Fleming's response to the disrup-
tive behavior at Saturday's com-
mencement is as inappropriate as
his response to discrimination on
campus. When students didn't be-
have as the administration saw fit,
Fleming slapped a code on them;
when graduates got drunk and wild
at commencement, he threatened to
cancel it (and replace the mass cer-
emony with smaller, more easily
controlled school-wide ones).
Fleming, instead of acknowledg-
ing the- reasons for the disruptive
behavior at graduation, has re-
sponded to last week's ceremony
with an iron fist. Just as in the code
issue, this reactionary approach
places too much of the blame on
the wrong end of the power ladder.
The fault for the disruption lies ev-
ery bit as much with the structure
of the ceremony -as with the stu-_
dents who attended.
It should be made clear that Sat-
urday's disruption was not related to
the protest against Jeane Kirk-
patrick receiving an honorary de-
gree. This protest was fully justi-
fied, as well as peaceful and non-
disruptive. The out-of-hand behav-
ior was mostly displayed by stu-
dents who were equally as uncon-
cerned with the protest as with the
speaker.
The University needs to recon-
sider the reason for having a com-
mencement ceremony in the first
place. The total lack of individual
recognition at the mass ceremony
has made commencement meaning-
less in the eyes of many undergrad-
uates. The only acknowledgement
for all the time, hard work and
money the students have put into
this University is "stand up, you
_graduate, sip } dwn," And a diploma
mailed to them sometime in July.
That kind of treatment isn't go- '
ing to make anyone feel valued by
an institution, and no one will
value an institution that doesn't
value them. It's the University, not
the students, that needs to change.
If the University wants alumni who
look back with pride on their alma
mater, they might consider showing
the students who will become those
alumni some consideration and re-
spect.
Basically, the administration pre-
sented an already rambunctious stu-
dent body with a ceremony that had
no chance to hold their interests. It
is inconceivable that an institution
as powerful as the University of
Michigan couldn't get a more
interesting speaker than Marshall
Shulman. Shulman was chosen
with absolutely no student input.
Although the students' behavior
may have been inappropriate, it was
not only foreseeable but virtually
ensured by the lack of student par-
ticipation. In fact, the small student
voice on the honorary degree com-
mittee is the only chance for stu-
dent input in the planning of the
ceremony.
The Ann Arbor News missed
the point in its' May 2 edition
when it condemned students for
disruptive behavior at a ceremony
they had no input into and which
did not meet their needs.
There should be a mechanism set
up to ensure student participation
beyond a small vote for honary de-
gree recipients. The Class of 1988's
rowdiness was a reflection of their
lack of participation and interest.
Future graduates would be more at-
tentive to and better enjoy a cere-
mony directed at them and issues
relevant to them on this important
day.