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.