Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / Feb. 13, 1962, 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
SstaSTWaAd, EH, Neighbor? Andrews Should No m hi II attp wc Heoi 5 ? II In its sixty-ninth year of editorial freedom, unhampered by restrictions, from either the administration or the student body. The Daily Tar Heel is the official student publication of the Publications Board, of the University of North Carolina, All editorials appearing in The Daily Tar Heel are the personal expressions of the editor, unless otherwise credited; they are not necessarily representative of feeling on the staff. 1U February 13, 19G2 TeJ. 942-2356 Vol. LXIX, No. 90 ? 5 The New Left The New Left, rather a loosely organized discussion group com- posed of individuals whose socio economic and political views fall somewhere in the vast area "left of Kennedy," as they put it, seems to be about ready to make itself known. On the bottom right of today's page, the group offers a brief out line of its general outlook, with an almost tacit invitation to sit in on a meeting. To our way of thinking, the or ganization has been too long in the shadows well outside the campus mainstream, functioning, for the most part, in silence. This is not to say that the group holds clande stine meetings at which individuals are indoctrinated into the mysteries of a secret leftist coterie merely that its scope has been limited. Carolina indeed, any college or university needs the kind of po litical stimulation that groups like the New Left can provide. Ideas are the meat of education. But they must be heard, discussed and dis sected. If they are valid, they will stand. If they are faulty, they will fall. The "Liberal-Conservative" con troversy at Carolina has all-too-of-ten been nothing more than a temp est in a tea-pot which finds indi vidual functioning purely and sim ply under their label. "Liberals" square off with "conservatives" in much the same manner as school boys in a rag-tag game of pick-up football, with team One against team Two. Idea exchange is lost in flurries of name-calling and "you're another one" arguments which generally re sult in little more than a few frazz led tempers, overworked adrenalin glands and not a damn thing recon ciled. Each camp pulls further back into its own territory to glare at the "enemy," exchange methods of attack and bolster the collective ego. Meanwhile, everyone forgets ex actly how he came to fall under the particular label of his group and loses the ability to re-evaluate his own position in light of whatever information or misinformation he has gained. The battle is the thing . . . the cause is often for gotten! The New Left group, however, appears to be taking stock of itself first, defining its terms, so to speak. If the cause is there, then let it become an issue. If not, then the crusade is Quixotic, the "en emy" a political, economic or social windmill. This is the valid approach to pinning down and answering some of the questions that are becoming increasing more ill-posed and nebu lous. The New Left gave its invitation. We hope those who are genuinely concerned will accept it. Kindergarten? The little quiz administered the other day to selected Marines was labeled by Charles A. Byrne, Sten nis Committee functionary who gave it, as a test of "knowledge" of the Cold War. It tests nothing of the sort. Only three of the 18 questions published in a recent newspaper account have directly to do with the Cold War. Such questions as "What are the populations of Russia, China, Cuba, France and the United States?" or "What didn't the Marine Corps like about "Operation Abolition?" or "What is the American Nazi Par ty?" may relate in some odd way to the cold war. They may even be desirable knowledge for the soldiery. But that is a matter of opinion. In fact, answers to several of the questions themselves are matters of opinion, not "knowledge." Such questions as "What is the menace EDITORIAL STAFF Wayne King. Editor Harve Harris Managing Editor Associate Editor Lloyd Little Executive News Editor Jim Clotfelter, Bill Wxjamett News Editors Jim Wallace Photography Editor Chuck Mooney. Feature Editor Ed Dupree Sports Editor Curry Kirkfatrick Asst. Sports Editor Garry Blanchard Contributing Editor BUSINESS STAFF Tim Burnett Business Manager Mike Mathers Advertising Manager Jim EvANS-JSubscription Manager Jim Eskridge . Circulation Manager Tn Daily Tab Hzzl Is published dally except Monday, examination periods ind vacations. It Is entered as second class matter In the post office In Chapel mi:, n. C- pursuant witn tn act or March 8. 1870. Subscription rates: per semester, $8 per year. i Ths Daily Tab Hiax is a subscriber to the United Press International and utilizes the services of the News Bu reau oi the University ot North Caro- Publisnjed by the Publications Board of the University ,o North Carolina, Chapel HHI. N. C. u 4 it f ' - f of Communism to the free world?" and "Do you think the Communists are trying to influence the armed services?" require statements of belief and opinion, not recitation of "fact." Now, it is one thing to test mem bers of the armed services as part of a general training program on their knowledge of established and agreed-upon facts. It is another for petty employees of a Senate committee, behind the back of the chairman and its majority, to test a handful of servicemen for opinions on which Americans disagree stren uously, especially, when it is bland ly said that any "leftist" responses whatever they are will be turn ed over, with the testee's name, to his commander. This kindergarten-type seatwork reached a depth of absurdity when it asked the Marines to identify or describe "dialectical materialism." Probably not more than 5 per cent of the members of Congress them selves could define "dialectical ma terialism" except perhaps by quot ing by rote a dictionary label. In deed, there is a strong possibility that Karl Marx himself did not know what he meant by it. Basically, the outrage of the whole affair is that it was designed to embarrass General Shoup, com mandant of the Marine Corps and a Congressional Medal of Honor wear er, because he happens to believe that a Marine's business is to fight when called on and not to engage in political debate. Greensboro Daily News What Next? The NAACP reported this week that its "southern search for Jim Crow run-offs of the National Spell ing Bee this week flushed out an other offender ..." Come on now, a segregated spell ing bee? 11 If Ls'KM r4 2 aha II . h if y I j .-' ATTITUDES by Clotfelter Textbook CooBeratiYe In the past ten days students have suffered from an honest-to-goodness "monopoly": the textbook market on campus. The University Book Exchange is in a position to give any price it chooses for used textbooks and can ask any price it chooses when re selling them. New texts are sold at regular commercial prices, with nary a discount to be had. By no stretch of the . imagination does the Intimate Bookshop deserve the title "competitor." Its existence in no way disturbs, the monopoly. There is, of course, a reason why the University cannot sell books at discount prices. The Umstead Act forbids state-supported institutions from competing with commercial en terprises ("competing in the genuine sense of the word, where the com petitors cut prices, improve service, and increase variety of products ... in order to take business away from the opposition.) So . . . the book-ex annually returns a whopping profit to the University. Because of this legislation the Book Exchange cannot be expected to help ease the student's financial burden in this area. That the burden is heavy can be attested to by any student who has bought textbooks (or by those stu dents -who are either unable or un willing to pay the prices, and don't buy books, at all) The economic wel fare of UNC studentry demands an attempt to solve, or at least modi fy, the present situation. .. ... . ' ' " Several answers I are possible: a student cooperative off -campus or on-campus; an individual-oriented national cooperative union; or the hope that the Intimate " will begin to act like a competitor and cut text book prices. The. last solution is tacitly unrealistic. An on-campus or off -campus co operative would have the advan tages that it: Would offer a great variety of texts, making it more useful to more students. Could be supported in. part by student organizations and would have a greater chance for success in its early years.V i Could serve all UNC students. Would be able to diversify into other fields where students are in an economic pinch, such as clothing goods. Unfortunately, a student coopera tive on campus would almost cer tainly violate the Umstead Act, in the same way the book-ex would. A much preferable system would have the cooperative established off campus and sponsored by an inde pendent student group, rather than student government. Off-campus stu dent cooperatives have been success- U.'S Movement Hurts Reds THE FXGHT IS FORGING AHEAD .r.thrjeat to; this country is far away overseas, not at home. America's anti-Communist move ment is hurting the Reds and the work is out to stop it at all costs. This is heartening news for those fighting the good fight who may. not always be aware of how their joint efforts are succeeding. Some interesting facts were re leased this fall from previously "classified" testimony before the Senate subcommittee, on internal security. The witness was Edward Hunter, former government employee and psychological warfare specialist who has authored several books on Communist brainwashing techniques. Hunter said the Communists eval aluation of the U. S. anti-Communist movement as a first-magnitude threat to Red world conquest plans was revealed by the inclusion of orders for its eradication in the 81 party manifesto of December, 1960. The order was unprecedented in Communist party history. This means that the American patriots had best gird themselves for a psychological warfare on slaught that will employ every dia bolical and dirty tactic in the Red repertoire of deceit, and every pos sible means of pressure. Nobody realizes more clearly than the Kremlin, Hunter said, that "If the anti-communist movement is not destroyed before it attains solidarity and stability and becomes sure of its ground, it will be fatal to the Com munist movement everywhere." The anti-Communist counter-offensive already is cutting inroads through the American national mind, discrediting, vilifying, smearing the sources of anti-Communist thought. The purpose: Take the sting out of the anti-Communist movement. Here are the immediate targets. i(l) Make anti-Communism an un popular thing to discuss or to ex press. (2) Convince America that the Red (3) Lump all opposition to Com munism under the label of "radical right-wingers." (4) Make anti-Communism in Fed eral agencies a form of "sticking one's neck out." The goal: Take the force out of the anti-Communist movement so that the Communist forces can win by default. Americans can take heart that their patriotism is paying off, but all. should be alerted,-too, that the "figh for freedom must be unrelent ing. " A NOTE ON HISTORY . . Perhaps Georgi Dimitrov was more prophetic than he knew when he, told the Lenin School of Political Warfare during the early stages of Red Tide: "As Soviet power grows, there will be greater aversion to Communist parties everywhere. So we must prac tice the techniques of withdrawal. Never appear in the foreground; let our friends do the work. We must always remember that one sym pathizer is generally worth more than a dozen militant Communists. "A university professor, who with out being a party member lends himself to the interests of the Soviet Union, is worth more than a hun dred men with party cards. A writer of reputation or a retired general is worth more than 500 poor devils who don't know any better than to get themselves beaten up by the police. Every man has his value, his merit. The writer ,who, without being a party member, defends the Soviet Union, the union leader who is out side our ranks but defends Soviet international policy is worth more than a thousand, party members AN ETERNAL TRUTH ... The greatest Liberal of the twen tieth century. Woodrow Wilson, had this philosophy of government: "The history of liberty is a his tory of the limitation of govern mental power, not the increase of it. When we resist the concentration of power, we are resisting the processes of death, because a concentration of power is what always precedes the destruction of human liberties." ' It is shameful that the "Liberals" of today do not espouse this basic principle of true liberalism. The tide has turned against Wilson and his ideals toward some undefined for mula for Utopia. But the moon can rise again and shed its light, and the tide can turn once more. N. Franklin Adkinson .. Samuel S. Jones , - - t Advance Liber To The Editor: The February 7, 1962 issue of the Daily Tar Heel contained a letter from the Rev. David Andrews in De fense of his "Pray-In" Conducted in Washington, D. C. on behalf of Mor ton Sobeil. Several statements, in Mr. Andrews's letter deserve closer con sideration. As reasons for his "Pray-In", Mr. Andrews says, "X did it because he is a human being, an American citizen, and an object of God's love." Using these three reasons as a criterion, one must admit that virtually every man in a peniten tiary can qualify for Mr. Andrews's sympathy. But in the case of Mor ton Sobell, Mr. Andrews believes that justice was not done, and he says that he believes in justice for everyone. Even such heinous evildoers as John Birchites, snake handlers, or men from Mars (I wonder who passed judgment on this choice group). After having studied the so-called facts in a book ". . . writ ten by a professor of law at one of our major universities," Mr. An drews expresses grave concern over the manner in which the Sobell trial was conducted. Really, Mr. Andrews, don't you believe that the courts are more qualified to pass judgment on the facts and fairness of the Sobell trial than someone who has written or read a book pervaded with preconceived opinions? Mr. Andrews has the following to say concerning his attitude toward Communism: "... I am not, never have been and never will be a Communist. My fully set up in several college com munities, such as Harvard, Oberlin, and the Universities of California and Wisconsin. An off-campus store could be more diversified in its product field and would be exempt from the Umstead Act. At its December meeting the Na tional Executive Committee of the National Student Assocation (NSA) passed . a resolution recommending the activities of a book cooperative to its member schools. The coopera tive, which hopes to operate on a broader scale than at present, is the International Student Cooperative Union (ISCU), with headquarters at the University of Chicago. Under the present ISCU plan, in dividual students become members of the cooperative, paying a $1 mem bership fee at the beginning. A member receives all texts at a 10 per cent discount and any other avail able book at a 25 per cent discount. Participating student governments get a small percentage of the sales, as would the National Student Assoc iation if its 15th National Congress approves legislation next summer. The ISCU plan would have he advantages of individual participa tion and near-term practicability, and the disadvantages of a cumber some, time-consuming setup for the delivery of books. An off -campus student cooperative in Chapel Hill would be more valu able in the long run, although dif ficult to establish. Both it and the ISCU program aim toward the same result by different paths: to free the UNC student from an oppressive ec onomic monopoly. JIM CLOTFELTER own economic philosophy is about as far removed from Communist totalitarianism, as one could get." Two sentences later he says, "I have never gotten around to study ing Marx or Lenin . . ." Now, if a man admittedly has never exam ined the philosophy of another so ciety, can he make any comparison, rational or not, between, his philo sophy and, theirs? Rev. Andrews refers to the at tempts ". . . to smear every active, honest liberal with red . . ." and people persist in ". . . equating Lib eralism with Communism." The assumption must be that he is the "Liberal" in question since the first paragraph of his letter states that " , . . some people have gotten the mistaken idea that I am favorable to Communism." Isn't it wonder ful Out of the dark ugly nescience suddenly shines forth the pure, noble, godly light of Liberalism. I do not believe that Mr. An drews is a Communist sympathizer in any way whatsoever. I am sure that he loves and believes in the American way of life and that he tries to be a good American citizen. He is, however, reckless, ill-advised, and mistaken in his pursuit. Rev. Andrews's apparent use of his clerical position as a means to disguise the promotion of a political cause (Liberalism) is repreheasible. FRANK E. CELLA Robin d r n 9s amouiigs Public relations object lessons rarely hit the world's front pages. But India recently unwittingly gave all students of public relations, par ticularly those in government and business, a bagful of public rela tions "don'ts." Every public official and business man should study carefully the pub lic relations aspects of India's speedy conquest of Goa. Begin with India's self-serving declarations prior to the conquest that adminis tration in Goa was collapsing. Ex amine carefully the words leading to the fight between India's UN delegate and a newspaperman. In the end, read the unfavorable world reaction to the conquest of Goa. There is something to be learned in each step of the shameful pro cess of swallowing up Goa. Here are some of the "don'ts" to remem ber: 1. Don't make the mistake, even a small one, which erases many years of building up good public relations, based on good perform ance and good behavior. (Item: The conquest of Goa wiped out in min utes the image of India, laboriously self-built for nearly 15 years, as a nation dedicated to non-violence and spiritual leadership.) 2. Don't talk from both sides of your mouth if you want to win friends and influence people as part of a program of achieving good public relations. (Item: Years of holier-than-thou international decla rations, by India were cancelled out, probably permanently, by one swoop on Goa.) MIKE ROBINSON Leftists Invite Discussion Dear Editor: Rather more than a year ago a group of graduate students who are interested in discussing contempor ary problems from a liberal or soc ialist standpoint began meeting in formally every two or three weeks. The group has since expanded to include a few faculty and under graduate members, and it now counts regularly on getting twenty or more people to its meetings. It is still in formally constituted (it has no elect ed officers) but it is run by an ex ecutive committee of six graduate students drawn from six different fields. It calls itself the New Left Club a title borrowed from a move ment that has been very active in England the last few years. The group has deliberately avoid ed, publishing a manifesto or a state ment of policy. There is such diver sity of opinion within the group that it would be quite impossible to achieve unanimity on a general policy. And anyway it seems in appropriate for a discussion group to publish a statement of political conclusions; if the problems have already been solved, they hardly merit discussion. The members can all be described as "left of Kennedy" but any more precise description would be innac urate. There are several liberal De mocrats, several democratic social ists and two or three 'Marxists; there are no Trotskyites, Stalinists or mem bers of the Communist Party, though such people would be welcome at our meetings insofar as. they would enliven the discussions. Anyone is welcome to join the group so long as he shares enough of the basic assumptions of the political Left to make discussion possible such as sumptions as that all political action should be grounded on a belief in humane values and in egalitarianism. This semester the group will be meeting every two or three weeks. These meetings will be announced in the Tar HeeL The first meeting will be held this Thursday in Graham Memorial at 8:30 p.m., when Dr. Blackman will lead, a, discussion on the Draft Program for the 22nd Con gress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. In addition, the New Left Club i3 setting up two study groups to meet independently of the regular meet ings. Each of these groups will de vote intensive study to a particular problem. One will deal with indus trialization in the South, bringing the combined efforts of historians, sociologists, economists and political scientists to bear on this topic. The other will read and discuss Trotsky's "History of the Russian Revolu tion," the great classic in. Marxist history. It is hoped that by the end of the semester these people will have extended their knowledge of both Marxism and the Russian Rev olution. Anyone wishing to partici pate in either of these study groups should be sure to come to the meet ing on Thursday. Nicholas Bateson Dick Ginnold Max Drake Rob Millon Marty Primack Charlie Parrish
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Feb. 13, 1962, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75