Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / May 8, 1952, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
PAGE 2 , - THE DAILY TAftHEEL. THURSDAY. MAY 8. 1952 The official student publication of the Publications Board of the Univer sity of North Carolina. Chapel Hill, where it is published daily, except Mon day, examination and vacation periods, and during the olficial summer terms Entered as second class matter at the post otlire in Chapel Ilill. N. C, under the act" of March 3. 1379 Subscription rates: mailed $4 per year. 1.50 per quarter; delivered, (S and $2.25 per quarter. : : : li Editor . Managing Editor ,, , , , , Business Manager -- - ,- Sports Editor ,, - News Editor. Society Editor Assoc. Eel,,., , Adv. Mr... Jody Levey ...Deenie Schoeppe .Sue Burress .Wallace Pridgen News Stuff Grady Elmore. Bob. Slough. John Jamison, Angeles Russos, Wood Smethurst. Janie Bugg, Ruth Ilincks, Wanda Philpott, Sandy Smith. Al Perry, Peggy Jean Goode, Jerry Reece. K I H II I II IU .... I I I I I Sports Staff Ed Starnes, Tom Peacock. Martin Jordan, Vardy Buckalew. Stench, Smear, And McCarthy Senator Joe McCarthy recently spoke at Princeton Uni versity. One of the students asked the Senator if he would repeat his communist charges against UN delegate Philip Jessup from the immunity-free podium. Whereupon several indignant ladies in the audience told the students they were "intellectually twisted." Later on in the evening two sophomores expressed skep ticism regarding the Senator's virtues and sincerity. "Some neighboring listeners" reports the Daily Prince tonian, "de manded that the two students be ejected from the meeting. Others proclaimed 'Let the commies talk, let the commies talk." "At this stage," continues the Princetonian, "a little man in a blue suit appeared and declared that he heartily wished that the two sophomores be sent to Korea and be brought back in a basket. The suggestion met with no objection from near by spectators." The Daily Tar Heel feels that the actions of Senator Mc Carthy present a clear and present threat to American de mocracy equal in potence to a Soviet invasion of Long Is land. We do not, however, confine our attack against the Senator to the cliche charges of "bigot," "character assassin " "reminiscent of Nazi Germany," "neurotic," and "pathologi cal," which have been bandied about by liberal groups since McCarthy first began to exercise his immunity. The danger of McCarthyism strikes much deeper into American politi cal thinking than the mere defamation of several outstand ing national figures. The Senator from Wisconsin is against communism. He apparently has chosen to implement his political convictions by assaulting those Americans whose .opinions, in the judg ment of the Senator, stray uncomfortably close to the com munist "line" prefabricated in Moscow. ' To appreciate the peril to our internal well-being we must analyse the stereotyped tactics of the communist parties which have been repeated effectively on every continent. First, the followers oi the Kremlin go into a community and spot out all the social and economic ills. (Nobody can say that any community in the world is entirely free from some social problems.) Then the Marxists rave, rant, and harp on these injustices longer and louder than anybody else. They seek, not to improve conditions, but merely to agitate. Here McCarthyism asserts itself. Other citizens who may be sin cerely desirous of improving couraged from expressing themselves for fear of labelled a "commie." For example, do you believe in peace, equality of oppor tunity, and slum clearance? Are you against trust combines, jynchings, and sub-human living conditions in colonial coun tries? Would you care to have your name attached to an editorial advocating the first three and disavowing the lat ter? If so, you .may be interested in knowing that , other Americans have been indelibly stamped with the crimson curse for stating their unfeigned views along the above lines. McCarthy's influence has reached serious proportions. Re publican candidates for the ' presidency are extremely reti cent to disclaim the controversial Senator. Men like Jessup, Lattimore, and Tydings know that veracity plays a minor role in the drama of McCarthyism. All the perfumes of truth and sincerity can never obliterate the stench of a McCarthy smearv .. '.. V-" ' - - - . " ' - . Consequently, a large segment of the American population (anti-communist, pro-righteousness) remains silent. It is in finitely, more comfortable to sit still. And in the eyes of the world the communists seem to have wen a monopoly ; on progressive reform. : j Another element, often overlooked by the anti-McCarthy-jues,is the possibility that if and when a genuine communist actually becomes entrenched high in our government, he can dismiss the charges against himself as "groundless McCarthy ism! -. . We applaud the Senators expressed intentions to uproot tiiose elements which threaten our nations security. We em- v however, that ths ; watchdog who barks at every ixenlnf the household if , , , , - ,,..,,. ,. , ., -BARRY PARBER ROLFE NEllX JIM SCHENCK J3IFF ROBERTS Lit Ed. Joe Raff -F. W. White JVatl. Adv. Mgr. Sub.Mgr .Carolyn Reichard ... Donald Hogg arc. Mgr. unsavory conditions are dis being m perpetual coniusicn, is vx by John Taylor- Reviews In an open discussion between playwright and audience after the first performance of "Liberty Flats," the Playmakers ffcial full-length experimental pro duction of the year, Gene Graves, the author of the play, stated that the plot was sup posed to have revolved around the attempts of Doug Barnes to break free from his family and entire environment. Whatever the playwright's intention, the play centered around not Doug, the son, but the desire of Luke, . the father, to leave Rose, the mother, in favor of a more desirable wo man. This faulty emphasis was due equally to the writing and to the performance of Dick Snavely, who played Doug, but we shall discuss "the latter later. The plot, as it appeared to the audience, or at least one mem ber of it, was an old, but very powerful one one calling for strong characterizations. In a number of exceedingly effective scenes, Graves made living peo ple out of his characters, but he did not sustain this high level throughout the rest of the play. It was at this point that the cast took over and made the show an arresting theatrical ex perience. " . ; Frances Hogan has always ; been, in my opinion, a good act ress. But as Rose; the distraught, . " pathetic mother, she far sur passed herself. Seldom hav I " seen a performance here that was as complete, minute : in , every detail, and affecting as was her's. With each tugging at her sloppy dresses, with each bewildered facial expression, she brought sympathy and com plete understanding of the character in a performance that I shall long remember. Not far behind Mrs. Hogan was Bill Trotman as Luke, the father. As a man who has lived twenty-five years with a woman whom he can't respect, he gave such a sincere and powerful performance, that he turned the audience's natural antagonism to the character into compassion. Dick Snavely's portrayal of the , son, on the other hand, was one of the weak spots of the even ing. It was not a bad perfor mance, for it was obviously an earnest one, but he failed to arouse the symathy that this character must provoke. Good in supporting roles were Charlotte Davis, Don Treat, - Frances O'Neal, Hansford Rowe, Harold England, and Ruth Boyce. by Joe Riff . Sometimes column material is difficult .to flind, but nearly always wheri -those times come I turn ; to "the pile , ct college newspapers: tin The Daily Tar Heel office and try tq seek;Out some interesting stories. ' Usually .there :is a ?. scandal -'somewhere $r?a humorous anec; : dote to be taken from these col lege papers. This made me think (a rare cirtrurnstance, indeed) about what other columnists must do when they need a eclurnn and turn to the exchange department for their sources. - ; I 'locked over 7a $sr ; copies" cf The Daily Tar Heel and right ' Express- Yourself fct:, - ; v v ""' : ; r- - Editor: . You must have been 'scraping the residue out of the garage cans for your May 6 issue of The Daily Tar Heel. I am referring to the three coliimn spread on page five by the Human Betterment League of North Carolina. - WHY IS IT NEEDED? In the first paragraph of the advertisement, the League ad mits that some children born to mental defectives may posess normal minds. If this is so, who is to judge whether a woman shall be denied the right to give birth to these normal children even though she may run the risk of producing mentally de fective ones? Even in the case of mental defectives, Is there such a simple solution to the problem as sterilization? Is it legitimate to sterilize a person just because he has become a public expense? It is an accepted fact that a residual portion of the population will never be able to support themselves fi nancially. What is to prevent state governments from enacting legislation to reduce the wel fare expenses by sterilizing ail of those unfortunate persons who will always be dependent upon public funds? ; : WHERE IS IT LEGAL? ; The League states that all progressive states provide for the sterilization at state expense of : persons suffering from in sanity or, feeblemindedness vfhich may be inherited by their cfiildren. Perhaps progressive is used too loosely by some peo ple! WHO MAKES THE DECI SION? Usually a court of law will not convict a person of a crime . if it is found that he is insane.: of feebleminded. Why? I sup pose that he is presumed to be unable to know right from wrong. How then is a feeble minded person capable of mak ing such an important decision as to whether or not he lis to be sterilized for the good of the human race? It seems that he is only capable of making a de cision by just influence of well meaning physicians and social workers who have no concept of the moral, law involved. To say that a person has the right to make a decision is not even . a half truth. It means that he has merely the right to give his consent. How can the League expect to insult the intelligence of anyone, who has given thought to the subject jof sterilization? Perhaps many persons do not Raff- Raff columnist on The Daily Nebras kan or a Minnesota Daily re porter. " On the front page of our cam pus journal a -couple of days ago was the following streamer; ,500 in - Valuables Stolen." This , of course caught every reader's eye.tbut if he had let his peepers roam a little further south, on the same page he would have seen this insigni ficant headline: --Poll Shows ; Student OK Honor System." Right s away the - hunting : col umnist has a stcry. ,And if he wants mere; all he has to do isfLip to the sports psg cf the by agree with my philosophy b that does not prove hem ijght or me wrong. It seems to me that any news paper which accepts such ad vertising most certainly endorses such a philosophy unless it gives both sides of the story in order that both sides will have the opportunity to decide for them selves what is right, what is legal, and what is good for everyone. . In conclusion it appears that such a society as the Human Betterment League of North Carolina representing organized sterilization does not permit the expression of a minority opinion. The League may contend that the manner in which they ac complish .their goal does not openly transgress democratic principles. Unfortunately, this restriction of minority opinion inhibits considered discussion and the development of sound progressive thought. Hence; or ganized sterilization procedures are notoriously reactionary. James E. Msaion Acceptance of advertising of this nature does not necessarily constitute an endorsement. ED. Editor: I am content with the literary situation on campus except for one thing there is no humor magazine. I, along with many others, should like to see the Tarnation started again. . A majority of the students with whom I have discussed the matter agree with me. They, think that since nearly all col leges with such a wide curri culum as Carolina's have some sort! of humor publication, we should have a revival of the Tar natlpn. ' t - - , But a; few believe that the 'cost' would be too great for "the budget. Nevertheless, -with ade quate advertising, increased pub lications fees, and an appropria tion, from the $15,000 book .ex change profits, I;feel sure that the Tarnation could thrive once more. Certainly it cannot fce said that the field. of humor writing is getting, fair consideration on campus. Another Tarnation, per haps better than before, would give huraorous literature its due place at Carolina and would be enjoyed and appreciated by most students. Let's reincarnate the Tarna tion and not label it a lead duck before the. first copy ap- pears. , . t ; v, ; , r Husn.ShuH "Betty Hurls A No-Hitter ' As Zetes Win.", At first glance tfae Texas oj New. Jersey reporter might think. that the Zetes car ried on quite an extensive pledge mg program last f alL ?rom a later issue of The Daily Tar Heel you may remem ber seeing , tlie heavy black prinWDi To Debate Polygamy Bill Tonight'1 and right below that article followed the rather suggestive -Wind Quintet Will Perform Tonight. m If you want to go back to older issues there must be loads of story origins. Perhaps other col umnists have done this and gotten just as much fun cut of it as I did. Anyvray it's fun mak JfSajsme cut cf cacthcx-man
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
May 8, 1952, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75