W$z Bail? ar ileel
In its seventieth year of editorial freedom, unhampered by
restriction from either the University administration or the stu
dent body.
All editorials appearing in the DAILY TAR HEEL are the
individual 'apinidns' of the Editors, unless otherwise credited; they
do not necessarily represent the opinion of the staff. The edi
tors are responsible for all material printed in the DAILY TAR
HEEL.
December 9, 19G2
Tel. 942-2356
Vol. LXX, No. 63
Conservative Buckley,
A Welcome Relief
Monday night at 8 p.m. one of
this country's more sincere citizens
and most enlightened conservatives
;will expound on "Freedom and the
Welfare State." We would suggest
that every member of the student
body attend the lecture.
William F. Buckley will have, we
think, something to .say. And
though we may not agree entirely
with what he says, we do anticipate
being entertained by the way in
which he will say it. Buckley has a
speaking reputation of which every
conservative must surely be proud.
Need more be said?
Well, perhaps just a little more.
Namely, that we would stress a
difference which should be appar
ent between the "conservatism" of
an extremely wealthy (arne't they
all?) and educated editor of the
"National Review" and the con
servatism of "negation" which is
too often in evidence on the cam
puses of southern universities.
Conservative Buckley may not
like the "New Frontier," but he ap
parently has the presence of mind
to' refrain from bleating about it.
Rather, he has ideas of his own, or
at least, of his own set, and it is
with these ideas that he will con
front his critics.
This may seem, initially, incon
sequential, or at least inconsequen
tial in so far as we presuppose that
all political figures have ideas of
their own, and that it is with
these ideas that they approach op
position. But to those of us who
have repeatedly encountered con
servatism as a mere "loud-lament"
about the sorry state-of-affairs in
which the "New Frontier" has
placed the country, the fact that
Buckley will speak instead of "cry
ing" is hardly inconsequential.
We welcome to this campus, with
open arms, a man of conservative
convictions who rises above petty
name-calling and negative lamenta
tion. We are tired of hearing every
thing left-of-the-American Legion
being labeled as Communist and
thereby summarily dismissed as
unworthy of intelligent considera
tion. We are tired of seeing those
who call themselves "conservative"
put on .shows that are worthy of
the Mickey Mouse Club.
In essence, we are tired of seeing
the conservative element on this
campus permit a small, but vocal,
group of weeping malcontents
represent the causes and stands of
a sometimes-valid political position.
Indeed, "conservatism" as it is
too often presented on this campus
fails to be a valid political "posi
tion" or "approach." It becomes,
rather, a mere anti-liberal lament.
And in view of this sad situation,
the presence of William F. Buckley
should be a welcome relief a
source of encouragement whether
one claims agreement with his
ideas or not. (CW)
Cover To Cover
Probably one of the most impor
tant intellectual events in the pub
lic sector o occur in the three years
we have attended this University
has been the birth and life of "Re
flections" magazine. Perhaps one
of the most pleasing occurrences of
recent months is that Editor Brown
has managed to get another (his
fourth) issue published.
This "Reflections' 'is 64 pages of
articles, fiction, poetry, drawings
and sculpture and possibly the
world's most appealing advertising.
There is much in the magazine
which is pleasing, encouraging and
exciting; and there is a little ma
terial which forces the reader to
cryVSo what?"
From cover to cover, very briefly:
&Ejt gadltf fflar -He!
JIM CLOTFELTER
CITUCtf WRYE
Editors
BIH Hobba
Associate Editor
Barry Lloyd
Wayne King
Managing Editors
Art Pearce " Dow Sheppari
' ' News Editors
Ed Dupree Sports Editor
CrryKirkpatrick Z Asst. Spts. Ed.
Matt Weisman . I . . Feature Editor
Harry DeLnng Night Editor
Jim Wallace Photography Editor
Mike Robinson Gary Blanchard
Contributing Editors
' DAVE MORGAN
Business' Manager
Gary Daltoa Advertising Mgr.
John Evans Circulation Mgr.
Dave Wysong m Subscription Mgr.
Tks Daily Tab En Is publish tfally
accept Monday, examination- periods
and vacations. It Is entered as second
class matter -in the post ofTlce ta Ghapel
RIB,- if. C pursuant wltn the act of
ilaxch t, 1870. Subscription rates I $44
per semester. 3 per year. '
Tns Daily Tab Bssl Is a subscriber to
the" United Press- International - end
iUlxe the eervlces of '"tne Tfew Bu
reau -of the University ot North Caro-
4 published by the Publications Board
f the University of North Carolina,
Outpel HlU.-N.-Cl ' '
The cover itself superb, marve
lous use of color.
Size of the magazine expanded
in width, more readable.
Editorials BrowTn and Leon
Rooke on Mississippi, leadership
and politics. These edits, shorter
than in previous "Reflections" is
sues, are good and gutty, with no
holds barred but, in parts, a little
superficial by the magazine's high
standards. The brief "awards" are
somewhat useless.
"Poverty and Possibility" by
Herbert L. Matthews Timely in
the context of the Cuban crisis, but
applicable to all the problems faced
by the United States in Latin
America. The article is an intelli
gent, important reminder of the
unfinished business of democracy
within the nations of Latin Amer
ica. "The -Tragedy of Our German
Policies" by retired Gen. Hugh
Hester A " very interesting piece
with vital information concerning
misinformation on the Berlin prob
lem and general American policy in
Europe. Its primary limitation is
the propagandists language such
words as "war-mongering" and
"honey-combed with Nazis" appear
several times in condemning West
ern propoganda.
There are two short stories, both
excellent, by Leon Rooke and Ralph
Dennis. The stories are probably
this issue's best feature. The Den
nis story continues the saga of his
sad, fat, word man. There are also
eight pieces of poetry and a series
of pictures of Edward Higgins'
welded sculpture.'
In all, this issue follows its pre
decessors in offering dual visual
and mental benefits.
But, to harp on an old point, the
best aspect of "Reflections" publi
cation is its publication. It is en
couraging and pleasing by its very
presence. (JC)
"It Was Rteht Here Just A Little While Ago"
GOP Gains In
South - - Golden
Letters To The Editors
Mr. John Tower, Republican
Senator from Texas, made a post
election statement on television.
The Republican g3ins in the South,
he said, not only showed the emer
gence of a two-party system, but re
vealed a definite swing to the con
servatives. I subscribe to the first view but
hardly to the second.
The two-party South is already
here; the result of two basic fac
tors; the intense industrialization of
the South, and the assurance by the
Republican candidates that they can
be relied upon to maintain the sys
tem of racial solidarity. There is no
question about this. No one can say
Florida, North Carolina, South
Carolina, and Texas are solid Demo
cratic states, any more than they
can say Virginia, Oklahoma, Ken
tucky, and Tennessee are.
But whether the folks voted for
"the conservatives" is open to ques
tion. As a matter of fact Senator
Tower himself serves in the United
States Senate because he has re
ceived the support of most of the
Texas liberals. Where Mr. Tower is
openly, and with considerable pride,
to the right of Barry Goldwater,
his Democratic opponent, William
Blakely, was openly, and with equal
pride, to the right of Strom Thur
mond. Indeed Mr. Tower's support
ers secretly intimated to the Texas
trade-unionists that if they voted for
the arch-conservative Blakely, they'd
be stuck with him for life, whereas
a vote for the less-secure Republi
can would give them a better chance
of getting a liberal Senator some
day.
In two Congressional races in
North Carolina, the Republicans
Abortion, Bull Pledges, New Left
SSL Bills
Inconsistent
To the Editors,
Is it not strange that the SSL de
cided that capital punishment should
be abolished (ostensibly because
man does not have the right to take
the' life of another human being
this being' the usual argument) and
in the same breath saw fit to af
fix circumstances whereby a single
man could do this legally? This
seems to me to be an outstanding
inconsistency in thought here.
The students achieved further ab
surdity by the conditions they estab
lished, only one of which (No. 4
when the pregnancy threatens the
mother's life), in my mind, even
approaches justification of abortion.
The first condition by which a doc
tor could legally perform an abor
tion if "convinced" that the baby
would be deformed, is not far re
moved from the similar practice of
the ancient Spartans, who at least
waited to be sure that the baby
would be deformed before hey put
it to death.
Suddenly Huxley's Brave New
World does not seem so far-fetched
after all. Do the students who repre
sented UNC really feel that an un
born baby should be deprived of his
life' because of a misfortune suf
fered by the mother? (A silly ques
tion obviously they do.) And since
when can a mother of unsound mind
not bear a healthy child? Either
there is an error in my thinking (in
which case I wish someone would
please enlighten me) or the SSL
has been guilty of some rash acts.
How about it, delegates?
John Hamilton
Facility Ruling
Discriminatory
To the Editors,
It has been said that there are
two sides to every issue. With that
maxim in mind let's study the recent
Student-Faculty Committee ruling
on bull-pledges and inactives. They
have decided that being disaffiliat
ed should mean specifically that
bull-pledges and inactives cannot so
much as enter their fraternity house
nor attend any social functions, open
or closed.
There are those who feel that this
is a positive step in the right direc
tion and that it should be commend
ed. Perhaps such a harsh move is
necessary to point out to these stu
dents just what their purpose at
Carolina is and perhaps nothing else
could have as moving an effect. Be
sides being a type of guidance for
the bull-pledges and inactives, the
ruling also serves as a protectorate
for the fraternities themselves.
(Many are the inactives who enjoy
knowing that they do not have to
attend chapter meetings or have
other obligations to the house yet
can still receive all the benefits
thereof." These students are in es
sence mooching off their friends who
in turn must take upon themselves
all the obligations and expenses for
both themselves and their disaffili
ates. Under this light it appears
that the committee came up with
a basically sound and competent de
cision. However let's look at the other
side of the picture. There are cries
of "Persecution" on many sides of
the campus. Elsewhere the Negroes
and the Jews are persecuted, yet
here at Carolina it is the fraternity
man who must keep a constant vigil,
not towards the Ku Klux Klan or
towards the S-S Trooper, but to
wards South Building.
When the Beat Duke parade was
reviewed, who got kicked? The fra
ternity system. It is true that fra
ternities produced more unaccept
able floats than did the dormi
tories; however when one considers
the higher participation rate of fra
ternities this is a seemingly natural
result.
Dorms were censured also, but it
was the fraternity system that was
lambasted. Is the faculty unaware
of certain happenings in the dormi
tories? Don't they know that on oc
casion girls have been known to
spend the evenings behind the
locked doors of dorm rooms? Per
haps this is perfectly alright since
there is no curfew rule imposed in
the dorms just as there is no rule
that says a student must leave a
certain dorm if he does not main
tain a "C" average or cannot at
tend his dorm's social functions for
the same reason.
How does the faculty propose to
enforce such an autocratic ruling?
Must the IFC post armed guards at
all entrances to fraternity houses
and parties with mug-shots of each
disaffiliate to prevent their en
trance? Has the faculty considered
the possibility that ATO disaffiliates
could easily attend a Zete party and
vice-versa? More important, has the
faculty forgotten that each student
has certain unalienable rights . . .?
It would appear that South Build
ing has acquired one trait usually
assigned to the fraternity system
discrimination.
Does the faculty realize that total
strangers, regardless of their Q.P.
average, may come to the fraternity
parties while inactives can hardly
peek through the windows?
It appears strange that only those
students who were so unfortunate as
to have pledged a fraternity are the
ones to be discriminated for not
maintaining a 'C" average. When
will the faculty decree that no fra
ternity man possessing less than a
"C" average may dine in Lenoir
Hall?
Who makes certain that no dorm
intramural team has members with
less' than "C" average?
In the past each fraternity had
the final voice in selecting their
members, but now this right must
be shared 'with the institution re
ferred to as South Building. Are we
not now even more selective? Does
the faculty not realize that right
now no disaffiliate can eat meals at
the house? That he can visit only
occasionally? That he cannot attend
sorority mixers? That he cannot
participate ia intramurals? That he
cannot engage in his chapter's busi
ness matters and decisions? Does
the faculty intend to take away
every right he possesses? It is not
so preposterous to ask "may we
speak to our disaffiliates in Y-court
or sit next to them in class? Can
we attend church with them? If
they are seemingly so unfit that
they shouldn't be allowed to visit
the fraternity house, would it be
proper to take them home to meet
the folks?
In conclusion it is evident that a
certain minority of students have
been denied their right to visit their
friends when and where they so
choose.
Does the faculty actually think
that this ruling is an effective solu
tion or do they somehow "subcon
sciously" realize that this is simply
one more step towards the total
banishment of fraternities from
Carolina and the liberal community
of Chapel Hill???
Watts Carr
Sam Simpson
Far Left And
Ri ffht Condemned
To the Editors,
As this seems to be the time of
year during which various societies
of evidently extreme deviant char
acter show signs of great activity
on this campus, I somewhat ques
tion their purposes, and even more
their means of achievement of these
purposes. I am especially referring
to the New Left Club, its elite, the
Progressive Labor Club, and its anti
thesis, the Young Americans for
Freedom. The New Left, according
to the opinions of several of its
ardent members, is theoretically
seeking the establishment of Social
Democracy in the U.S., a principle
which is dear to many Americans,
and is the obvious trend in Ameri
can politics today; yet the New Left,
by its association with various
other organs and personalities, defi
nitely, and beyond any doubt, shows
pro-Soviet leanings, a characteristic
which has slowed down the move
ment for Social Democrcy more so
in this country than in any other na
tion in the Western community of
nations. Others within this area,
such as the United Kingdom and
Italy, have S ocial Democratic
parties, which, not desiring Com
munist co-operation, have made
great strides in the establishment of
true democracy. But when the New
Left comes out with pro-Castro
propaganda leaflets in time of gov
ernment crises, then certainly people
who have any respect for any as
pect of American ' life, are almost
forced into the conservative fold by
no real choice of their own. Thus,
by such activities as the New Left
has been occupied with of late, "the
club has actually been working
against its proposed principles, and
having done so, has actually done
harm to the cause of Social Democ
racy. The ideas of the Progressive
Labor Club are evident; it has no
sympathy for Western Socialism or
liberalism, and prefers the crude
ideas of Lenin.
As for the other end of the pole,
the .Young Americans for Freedom,
there too exist numerous contradic
tions. The organization claims to be
pro-American, but with its Birch
GoldwaterMcCarthy type thinking,
has certainly hurt not only its own
cause of conservatism, but has in
the process of its evolvement turned
away from the cause of democracy,
and has instead turned to the emo
tional outbreaks of various fanatics,
including Mr. Rockwell of Arling
ton, Virginia, who reminds one of
a certain character of several dec
ades ago,' namely Adolf Schickel
gruber. I am nevertheless sure that
most sane people will turn away
from these fruitless organizations
which I have here mentioned, and
if they have not done so yet, then
I urge them to do so, for 'it will only
do them harm in their future
careers and lives. If you are a So
cialist, then turn to one of the exist
ing parties of this country, and help
shape it your way; and if you hap
pen to be a conservative, restrain
yourself from Fascism and attempt
to achieve your goals within demo
cratic organizations.
Dennis Dobrowske
Otelia Real
-And Youthful
To the Editors,
I was eating alone in Lenoir all
last Sunday afternoon when an el
derly lady approached my table and
asked if she might sit with me. I,
of course, consented and she intro
duced herself as Otelia Connor. The
name sounded familiar, but 1 did
not immediately realize with whom
I was having the pleasure of eat
ing. However, during the course of
our conversation, "I remembered
seeing articles in the DTH signed
by that name and I asked if she
were the author. She said that she
was and seemed pleased that I had
read her articles.
I have found that very few stu
dents, especially freshmen, know
anything about Otelia Connor. Many,
myself previously included, thought
"Otelia Connor" to be a pseu
donym used by a DTH editorialist
who wished to remain anonymous.
To those persons who are laboring
under this misconception, Mrs. Con
nor is in fact a 'delightful individual.
She is a 'widow' and has' two mar
ried children. She told me that she
thought that children .had lives of
their own to live and should be al
lowed to do so without the interfer
ence of parents. Mrs. Connor in
formed me that she" came to Chapel
Hill in order to live in an intellec
tual atmosphere and' at least par
tially escape the ' world of "bridge
parties and garden clubs
I used' the word "elderly" most
hesitantly in reference to Mrs. Con-
probably wen because they wera
less conservative than their Demo
cratic opponents. This does not
mean they were endorsed by Demo
crats but these two Republicans
won House seats because they piqked
up mast of the organized labor and
some of the Neg votes in their re
spective districts. Charles Raper
Jonas returned to the House for a
sixth term as Republican represen
tative from' North Carolina's 8th
district. It is no injustice to him to
say that Mr. Jonas is considerably
to the right of Dwight D. Eisen
hower. His defeated Democratic op
ponen:, Paul Kitchin, however, was
to the right of John C. Calhoun.
Both men were incumbents, running
against each other, because North
Carolina lost a House seat in the
1960 census redistricting.
In the 9th district, Republican
James Broyhill defeated Democrat
Hugh Alexander who was in close
competition to see if he could be
even more conservative than Mr.
Kitchin. Republicans and Democrats
knew they would split the conser
vative vote. The election depended
upon who could swing the vote of
the textile unions, the Negroes, and
the supporters of social legislation.
The Republican candidates won
most of these votes for the same
reason Senator Tower did: because,
as Republicans, their position is yet
a little shakier in the South than
their Democratic opponents who
once elected, serve forever.
One has to remember, too, that
the chief Republican winners, Rocke
feller in New York. Romney in
(Michigan, and Scranton in Pennsvl
vania all talked about jobs, secur
ity, and "immediate help for the
unemployed." I listened to a speech
by Republican Romney 0f Michi
gan. I shut my eyes and for a mo
ment he sounded for all the world
like Henry A. Wallace, in his third
party race for President in 1943.
Senator John Tower of Texas may
think there's a Barry Goldwater
Renaissance going on, the voters ap
parently don't.
Harry Golden
Carolina Israelite
nor for, if youth is an attribute of
the spirit, Otelia Connor could not
possibly be more than thirty-five.
There are very few individuals'
around, but it was my pleasure to
have lunch with one today.
Donald W. Carson
Major Threat
To UNG Seen
To the Editors:
.Last Spring two seniors who ob
viously loved this place wrote ar
ticles for the Tar Heel on ;he mean
ing of the University. It may well
be to add a midyear footnote to
those articles, however ironically
the footnote may contrast with the
spirit of the original articles.
There has arisen a threat to this
campus in recent years and it is
fast approaching a climax. Any
honest analysis of it must penetrate
beyond consideration of "weejuns,"
"sharpness," and the Duke parade.
The threat involves the whole Uni
versity. It is best seen in the per
spective of the University idea. This
idea involves a community of schol
ars searching earnestly for the
truth, ever maintaining intellectual
concern and personal integrity in
that search. Yet, at UNC the pos
ture of the student is the antithesis
of this concern. Casualness is the
goal. This is exemplified in the spec
tator stance of casual clothes,
casual feelings toward courses,
casual relations with other students,
and a casual refusal to become ac
tively involved. There results an
intellectual lethargy in meeting aca
demic requirements of the Univer
sity. In interpersonal relations there
h not only a lack of any real warmth
or affection, but there is in its place
an affected friendliness that ap
proaches manipulation. Most dan
gerous of all is the general flouting
of anything that purports to be
honorable and meaningful.
This casual posture has the po
tential of becoming a malicious
force that may bring the ruin of
UNC as a university. True, this gen
eral quality is ubiquitous in the out
side world, caused as it may be by
the World' Wars, the potential of nu
clear war, and the inordinate mis
use of freedom that result from af
fluence. This is no reason, however,
that it cannot be met here at UNC.
How met? The answer is not clear.
Certainly the threat should be met
directly and acknowledged realis
tically. Beyond that, there must be
reliance on certain qualities inher
ent and potentially forceful in the
individual student, such as integrity,
courage, 'verility, and a serious con
cern for searching out and fighting
out a' real kind of truth.
Tom Iseley
1