Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / May 11, 1966, 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 Wednesday. May 11. 10 j ihf EaUit (liar tel Opinions of Tin- Daily 'lar I In-1 air tpnNMt in its :: editorials. All unsigned editorials are written l the ij: editor. Letters and columns relied only the personal ::: vieus of iheir contributors. FltKI) THOM AS. EDIT OK As You Dislike It That strange air of quietness that seems to find its way to Chapel Hill every spring just before final -examination period has arrived. Suddenly faced with the challenge either to grad uate or to bring the old Q.P. average up to a level that will permit readmission to the University next fall, the student newsmakers are producing less each day. It is at times like this that newspaper editors fall back on space-filling editorial comments about the weather, Mother's Day (ouch!), etc. But such editorials often fall short of satisfaction. Too many times readers have no particular inter est in a subject on which an editor has commented. Therefore, today The Daily Tar Heel has decided to give you a form editorial and let you fill in the blanks according to your own personal grievance. Here it is: The action of (Student Legislature, the IFC, the Panhellenic Council, the MRC, the WRC, the Admin istration, the Athletic Department, Chapel Hill Board of Aldermen, other) last (Monday, Tuesday, Wednes day, Thursday, Friday nobody works on Saturday) is without a doubt the epitome of (petty partisan poli tics, "Brooks Brothers Bigotry," silly TCC nonsense, hasty action without careful planning, narrow-mindedness, poor recruiting tactics, disregard for the wel fare of UNC students.) The (TV Bill, closing hours, parking problem, ticket situation, high prices of town merchants) has been our single greatest concern this entire year. We had hoped that a solution would be reached in the (supply proper day) meeting. Now it appears that we are further than ever from an equitable agreement. To say the (organization being slandered) disap pointed us would be putting it mildly. To say they dis gusted us would be a euphemism. In fact, no one word could describe their actions. We have found (pick a number from one to ten) adjectives that come very close to conveying our opinion: (choose from these irresponsible, hilarious, drunken, Puritan, sinful, dangerous, blasphemous, libelous, conceited, selfish, ignorant, communistic, ultra-conservative, sadistic, other). What do those people think we are here for? Could it be that people in a position of such responsi bility do not realize that our first goal while in the University is (the free pursuit of knowledge, to make a 2.0 and stay out of the draft, learning to live with other people, finding a husband, finding a wife, rais ing hell, impressing everyone with our sharp new cars, seeing a brilliant array of collegiate athletics, self survival)? It's high time someone took the University reins out of the hands of (second floor GM, Big Court, wom en, South Building, Woollen Gym, City Hall) and put them where they should be in (second floor GM, Big Court, the women's hands, South Building, Woollen Gym, City Hall). Ours is a great University now. It is (respected, loved, criticized, attacked) by people all over the (town, state, nation, world). We certainly (want, can not allow) this situation to continue. But (how can it, it definitely will) continue if our leaders in the future behave in the fashion they did Saturday (maybe some people do work on Saturdays). The statement by (Bill Purdy, Lindsey Freeman, Madeline Gray, Lew Brown, Susan Gretz, Chancellor Sitterson, C. P. Erickson, other) "We felt our action to be the only possible course in light of present cir cumstances. We hope this set of regulations will in no way jeopardize future privileges of students involved." was plainly self -contradictory. How can students ever (get TV sets, bring women into their rooms after midnight, park on Polk Place, get box seats for their families in Kenan Stadium', get ten-minute laundry service) if the precedent is set in the opposite direction and in such strong fash ion. Seldom has The Daily Tar Heel felt so strongly about any issue. The students' welfare is being over looked for the sake of (politics, Greek pride, a decent reputation, money, grass, God, country, Mother, ap ple pie). We hope something will be done about this and soon. Gill Satly (Mr ifysl Fred Thomas, editor; Scott Goodfellow, managing editor; John Greenbacker, associate editor; Ron Shinn, news ed itor; Barry Jacobs, sports editor; Ernest Robl, assistant news editor; Bill Hass, assistant sports editor; John Jenn rich, wire editor; Mike Wiggin, night editor; Jock Lanter er, Jerry Lambert, photographers; Chip Barnard, art ed itor; Andy Myers, Steve Bennett, Steve Lackey, Peytie Fearrington. Carol Gallant, Lytt Stamps, Alan Banov, Bill Amlong, staff writers; Bill Rollins. Sandy Treadwell, Drummond Bell, Jim Fields, sports writers; Jeff Mac Nelly, Bruce Strauch, cartoonists. May 'in Chapel Hill. I sat up all night running my car so it wouldn't freeze!" Letters To The Editor Virtues Of DTH Praised, Panned By Seely, Lipsitz Seely's Congratulations Editor, The Tar Heel About a year ago Ernie McCrary, Pat Stith, Ed Freakly, John Greenbacker and the rest of the Daily Tar Heel crew in formed me that not only would they put out a better newspaper than Hugh and I, they would prove it by winning more awards. Today I watched them win, and win, and win, and the coffers of the Charlotte Observer - Charlotte News Collegiate Press Awards apparently have flown to Chapel Hill. The awards the DTH won today were not only a credit to the men who received them, they reflect credit upon the news paper, the student body and, most of all, the University. Of course, my congratulations to every one who had a part in wnning the awards, and also a., warning to the present regime: You've got a hard act to follow. Fred Seely Sports Writer Charlotte News Editor's note For those who don't know, Fred Seely and Hugh Stevens were the co - editors of the DTH before Ernie McCrary took office.) Northern Women Again Editor, The Daily Tar Heel: "Loud Yankee Broads" seem to be Steven Kropelnicki's speciality as is evi dent in last Thursday's Daily Tar Heel. He takes the opportunity of expounding upon Northern women and of course he is in the position to judge being a Southerner, for he has been North. The image of the Northern woman according to Kropelnicki is a woman in curlers with deplorable speech, an obnoxiously loud voice, and oh yes, let's not forget clothes as no "South ern Gentleman" does. They were in "abso lute conformity to the latest styles." It is painfully obvious that Kropelnicki's judgment falls short in his mass generaliza tion of women of the North. Also obvious is that his acquaintances from the North constitute members of a lower-middle class. If you are looking for refinement, breed ing, and background, break your social barrier, Kropelnicki, come up, come up, come all the way up . . . David W. Goodnow 300 S. Columbia St. Lipsitz Was Misquoted In a terribly broken up and incoherent article reporting my talk to a SPU-spon-sored seminar, I am quoted as saying Viet Cong have killed 60,000 civilians and that the U. S. is killing 10,000 civilians a month. Where the reporter got such fantastic fi gures is anybody's guess, but he certain ly did't get them from listening to me. No one has accurate figures on these matters, and so there is great need to be causious in discussing the organized mur der that is taking place. What I said at the seminar was the The New York Times had reported 4,000 village leaders and some thing on the order of 10,000 - 11,000 other civilians killed by the VC since 1964. As for civilians killed by the American and South Vietnamese government forces, there are only the estimates of people like Vietna mese government forces, there are only the estimates of people like Jean Lacouture and Bernard Fall that between two and six civilians are killed for every VC. Given 1,000 VC killed per month, this would mean a minimum of 2,000 dead civilians, assum ing the two to six ratio is somewhat ac curate. My point was a very old one, re peated by almost everyone who has been a critic of the war: it is strange to save a country by massive slaughter of civilians. If the only way to defeat the VC is through such massive killing, is that worth the cost? It seems to me that this is one of the questions raised by the recent Budd hist demonstrations in South Vietnam. How extensive the killing of civilians actually is, however, no one can say for sure. There has already been so much mis information and myth - making concern ing the Vietnam war, that we should be very careful not to add further confusion. There are very real moral issues raised by American actions in this war, and it is time Americans looked at these issues squarely. It is no help when the free press quotes a bit too freely. Lewis Lipsitz Political Science Dept. "........" ........." "?x,:":'" Letters :: The Daily Tar Heel welcomes Iet ters to the editor on any subject, particularly on matters of local or :: University interest. Letters must be typed, double-spaced and must In :j: elude the name and address of the : author or authors. Names will not be I omitted in publication. Letters should S be limited to about 250-300 words. The 1 DTH reserves the riffht to edit for :j: length or libel. Lonrer letters will be : considered for "The Student Speaks" :: if they are of sufficient interest. How ever, the DTH reserves the riffht to :$ use contributed materials as it sees 8 fit. Lynd Sees Capitalism As Unstable: Love Is Needed (Editor's note The following are ex cerpts from a speech made last March in Chicago by Dr. Saughton Lynd of Yale University. Originally published by the Min nesota Daily, they give some indication of the view of American capitalism held by the professor who defied the State Depart ment go to North Viet Nam.) American capitalism is not a permanent or stable system. It cannot provide con structive and remunerative work for all its citizens. It refuses to support those without work at a level of life consistent with human dignity. The technological pro gress to which it is driven by corporate competition for profits puts more men out of work by automation. The only pub lic works it is willing to undertake which alleviate unemployment significantly are war and the preparation for war. But au tomation of these activities decreases the effect of such spending in increasing jobs and income; further, possession of nuclear weapons by both sides sets absolute limits on the degree of escalation available to the permanent war economy. Therefore, the permanent war economy is not perma nent. It will either be transformed into its opposite, socialism, or commit suicide. A second source of contradictions is the spread of socialism throughout the under developed world. The option of alleviating internal economic problems through over seas investment is increasingly foreclosed. The spread of socialist economic planning in the underdeveloped world is the funda mental fact of our century and must be tak en as a given. It is not a paper tiger, as was the apprehension in the 1950s that the Soviet Red Army would march to the En glish Channel, but a real and increasing threat to American capitalism. (Both) the intellectual and the poor per son in Mississippi or Newark act personal ly. They are concerned with ends, not like the politician with means (otherwise known as votes). Both have in view and I think anyone who worked in the South will bear me out on this both the Ne gro Baptist field hand in Mississippi and the intellectutal activist have in view an ideal community, something like a family but bigger, something like a seminar ex cept that people act as well as talk, some thing like a congregatin except that peo pie work together as well as pray topthcr. I don-t think you can build a move ment on hate. In my experience, the mot militant people have also been the quu-t-et In mv experience he who thinks the policeman" can become a brother is less likely to get hit on the head. The tough est nuts among us. I have noticed. u-,;i shyly confess in an odd moment that uhat realiv keeps them going is the vision of a band" of brothers standing in a circle of love. This vision . . . simplifies many knotty strategic problems. It makes the fundamen tal assumption that if enough people war.! such a society they will sooner or later find a way to achieve it. The really im portant thing is that in the meantime we not lose hope, that we stay together, that we deal with each other in an honest and kindly manner, that we share our resour ces socialism is a very natural idea for poor students, as it is for poor people of any kind in faith, or to use a new ex pression, that we keep our eyes on thp prize and hold on. It's not a new vision. It is a very old idea that God gave the good things of this world to his children to share as in one family; that the idea of someone owning a field, or owning a portion of downtown Chicago, that the idea of private property is blasphemy. It is a very old idea that society should be made new on the model of the family, so that we would bear each other's burdens as brothers and sisters and like the early Christians, hold all things in common. But it's Utopian, I hear someone cry! Even if people can live that way in little groups they cannot change the structure, cannot solve the problem of power! The vision of community ... is not Utopian because it is not pie in the sky. It doesn't put off action until tomorrow. Its creed it: If not now, when? If not you? who? It is the faith that says each of us most act as best we can in response to each day's moral outrage, not waiting till the party decides its perspective for the coming period. Kennan Ob Yiet .Mam Involvement (Editor's note The following is the first of a series of articles reprinting for mer ambassador George Kennan's remarks on the US Viet Nam involvement before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.) The subject on which I am invited to give my views this morning is, as I un derstand it, the complex of problems con nected with our prsent involvement in Viet Nam. I would like to explain in under taking to speak to this subject, that South east Asia is a part of the world for which I can claim no specialized knowledge. I am not familiar with the official ration ale of our policy there except as it has been revealed in the press. I cannot re call that I have ever during my official service in government or subsequently, been drawn by the executive branch of our government into consultation on the problem of our policy in Southeast Asia, or even been made privy to the official dis cussions by which that policy was decid ed. I am sure that there are many data that are relevant - to any thoroughly founded judgment on these matters which are not available to me, and this being the case, I have tried in recent weeks and months not to jump to final conclusions even in my own thoughts, to remain sympatheti cally receptive, both to our government's explanations of the very real difficulties it has faced and to the doubts and ques tions of its serious critics. I have not been anxious to press my views on the public but I gladly give them to you for whatever they are worth claim ing no particular merit for them except perhaps that they flow from experience with communist affairs that runs back for some 38 years, and also from the deep est and most troubled sort of concern that we should find the proper course, the right course, at this truly crucial moment. The first point I would like to make is that if we were not already involved as we are today in Viet Nam, I would knou of no reason why we should wish to be come so involved, and I could think of sev eral reasons why we should wish not to Viet Nam is not a region of major mili tary, industrial importance. It is difficult to believe that any decisive developments of the world situation would be determined in normal circumstances by what happens on that territory. If it were not for the considerations of prestige that arise pre cisely out of our present involvement, even a situation in which South Viet Nam was controlled exclusively by the Viet Cong, while regrettable, and no doubt morally un warranted, would not, in my opinion, pre sent dangers great enough to justify our direct military intervention. Given the situation that exists today in the relations among the leading Commun ist powers, and by that I have, of course, in mind primarily the Soviet -Chinese con flict, there is ever likelihood that com munist regime in South Viet Nam would follow a fairly independent course. There is no reason to suspect that such a regime would find it either necessary or desirable in present circumstances to func tion simply as a passive puppet and in strument of Chinese power. And as for the danger that its establishment there would unleash similar tendencies in neighboring countries, this, I think, would depend lar gely on the manner in which it came into power. In the light of what has recently hap pened in Indonesia, and on the Indian sub continent, the danger of the so - called domino effect that would be produced by a limited communist success in South Viet Nam, seems to me to be considerably less than it was when the main decisions were taken that have led to our present involve ment. Let me stress, I do not say that that danger does not exist, I say that it is less than it was a year or two ago when we got into this involvement. 1tJHATWWLDtfW f SWiFITOLDHW away y (jJoold you mss MY I V I I V AWAY 7 f U I ' f LET THAT BE l a I 4 - I LESSON T' Y&fc I COULD f OH, I KNCU)U STAND If A COULD STAND IT BUT WOULD YOU MISS MV SMILING FACE? tuh I'll fw over an' 3ET aC COUPLE OF AS PRINS F YES, PET ) f ISN'T 1b I SWEET?)
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
May 11, 1966, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75