Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / March 2, 1965, 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
Pge 2 Tuesday, March" 2, 1965 DTE Editorial Page 1 ??5 - t J.T T" T- - fT Tf 1 1 ?.t jj upinwns oj ine uauy-iar neei are expressed in ns eanormis. ueviers ami columns, covering a ivide range of views, reflect the personal opinions of if their authors. Look, Listen And Consider In the past, it has been quite accept able for students to look at Student Gov ernment and the people therein and take it all with a grain of salt. The SG budget was small, its aims smaller and the quality minute. But today it is different The "budget is huge some $170,000 will be handled next year. Its prestige is bigger the students in charge today are the leaders of tomorrow, the Terry Sanfords, the Bert Bennetts, the Joel Fleishmans. And the aims of Student Government . have become the aims of the University. It has been exhibited in the responsible opposition to the Speaker Ban Law, the well-organized plans to improve condi tions in our Residence Halls and the work to modify the student judiciary. These are just a few there are many others, and each project is undertaken with the thought that the student at this University must be the ultimate beneficiary. Tonight the spring elections officially start with the first meetings in Residence Halls. In three weeks the student body wrill go to the polls to choose its new leaders, and during this time the can didates will be doing everything possible to get to each and every student and appeal for his vote. But there is a question yet to be arK swefed will the students take advant age of this opportunity and do everything possible to make their vote a well-considered one? . As candidates last year, we spoke at almost every meeting in the Residence Halls. We spoke at sororities and fra ternities, and we pounded on doors. In most areas, the people heard us out and gave our appeals consideration. But it is impossible for a candidate to see everyone he will be lucky to con tact 50 per cent of the voters. Some ef fort must be made by the electorate. In the average Residence Hall meeting last year, the best turnout was composed of no more than 20 per cent of the living unit. Even in halls which have a long history of interest in Student Govern ment, there was a great deal of apathy. Hie Presidential candidates noticed the same thing, as did all other aspirants to office. A pity: Certainly, as it leaves the door wide-open for an inferior candidate to gain office. Occasionally it happens, and it is the students who suffer. We urge the Student Body to look hard at the people who seek their vote- Talk to both sides, and listen to each with an open mind. If there is no opportunity to hear the candidates, both parties have headquarters in Davie Hall, and some one will usually be present to give the pitch. Personalities alone should not deter mine this election, and during the next three weeks the students of this Univer sity will have a chance to delve deeper into the issues and the candidates. We urge you to vote but make sure your vote has been considered, and con sidered wisely. How Much Longer Will We Wait? How much longer will we continue to tolerate the awful toll of death and injury on North Carolina's streets arid high-wavs? w During the past weekend alone, 21 people, including a student at this Uni versity, died in traffic mishaps within the state's boundaries. Twenty-one as a number, not terribly impressive; but in terms of families broken and human resources wasted, a shocking and apal ling figure indeed. Twenty-one people ' one every two and a half hours, a deva stating rate. Again, how much longer will we wait . before taking action to end this depres sing destruction? The results of a poll concerning pro posed highway legislation taken recently by the North Carolina State Motor Club provide a partial answer to this question. Almost 60 per cent of those questioned said they favored compulsory mechanical inspection of motor vehicles by state li licensed, bonded garages, for a $1 fee. More than 70 per cent backed expan sion of the State Highway Patrol by 150 men. An even 90 per cent supported legis lation to control billboards on North Ca rolina's interstate highways. By refusing to pass such a law, the state automatically forfeits Federal aid annually. More than 80 per cent favor appropria tions to provide driver training in North Carolina high schools. With such overwhelming potential sup port for highway safety legislation pres ent in the state, any question about when North Carolina should take action to end the slaughter on our streets has only one answer. Now. The Peace Corps Comes To UNC Last night's discussion on the Peace Corps in Howell Hall marked the fourth anniversary of that program. It was March 1, 1961 when, after a long struggle in Congress, the late Presi dent Kennedy signed the bill establishing the Peace Corps into law. Since then, it has changed from a hotly contested polit ical issue into something just as sacred and American as God, mother and the family dog. This week is Peace Corps week at UNC A team of five officials and return volun- Wq Bailg ar If M 72 Years of Editorial Freedom The Daily Tar Heel is the official news publi cation of the University of North Carolina and is pefclished by students daily except Mondays, examination periods and vacations. Fred Seely, Hugh Stevens, co-editors; Mike Yopp, Ernie McCrary, managing editors; Pete Wales, associate editor; Larry Tarle ton, sports editor; Fred Thomas, night editor; Mary Ellison Strother, wire edi tor; John Greenbacker, Kerry Sipe, Alan Banov, staff writers; Pete Gammons, asst. sparts editor, Perry McCarty, Pete Cross, Bill Lee, Tom Haney, sports, writers; Jock Lauterer, photographer, Chip Barnard, cartoonist; Jack Harrington, bus. mgr.; Betsy Gray, asst. bus. mgr.; Woody Sobel, ad. mgr.; Jim Peddicord, asst. ad. mgr.; "Tom Clark, subscription mgr.; John Evans, circulation mgr.; Dick Baddour, Stuart Ficklen, Jim Potter, salesmen.' Second Class postage paid at the post office in Chapel Hill, N. C. Subscription rates: $4.50 per semester; $8 per year. Printed by the Chapel Kill Publishing Co., Inc. The Associated Press is entitled exclusively to the use for republica tion of all local news printed in this newspaper as well as all AP news dispatches. I i ii teers are manning booths in Lenoir Hall and Y-Court to distribute information and answer questions of anyone interested in volunteering. In addition, the team is speaking at assorted classes and living units. Tonight at 8 p.m. they will show a movie in Car roll Hall on work in the Peace Corps. UNC has a solid tradition of support for the Peace Corps. Thirty UNC students have been overseas, 10 of them have com pleted their work. UNC has sponsored several training groups here as well. Also, Chancellor Paul F. Sharp's oldest son is presently serving in Colombia with the Corps- The Peace Corps has come to be recog nized as one of the most effective and far-reaching foreign policy measure we have. More importantly, it provides a chance for Americans to participate in creating a national image abroad. This is far more meaningful than pouring tax money into loan funds, and far closer to a true representation of the spirit of this country. We hope that Carolina students will take full advantage of this week's oppor tunity by attending the movie and other discussion groups. Whether or not you are interested in actually joining the Peace Corps, this is an excellent oppor tunity to find out more about it and to get candid opinions from those who have first-hand experience. We expect that the Peace Corps will continue its phenomenal growth and suc cesses, and we hope UNC students will continue to help mold this fine American tradition. PETE WALES Music To Our Ears A ;' ' .A-" ; - i . i V '- ' ' - i 'I :: ' ' - - :. ' - ' ' , v ' - 1 . - .A mmmmm ::it.rt: t ' ' v ' ' S ' '''X ' ' fj rrr .; ' ' ' ' :-x-:-aj:'-:':-KW' Letters To The Editors Clauses Gardner And Love GMAB Holding Back On Tickets Editors, The Tar Heel: Wishing to obtain choice seats for the Miriam Makeba perfor mance, I arrived at Graham Memorial at a time sufficiently early so as to be the fourth member of the ticket line. To my dismay and bewilderment all of the aisle tickets through row "k had vanished. 4 May I ask the following ques tions? To whom were these tic kets given? Did those who re ceived these tickets have to pay for them? Is each member of the Graham Memorial Activi ties Board alloted a fixed num ber of tickets?. If so, how many? Jack Webb 303 Connor Lipsitz Letter Called Illogical Editors, The Tar Heel, In the Wednesday edition of the DTH there appeared a let ter by Mr. Lewis Lipsitz con cerning the criteria upon which fraternities determine their membership. Mr. Lipsitz's let ter is characterized by a lack of logic which is surpassed on ly by his obvious lack of un derstanding of what a fraternity is. The first part of Mr. Lipsitz's letter is devoted to belaboring a rather obvious point that there are different types of dis crimination. He draws l a bril liant analogy in attempting to make his point applicable to fraternities. He uses the exam ple of the different types of co ercion which can properly be used by a democratic govern ment. However, as a fraternity is hardly comparable to a pub lic government, much less a de- mocratic one, Mr. Lipsitz has succeeded in presenting a bril liantly irrelevant and ridicu lous analogy. - Mr. Lipsitz meets with, more success as his letter progresses. He makes his beliefs abundant ly clear when he informs us that, " . fraternities are not private clubs." When Mr. Lip sitz cites existing University re gulation of fraternities evident ly to justify possible . interfer . ence with and coercion of these organizations his illogic is lucid ly clear. To cite a regulation concern ing women in the rooms and re late this to regulation and inter ference with how a f ratemity determines its membership is a classic example of non requi tor argument. To me this type of proposition is like say a thtt Lrcatsa the state requires peo ple wishing to get married to get a marriage license that the state then has the right to determine whom you will narry. Mr. Lipsitz's statement that, " . . . fraternities have no right to use procedures in de termining who can pledge which are based on racial and relig ious bigotry . . .. " would be much more indicative of what he is driving at if he cut this statement short by about the last eight words. Perhaps Mr. Lip sitz would like to do away with rush and instead interview and assign pledges to different hous es on the basis of his beliefs, scurrilous personal attack rath The crux of the whole matter er than reasoned discussion of Would seem to be that some vital issues. Your readers may people like Mr. Lipsitz think be interested in knowing that they know what is "right" the University News Bureau, not. just as applies to their own presumably acting at the behest personal relations but as ap- of the Administration, took the plied to everyone else's and are unheard of step of sending a co willing to attempt to force their py of that particular DTH edi own arbitrary value judgments torial to every newspaper, TV on others. and radio station in the State. The DTH "line" was then pick explosion at the first rally. And the stage was set for disorder. To put the matter bluntly, the DTH lit the fuse for that little explosions at the first rally. And The relevance of Mr. L i p -sitz's discussion of "fraternity" sense and of "brotherhood" is still a little puzzling. To in clude every "fellow man" would ha tn rln nwav with tho evetpm altogether. A fraternity is not in so doing, the DTH betrayed an organization which experi- a reat tradition of which I am ments with abstract sociologP a f?" l i-i.it. j cal- and political concepts. Nei- Bu7 let s meet your libel head tbpr is a fraternitv merelv a on. You say that Jim Gardner group which lives, studies, and parties together. National fra ornifioc are hnspd nn cprtnin absolute, on-going principles ace and ask this ques which are- embraced--by its tion: What's so bad about Ma membership voluntarily at t h e no Savio? Chew on that for a time of pledging and of initia- while sand you i may come to see tion v - - Mr. Gardner in an entirely dif . . , . . ferent' light. Right how, he (not Merely because Mr Lipsitz is you) is 6the ca?rier of a great SSJSS. tradition that was, and may yet sees himself as another Mario Savio. That was a stupid and vicious lie. But let's take it at . it does not follow that the Uni versity can or should in any way . determine his personal associa tions or friendships. However,, following Mr. Lipsitz's logic it would seem that there would be more grounds for this than for be again. Peter B. Young WRAL Raleigh the University to interfere with TVpnlrino- Tn TTpjjtcp the membership criteria of fra- nerving AI1 xicaibC ternities. A O- ap o With all due respect to all A Digit Ut bprmg those who are attempting to be- l o come involved, I believe that Editors, The Tar Heel: the membership criteria are the concern of only those who are- Spring has come many times members of the national organ- this year by the age-old provis ization. As for everyone else, ion of the flowers popping their it'? none of their business heads from the winter beds. iust as it is none of mine as to However, that seems not to be their personal associations. Clark Crampton Kappa Alpha WRAL'S Young Blasts Editorial Editors, The Tar Heel: a vaiia criteria since tne jon quils were in bloom at Christ mas and the red buds have been in bloom or partial bloom ever since that time- . Even seeing the student coup les stop on the sidewalks en route to class and elsewhere to give and take a passionate or semi-passionate kiss before con tinuing their intellectual endea- I have been pleased to note of spring. However, in the number of-letters you re- the latter weeks of Februaryf ceived protesting the unseemly, there seemed to be a real sign, undemocratic, immature behav- over above the robins and ior of some students at J l m crocus Gardner's fu-st raUy Articulate while waiting at a stoplight, as Mr. Gardner is, it would ap- Dehind a hearse, we were enter pear as though this minority of tained by a oung lady kissing "CaroUna Gentlemen made or nibbling fondly the ear of the his point for him better than he n g man driving. Though could ever have hoped to do on there may be more ice d his own. . snow, when young men and wo- And what is that point? men begin cutting up in a Simply this: if the General As- hearse, truly spring has come. sembly tomorrow were to re- Nancy Boynton New West peal the Speaker Ban Law, there would still be no "free speech" on the Chapel Hill cam pus. Free speech demands free speakers and free listeners. And there is a painful lack of both these requisite ingredients. The old tradition is dead, and Jim Gardner, almost (but not quite) alone, is attemtping to build a new tradition, brick, by painful brink The Question arises, how did II a small-group of "Carolina Gen- I "Jr " S tlemen" just happen to come to- - geSe? for the ugly purpose of VkZ ! interrupting a serious intellect- ( T7" "fjS' I ualdiscourseT ..USJItSjJi ial which chose the route of faggfflasgfcSSSBk P m LETTERS The Daily Tar Heel solicits letters to the editors at any time and on any subject. AQ letters must be typed State. Mas Eight To' Control ' UNC Editors, The Tar Heel: Thursday's lead editorial, "The Gag Law Strikes Again," has at last prompted this writ ten defense of the Speaker Ban Law. Thus far, discussion of this law has been more notable for its passionate assumptions than for its veracity. Even apologists for the Ban, attempting to quell their opponents' anguish ed cries about the Fall of Aca demic Freedom, have been drawn into futile and irrelevant discussions regarding the nature of Communist arguments; i.e, are they truthful and hence val uable, or deceitful and thus worthless. The idea is that advocates of the Ban claim, in my opinion legitimately, that Communist arguments are frought with de ception and falsehood, and are thus not in the spirit of aca demic inquiry and the pursuit of. truth. Speaker Ban opponents are quick to point out that aca demic freedom requires that all arguments be heard, regardless of their merit or truthful con tent. Thus the disagreement proceeds onward. Unfortunately, both sides have unconsciously accepted a premise which I believe to be false. The premise is ' that the University of North Carolina is by right endowed with academic freedom. Let there be no misunderstan ding about academic freedom at this University. This is a State owned and supported institu tion and as such has no free doms or prerogatives except those granted to it by the State. This is the central, unfortun ate truth which has been bliss fully ignored in the Speaker Ban controversy. Should the General Assembly dictate that only re gistered members of the Demo cratic Party shall be eligible for faculty positions, the University would be thus bound. Whether such a provision would or would not restrain free inquiry and the pursuit of wis dom is not relevant; the point is that it would be perfectly within the legal bounds of the Assembly to so legislate and the legislation would be binding un til and unless ruled void in the courts. Another misconception preva lent among those who oppose the Ban regards control of the Uni versity administration. This is a function delegated by the As sembly to the University Trus tees. The fact here to be noted is that ultimate regulation of the University resides with the leg islature. Thus the Student Government petition calling for a "return of Trustee , control" is absurd; for The Board of Trustees is ex pressly subordinate to the Gen eral Assembly, and exercises over the University only those powers which the General As sembly sees fit to grant it. In the case of the Speaker Ban law, the Assembly is sim ply exercising a facet of the authority it has always possess ed, but which it had previously permitted to the Turstees. The merits of the law itself is another topic. Be it granted that the Speaker Ban does limit academic pursuit. However, it must be noted that: 1) Those interested have but to acquire one of a number of private facilities to avail them selves of whatever "academic truths" Communists currently have to offer. 2) That the practical loss to the pursuit of knowledge ef fected by the Ban is minimal indeed, those prohibited by the law have, in my opinion, con sistently sought to confuse and distort the truth, rather than to enlighten. 3) That Federal courts have previously held that similar, though not equally restrictive, statutes violate neither the First nor the Fifth amendments. Moreover, I number myself among those who adhere to the position that no citizen of this state should be legally coerced into contributing toward the maintenance of a public plat form for those who advocate the violent subversion of our present form of government, nor for those who are sufficiently reluctant to state their beliefs and activities with regard to subversion that they find them selves compelled to retreat to the Fifth Amendment. Such persons find numerous forums elsewhere from which to enumerate their doctrines. There is hardly a need to reach into tax funds to provide them with a platform here. In summary, there is little to be said for furnishing subver sives with a stage when the ligh ting, curtains and scenery are provided at public expense. Regarding those associations which have declined to convene in Chapel Hill because of the Speaker Ban: their decisions are unfortunate, but reflect more upon too - easily provoked sensitivities than upon the judg ment of the State legislature, or upon the merits of the law. Finally, there is considerable truth in the lamentation of those who seek the Ban's repeal that there exists among much of the public some murky suspicion that those who actively oppose the Ban are somehow in lea gue with the "Communist Con spiracy." Any enlightened person sum marily dismisses this nonsense actually, I know several stud ents who were ardent in their support of Goldwater in the re cent election, and who are equ ally ardent in their oppostion to the Ban. . Nevertheless, it is disturbing to note that some most bitter in their denunciation of the Speaker Ban and the "reaction ary spirit" that made it possi ble, are among those whose dis position toward a form of gov ernment other than our own is and has been evident. It is interesting, and it may be edifying to reflect more than a moment on the motives and aspirations of these few radicals in calling for repeal of the Speaker Ban law. William Graham Otis 225 Joyner Viet Nam Policy Needs Criticizing By TIMOTHY RAY . Bill Chaffin and Steve Flana gan, in their letter of Feb 27, say that the groups of students 'who held a demonstration on Feb. 20 against our present Viet Nam policy advocate "peace at any price." In addition they say that the demonstrators "seem ed unconcerned with mere phy sical appearance." Answering the second charge first, the demonstrators were not, on the whole, poorly dress ed. There are those among our student body who consider a person shabbily or improperly dressed unless he looks as though he has just emerged from Varley's, Milton's, or one of the other purveyors of ele gant and expensive garments in Chapel Hill. Perhaps, as a stu dent body, we put more em phasis on this sort of exhibition than we really ought to. In any case, the demonstration includ ed persons whose appearance had been more than adequate ly provided for. Regarding the more serious charge, Chaffin and Flanagan seem to believe that everyone who objects to our Viet Nam policy believes that "The Com munists are peace lovers and advocates of non - aggression." That is ridiculous. 1 have met a number of "peaceniks" and I have not seen one who bas this sort of opinion of the Commun ists. In spite of these two gentle men's opinion, it is clearly pos sible to criticize U. S. foreign policy without being a Commun ist. Is Charles de Gaulle a Com- munist, for heaven's sake! He's about as Communist as Eisen hower. So is Secretary General U. Thant, who has been urging small informal talks between all nations involved in Viet Nam. The U. S. position on Viet Nam has been less than perfect. In fact, it may be somewhat hypocritical. We have repeated ly accused others of violating the 1954 Geneva Accords, which provide for partition and free elections. Yet we have opposed free elections there, and our bombings in the north are clear ly a violation of the partition. We have said that we are there at the request of the South Vietnamese government. Which of the last half-dozen govern ments? Our President has refused to discuss our policies in dets'l with newsmen, though there has been great speculation as to what his intentions may be. We certainly ought to consider the opinions of the people we are trying to save: Premier Phan Huy Quat recently said, "Viet Nam is suffering too much. We want to end the war with hon or." Perhaps the best solution would be a reconvening of the Geneva Conference. According to the French Minister of Infor mation, Alain Peyrefitte, the So viet Union (surprisingly enough) is presently advocating this very thing. And, although Chou En-lai's statement that U. S. withdrawal is prequisite to a settlement has been much quoted, Mao Tse-Tung has said that there are no preconditions for negotiation. The continuing U. S. insis tence on Communist withdrawal as prequisite for negotiation could lead to catastrophic escal ation of the war. As the French see the situation, "the United States and President Johnson re main the "great unknowables" in the present situation" (Chris tian Science Monitor for Feb. 26). One hopeful sign "is that John Moors Cabot is presently meeting with Chinese envoy, Wang Kuo-Chuan, for informal talks in Warsaw. May these talks escalate into negotiations.
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
March 2, 1965, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75