PAGE 2, THE COUGAR CRY, FEBRUARY 3, 1969
EDITORIAL
EDITOR’S NOTE:
Democracy or Conformity?
And Then You Ask Why...
This week’s editoral isbyNithi
Klinkosum, one of WCC’s most
distinguished h i s t o r y instruc
tors. It was originally published
in the Winston-Salem Journal
and Sentinel.
Democracy or Conformity?
Having been living in America
for a decade and a half, both as
a student and as a teacher, I
have become “Americanized* in
many respects. Perhaps the en
joyment of watching the great
American sport, football, is one
such fact. Secondly, the idea
of individualism which has been
passed on to me by the educa
tional system of this country is
another.
I am sure that millions of Am
ericans witnessed the 1969 Super
Bowl game this past Sunday; and
many of them may also have
witnessed the half time activi
ties, “America Thanks.” Ameri
ca has a lot to be thankful for...
her freedom, her role in world
affairs, and above all, her dem
ocracy. The halftime theme
moved me to write to you con
cerning particularly the freedom
of the minority groups of this
nation, be those groups black,
red, or yellow. This freedom I
refer to concerns also the right
of individuals to worship as they
believe.
Does a minority really have
the right to worship in this coun
try? Constitutionally, I would say
«yes.» But in practice, how many
really have to suffer and endure
the indirect actions of the so-
called democratic spirit of the
established institution in this
country? How many citizens who
belong to the minority ethnic
backgrounds are discriminated
against not because of their in
abilities to perform but because
of their color and beliefs. Many
deeds are done in the name of
the Prince of Peace; also many
injustices are done against those
who do not belong to His estab
lished church. Perhaps the med
ieval crusaders were kinder than
the present day Sunday Christ
ians in that they faced their en
emies face to face; the twentie
th century Crusaders attack the
believers of other faiths by means
of economic pressure.
I can truthfully speak by virtue
of my own raw experience with
the so-called soldiers of Christ.
I was asked of my belief and
subsequently dismissed from a
former teaching position. Many
readers by now think that I be
long to the current “flower gene
ration.” This conception is much
to the contrary. I was born and
reared with the World War II
generation in Thailand—a land
that saw the coming of both
friends and enemies; a land in
which 85-90 per cent of the pop
ulation are Buddhists (a religion
that talked of peace and love
five hundred years before the
coming of Christ!); a land that
welcomes missionaries of all
faiths to her country and to her
temples to speak of peace and
love; a land that teaches her
sons and daughters the love of
freedom, self-respect, and the
respect for others and their be
liefs. I had heard of George
Washington, Thomas Jefferson,
Benjamin Franklin, and the Statue
of Liberty long before I came to
know America personally. I had
(Continued On Page Three)
From the beginning of time, in
any given society, there have
been the “haves* and the “have-
nots”. That is to say, that some
people, either by birth or other
means, have more wealth, power,
a higher position, or in some
other way have a hold over other
classes of people in the society.
This hold or control can be lit
eral, as military control or even
outright ownership, or it can be
control by prejudice and discri
mination, the more cruel of the
two.
For purposes of this article,
the Negro in America will be used
as the prime example to illustrate
the thesis. The Negro has been
controlled in both of the afore
mentioned ways by the white
society in America. At first,
in the colonial days, the American
Negro was a slave, mere chattel
to be bought or sold much as a
cow or horse. His only purpose
in being alive, according to the
white man, was to work on his
plantations. A slave could not
legally marry, own property,
vote, testify in a court, or move
about without permission. Also,
he was not permitted to learn to
read and write. The white master
had control over his Negro slaves
to the point of life and death.
With the Emancipation Procla
mation of 1862, Abraham Lincoln
allowed the Negro to gain his
freedom, freedom not to be free,
that is. A paradox? Yes, but most
definitely true. While the white
man no longer had the literal
life over death control over the
Negro as master to slave, he
still had economic anddiscrima-
natory privileges which were,
in many ways, the worst of the
two. The Negro found himself
uneducated and bewildered in a
world full of people ready to rape
his wife and take his money,
ready to curse his color and
steal his land, and also ready to
deny his rights that are guaran
teed to all men.
After the slaves were freed,
the whites still claimed superio
rity. There was still the threat
of physical violence if the Negro
asserted himself too much, and
many “legal” steps were taken to
keep the Negro in his place. One
of the larger problems created
by the freeing of slaves was their
vote. The white establishment
knew that by the laws of the day,
which were that any free man
could vote the Negro could vote
and make his presence known. So
they began passing “grandfather
laws” in many Southern states to
stop the Negro vote. These laws
stated that only persons whose
grandfathers had been allowed
to vote could vote now. The newly
freed slaves’ grandfathers could
not, of course, have voted pre-
vioucly because they were slaves.
Therefore, the Negro could not
vote and this major tool to gaining
equality was lost. Also, the whites
came up with an “equal but sep
arate” philosophy in dealing with
Negros, This meant separate
housing, separate buses, trains,
rest rooms, laundries, churches,
even separate Coke machines.
This doctrine was even condoned
by the Supreme Court for a
time.
In more recent years, many
forward strides have been taken
by the American Negro. The
oretically, he is just as free and
equal as any man. He can go to
the school of his choice, on
paper; and in general, he is no
longer a second class citizen,
also on paper. However, in prac
tice, the converse is most often
true. The Negro is ofter forced
to go to sub-standard schools,
use out-dated books discarded
by white schools, he cannot live
in certain sections of town, and
his color still seems to deter
mine his employment. An ex
ample of the latter is that the
ratio of master’s and doctorate
degrees among Negro school
teachers and educators is dis
proportionately high, the reason
for this simply being that they
know they must have a superior
education and training to get a
job. They also know that if they
are lucky enough to go to college
that they must go as far as
possible, because they further
realize that in order to be con
sidered equal, they must actually
be superior.
There are many people who try
to nationalize the plight of the
American Negro by saying that
he will not help himself, that,
if given opportunities, he will
just let them go without even
trying to take advantage of them.
These people are just taking the
example of a minority of
the Negro population and are also
forgetting that there are many
times more “poor white” wel
fare breeders than Negro, and
are trying to sweep the whole
situation under the proverbial
“rug” of indifference.
Why should the American
Negro be expected to take second
best and like it. Why should he
wait on the white man to come to
his rescue? If he waits until the
white man “allows” him equality,
the Negro will be the second
class citizenry another three
hundred years. Why? The white
man stands to lose if the Negro
is equal. Therefore, regardless
(Coniinued On Page Three)
THE VOICE OF WILKES COMMUNITY COLLEGE
Wilkesboro, North Carolina
Editor Bob Lackey
Assistant Editor Floyd Rogers
News Editor Ken Welborn
Sports Editor Jim BUIings
Circulation and Business Manager Jack Bryan
Columnist Floyd Rogers
Photographer Jack Bryan
Cartoonistf Carol Key
Typists Shelby Hampton, Barbara Tatum, Linda Poe
Staff Margaret Poole, Jerry Pardue, Montie Hamby
Advisor Mr. D. S. Mayes