Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / Sept. 29, 1963, 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
Volume 72, Number 8 Sunday, September 29, 1963 Letters To The Editors V c Stye iatlg (iiar 11 70 Years of Editorial Freedom ook- Eka Ml TTT o 71 H ... ml it S3 1 m i m i;i Gag B ghte I;- s vhfh fir i January i t ft -J Offices on the second floor of Graham Memorial. Telephone number: Editorial, sports, news 942-3112. Business, cir culation, advertising 942-2138. Address: Box 1080, Chapel Hill, N. C. Entered as 2nd class matter at the Post Office in Chapel Hill, N. C, pursuant to Act of March 8, 1870. Subscription rates: $4.50 per semester; $8 per year. Published daily except Mondays, examination periods and vacations, throughout the aca demic year by the Publications Board of the University of North Carolina. Printed by the Chapel Hill Publishing Company, Inc., 501 West Franklin Street, Chapel Hill, N. C. THE DAILY TAR HEEL is a subscriber to United Press International and utilizes the services of the University News Bureau. I ii ; If 1 M j j t s , w i iv. v l - - ' j The Ungeiitlemaiily Gentlemen And we always thought that "Carolina Gentleman" was more than just an ex pression. The photo above was taken at the Hootenanny in Memorial Hall on Friday night. This mob scene is composed of students trying to get the best seats possible when the doors opened. It is a disgrace. For example, one young lady was pinned against a pillar for some five minutes, unable to move. Another fainted. Heaven only knows how many others were jostled, mauled and pushed about. By Carolina Gentlemen. Where the hell was Otelia ? The Spectacle of Ralph Moody: A Vibrant Spirit Gone to Seed The tragic spectacle of a vibrant spirit gone to seed is clearly evident in our as sistant N. C. Attorney General, Ralph Moody. Consider his educational record : "He entered UNC in 1917, shunning all curriculums, and taking only the courses in undergraduate school that caught his fancy. College was inter rupted by a stint in the Army. , "Returning to Chapel Hill in 1920, Moody passed the law examination and was admitted to the Bar even before he finished his law courses. He left Caro lina in 1922 to go into practice with his father in Murphy. He never took a de gree." ;(Source: News & Observer, Aug. 24, 1958; UNC Alumni Directory, 1795 1953.) Obviously, Mr. Moody was a capable, independent fellow who probably enter tained dreams of rising high after leav ing school. Obviously, he has risen high. He is one of the State's top legal minds. But what has happened to the fellow's spirit ? ; Judging from his remarks in Dunn Wednesday, on the Speaker Ban law ! and academic freedom, Mr. Moody has fallen victim to that incrustation of spirit which bears down on a man, slow ly strangling his spirit, making him less of a man than he once was and leav ing him unaware of the change. EDITORIAL STAFF Gary Blanchard, David Ethridge Co-Editors Managing Editors . Associate Editor Photo Editor Sports Editor Wayne King Fred Seely Peter Harkness Jim Wallace Curry Kirkpatrick John Montague Jim Wallace Asst. Sports Editor Night Editor , Reporters: Mickey 'Blackwell, Administration Peter Wales, Campus Affairs Hugh Stevens, Campus Affairs Sue Simonds, Desk Bruce Williamson, Desk Dona Fagg, Desk Reviews Editor Women's Editor Features Editor . Science Editor Steve Dennis .. Diane Hile ..... Chris Farran Mat Friedman BUSINESS STAFF Business Manager Art Pearce Advertising Manager Circulation Manager .. Subscription Manager .. Asst. Advertising Mgr. Asst. Business Mgr. Sales Fred McConnel John Evans Bryan Simpson Woody Sobol Sally Rowlings Frank Potter Dick Baddour Bob Vanderberry For now, he too has made it clear be yond doubt that he has fallen victim to the same generalized frustration that pervades our age. It is that frustration, and nothing else, which dictated the methods and provid ed the momentum for the passage of the Speaker Ban law. Frustration over the fact that com munism cannot be stamped out with a flick of the wrist; frustration that things are daily growing more complex and there are no easy answers any more; frustration, most basically, at the degree and pace of change human and technological which the Space Age has ushered in. Unable or unwilling to face all this, often for perfectly understandable but still invalid reasons, too many Amer icans have taken cover in a form of with drawal such as is exemplified by the Speaker Ban. "If we can't whip 'em outright, then we at least can prevent them from speaking" this is the reaction of such honorable but misguided men as Mr. Moody. And without realizing it, what they have done is admit their inability to cope with the continuing existence of Communism, and the increasing pace of change. This is fundamentally why we are op posed to the Speaker Ban, and the type of mechanistic thinking represented by Mr. Moody. We haven't had our turn at bat. Like most young people everywhere, we don't like the idea of giving up before we've had a chance to do our best. We are not at all certain that Com munism is "the wave of the future;" or that Mr. Khrushchev can "bury" us. We do not consider the fact that a handful of students have been able to establish Carolina as a "red nest" in the eyes of many as especially important. Rather, we consider it thumping proof of our democracy's and our University's strength that thousands upon thousands of Carolina students have not turned to Communism for an answer to the iniqui ties and shortcomings they see around them, but instead have concluded that Democracy remains mankind's best hope of permanently bettering itself. Thus it is that we view Mr. Moody's decline from promise to reaction as trag ic indeed. And thus it is that we refuse to ac cept his philosophy. We are nowhere near being ready to throw our hands up in despair, as the backers of the Speaker Ban law in ef fect have done. Editors, The Tar Heel, The statement of the State As sistant Attorney General, Ralph Moody, in support of the "gag law" is regretable and unworthy of a man of his high position. . Moody ridiculously feels there is no connection between aca demic freedom and the law. His understanding of academic free dom is one of the most perverted and distorted imaginable. He feels that "academic freedom is the freedom of the teacher or research worker in" higher insti tutions of learning to investigate and discuss problems of his sci ence and to express his conclu sions." Yet how can Moody ex pect an academic community to discuss problems unless it is al lowed to hear all sides of the problem. One does not come to knowledgeable conclusions 'after hearing only one side of an issue. Mr. Moody feels he has wrap ped his case up when he remarks that, after all, "where is the academic freedom in the colleges of the Soviet Union. . . .?" This is exactly the point Mr. Moody! The gag law would attempt to shut off the free interchange of ideas, just as it is cut off in the Soviet Union. We are thus de meaning ourselves to their low position. If we are to show the world that democracy is a viable system, are we to prove it bv imitating the tactics used in the colleges behind the Iron Curtain? F.D.R. once said that "all wp have to fear is fear itself." Cer tainly, we should not fear to hear the views expressed by those- ; of another political per suasioil. Democracy can not de feat Commusism by running away from it, but by facing it square ly and proving that the strength of democratic ideas is greater than, that of Communist ideas. If Mr. Moody fears the appeal of Communist ideas, to . American students, he must not have as ' much faith in the power and ap peal of democratic concepts as do I. Let the students of North Carolina come to their own con clusions, for this is the Demo cratic way. It must be remembered that one of the first steps Hitler took in his quest for power was to eliminate from the public all ideas contrary to his. This is typical of totalitarian regimes. Let it not be typical of states of the greatest democracy in the world, the United States of America. - Stu Eizenstat . ZBT House An Answer To Ogeden's Letter Editors, The Tar Heel, Although presented in an in telligent and seemingly rational manner, Mr. Odgen's conclu sions about, and defense of, the Speaker Ban are based upon muddled end antiquated reason ing that obscures the central issue of debate. He begins his scrutiny of the problem with the ' use of the cliche, "Let's see both sides of America today. For the philoso the problem." After perceptive- phy "these men" really advocate ly recognizing that these legisla tors would like to see Univer sity policy agree with theirs, his insight is wasted when he fails to make a judgement upon his observation. Certainly "The sen timent behind their actions" is understandable, but because it is favorable, then let's condone it. If it is detrimental, then it should be condemned. I feel that it is most decidedly in the second category. The time, has long since past when legislators can coddle and "guide" an ed ucational institution like a house pet. Another erroneous generaliza tion lies at the heart of Mr. Og den's argument. He states . . . "However, remembering that the philosophy which these men wish to combat is the official philoso phy which motivates Russia, at ' least in part, to her aspiration of world conquest." This apparent ly valid statement is based on the notion that you should riot aid your enemies. That seems logical enough, you could say. But the action by the legislators exhibits a prime example of the ambival ence of some conservative thought, namely that the only way to maintain our open and free society is by limiting the freedom of its inquiring con stituency. This attitude of "pro tectionism", reveals the hypocrisy in the concept of freedom held by some people. It is one of the most prevalent double - standards in Question Of Civil Rights; A Look Into The Future By ARMISTEAD MAUPIN Foreword. Title III of the President's Civil Rights Bill of 1963 introduces a unique concept in the field of race relations. This section not only provides for the formal desegregation of public schools in the South but also seeks the removal of "rac ial imbalance" in schools through out the country. The bill proposes to achieve these goals by vesting broader powers in the Commis sioner of Education and the At torney General. The Commissioner would be authorized to fix the "rules and regulations" for carrying out pro grams of desegregation. He would, furthermore, be enabled, to take positive steps toward the elimina tion of "racial imbalance" by the shifting of students from school to school whenever necessary. The ultimate necessity, of course, would be the develop ment of a quota or ratio system by the individual schools for the maintenance of "racial balance." And it is not inconceivable that such a program might, someday, extend even to the classroom ... No one questioned the record of Mary Agnes Faircloth. For 27 years her diligence and integrity had served as a bea con for younger teachers at Her bert T. Mortmain Junior High School. She was a woman of re markable intelligence, driven by an iron will and a compulsion for perfection. ' Things, however, were far from perfect on the morning of Sept ' ember 29, 1966. A pall of uneasi ness overhung the teachers' lounge as Mary Agnes Faircloth conversed with young Miss Apple baum of the Mathematics Depart ment. "I'm in a rather awkward situ ation, Stella. As you know, the , man from the Commission visits the classroom today, and I have a serious racial imbalance in Ele mentary Sociology." "That can't be, Miss Faircloth! Your class was- reapportioned . months ago." ... "I know dear, but the Monroe boys are out with the mumps, and Rotunda Davis got married last week. I should never have let things slip. My , ethnic ratio is dreadfully off kilter. And, today of all; days, it just doesn't look right." , -: . ; ; The words came slowly, with painful ; certainty. ' Miss Apple baum made a serious face.. Mary Agnes Faircloth patted her bun nervously and continued. "Stella, I'm going to ask a fa vor that I've never asked of an other soul on this earth. If it isn't all right, just tell me so. We're friends, and I wouldn't im pose for the world." Miss Applebaum's assenting smile and nod passed unseen by Mary Agnes Faircloth. She was staring out the window at nothing. Her hands clamped onto a chair back as her lips forced out the difficult words. "Stella, could I possibly borrow three of your Negroes?" Miss Applebaum's face was at once sympathetic and resolute. "Oh, Miss Faircloth, I'm so . sorry . . . rra barely up to my own quota . . . Why don't you check with Doris? I understand her Marriage and Family Living class has an underbalance of white children. Perhaps you could trade or something." "Do you really think so?" said Mary Agnes Faircloth, turning to face her colleague. "I should never have let things slip. I should have seen the Dean of ' Racial Balance days ago. They'll never ..." Miss Applebaum gripped the old er woman's hand gently. "You're making too much of this, Miss Faircloth. The Commis sion can be very generous sometimes." is the careful selection of "the bet ter things in life" so as to avoid marring the ublemished tableau of capitalistic America. A final faulty generalization is to be found in the concluding sentence of the same para graph ". . . but it is certainly within the duty of a University to properly warn its students of the danger they will face and lav with fhdm nn ahfHincr sense of the traditions into which they were born." There are, I think, two key fallacies. The first is the appearance of the word "face". For the University in its support or acknowledgement of the Speaker Ban is not al lowing the students to face the extremely live ideology of com munism. It is fostering a shel tered atmosphere that has little verisimilitude to the actual world. I don't believe this is a claim the University wishes to boast of The second error is the phrase ". . . an abiding sense of the traditions into which they were born." Just because an in dividual is born in a society which believes in particular tra ditions does not mean that the individual is obligated to accept them. If an acceptance of these traditions is mandatory for each member of society, then the theoretical "free inquiry" is an evanescent rather than inveter ate concept. Connected with this notion of tradition, I sense that Mr. Ogden's basic premise is that an essential task of a Uni versity is to propagate a par ticular idea. This is "alluded" to in his ". . . and leave with them an abiding sense of the traditions . . .". The greatest tradition that America can offer to anyone within or without of its boundaries is the opportun ity for each individual to ex plore, examine, and evaluate as much of the world as he can dis cover. The present Speaker Ban is hardly in keeping with this tradition. John Shaffer 333 Craige The Editors On Individual Rights Editors, The Tar Heel, Congratulations on some clear thinking in your editorial discus sion (Sept. 27, DTH) of the Su preme Court's prayer and Bible reading decision. You argue con vincingly, that one's "right to do something, any thing, implies the right to do just, the opposite if one wishe.? to. Otherwise there would be no right no complete freedom of choice involved . ' ' The argument is well put, and to all thoughtful persons, I submit, if irrefutable. Yet the editors of the Daily Tar Heel, you yoursel ves, ostensibly refute it by con tinuing to support the President's Civil Rights Bill. And the most poignant objection to the Public Accomodations Title (ID within this bill is that while creating more freedom for some, it does so at the cost of less freedom for others. In logic, you will remember, the important thing is the form of an argument; if the form is valid, and the content is true, the argument is sound. The obvious point here is that the argument you put forward in support of the Bible-reading decision is equally applicable to the pending Civil Rights legislation. How then can you justify your position that one has a right to worship or not to worship, as he chooses, while a restaurant owner docs not have the right to serve whom he pleas es? For in your own words, "How can you have the 'right', the total descretion, to act, if you den't also have the total discretion not to act?" Or do you follow me at all? John II. Atkins 17 Old West A Gripe We All Understand Wei 1 Editors, The Tar Heel, Impressions are formed quick ly by the entering freshman dur ing their first two weeks of school. And the impression that has so far been given, at least to many students, by the Book Exchange has been anything but pleasant. Students seeking help in the not-so-easy task of finding the right books for the right course are often disappointed by the curt and unconcerned attitude of ten taken by the staff. Friend liness should not be too difficult to attain. A certain amount of restraint and understanding would indeed be welcome. Is the Book Exchange a private enterprise, or is it part of the University? If it is privately owned, it seems that the manage ment could make an effort to be as willing to help the student as the stores downtown are. Harry Blair Jr. Bill Harrison Melville Stephens Grapes Of Wrath "Who Do Yon Think You Are Indonesians?" By RALPH McGILL A Trappist monk, deeply mov ed by the deliberate, planned murder of children in Birming ham by men who dynamited a church at Sunday school time, knowing it would then be filled with young persons, sent the fol lowing text: "Qui Tacet Con sentire Videture." ("He who is silent is understood to con sent.") Silence is the dilemma of the so-called moderate South and North. The word no longer has its former validity. Today the word "moderate" has come to mean merely one who remains on the sidelines, waiting to see which way to jump. "Moderate" now means to remain silent, to avoid controversy, to make ijo commitment, to avoid affirming belief in principle. The Black Muslims, an ex tremist organization, campaign with the propaganda that the Negro can expect no mercy, no justice; that the white man does not intend to do what is moral ly right; that laws are meaning less, that while the Christian church here and there has re luctantly agreed to token inte gration of worshiping God, this is hypocritical window-dressing; that there is nothing to be gain ed by being moderate. The Bir mingham atrocity plays into their hands.-As a people we do not like to face the fact that there obviously are Americans who would welcome the oppor tunity to participate in the equiv alent of the late Adolph Hitler's concentration camp tortures and his gas chamber killings. The excesses of the worst of the White Citizens Councils and of the riff-raff scrapings that make up the lesser organizations of hate every day give ammuni tion to support the claims of the fanatic Black (Muslim extrem ists. None of Hitler's murderers weremore brutalized than those who decided to kill children at Sunday school as a terrorist act designed to defy this country's laws and court orders. These things seemed far away when they happened in Algeria. Yet, we still hear the so-called mod erates saying that "it" is all the fault of the Kennedys or of Martin Luther King or of tele vision or the press. "Ii only peo ple would, quit talking about it," they say of the convuLsive social revolution that literally girdles the earth, "it would all die down " What confronts us is the fact tnat all along the "moderate" has been mostly myth. Bv his silence he gave consent to im moderation We can see", too, what this had done to a once fine, honest word. The moder ates, silent on the sidelines, have brought about its undoing. In the near decade since the U S Supreme Court's decision ' on" school, there is nowhere on record a single constructive plan of action by a so-called moderate. Here and there were a few per sons who moved from the side lines into action designed to save schools, to obey law or to prevent violence. They found tnemselves cursed by phone and letter and looked at askance by many of their church congrega tions and friends. These men, by acting as mod erates in the deep meaning of the word, found themselves label ed as immoderates. By and large, the so-called moderates in pulpits, in business, in profes sions, in editorial offices, in edu cation, remained carefully si lent and. aloof. When a neighbor ing city managed to affect peace ful desegregation of its schools, these "moderates" said, "We are delighted, but of course we can't do that in our city. We aien't ready." This was precisely what the extremist elements also were saying . So now after the bombing of schools, temples, churches, homes and motels comes the dynamiting of a crowded Sunday school where Negro children, reading the lesson of the for giveness of love, were killed or maimed. A few resolutions have been adopted. Expressions of horror and regret have been made. All silence falls again. But, tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow will creep into our petty pace . . . And until the "moderate" and the great body of Christianity make up their minds whether by their- silence they give consent to the Black Muslims, the White Citizens Council or the dynamit ers, we shall continue to tram ple out that bitter vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored.
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Sept. 29, 1963, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75