Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / Nov. 19, 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
Page 2 Friday, November 19, 1965 ' ,f .-----............ ...... Stye Satlg War id j Opinion of the Daily Tar Heel are expressed In its :g & editorials. Letters and columns, covering a wide range :g of views, reflect the personal opinions of their authors. :::: ERNIE McCRARY. EDITOR X Vi H ...1v1i.,-.,,v.iv.TT.T.v,TAv.vw,:,:,wvAvw V V- .VV. V"""".".V.V. V.V.V. ........ ".V "Rameses Who?" Rameses is gone. And UNC students were the last to know. The Of fice of the Dean of Men has taken the attitude of late that no unhappy news is to be released unless it is forced out as by publication in state papers. The approach which has been demonstrated is, "Well, if it's out I guess we'll have to talk about it." The ram was snatched before last weekend. Rum ors of the deed circulated around campus and Dean of Men William G. Long said that he knew by Tues day that the ram was definitely gone. But on Tuesday a representative of his office flat ly denied the rumor to the DTH. As Mrs. R. C. Hogan, who lives at the farm where Rameses is kept, said, "They have been trying to cov er it up until they got him back to keep Carolina stu dents from getting upset and going over and tearing around the Duke campus." A noble purpose, indeed, but nevertheless we do not feel very kindly toward being on the receiving end of apparent lies or partial truths from the administration. While he has not exactly told any falsehoods about the matter, Campus Police Chief Arthur Beau mont has just been referring all inquiries to the local police because he knew they had no information to provide. While completely sympathizing with efforts to avoid any inter-campus violence, we find it hard to swallow this "keep it a secret as long as we can" policy. Naivete is usually not a trait of school admin istrators, but we can think of nothing else to call it if they think that this or any other story of campus-wide interest can be permanently concealed, no matter how good they think the reason is. In the meantime, if we don't have a burglar alarm put in Rameses' stall, with maybe a guard or three before the State, Wake Forest and Duke games, our mascot is going to be the most widely travelled ram in the history of the species. Concerning a rescue raid to the Duke campus, we prefer to see the thieves bring the ram to the game and get kicked out of school after the UNC football team has soundly thrashed the boys on the Duke squad. Would It Help If I Say PLEASE Get Me a Date Ticket? 'I The UP Strike University Party Chairman Jim Hubbard is be ing less than fair when he accuses Elections Board Chairman Alvin Tyndall of being "incompetent" and demands his replacement. Nc matter how valid or invalid Hubbard's com plaints against the handling of elections, he should have first presented his case to Student Body Presi dent Paul Dickson, who appointed Tyndall. If Dick son had refused to consider the UP's protests, Hub bard would have been on considerably stronger ground in making his public charges. Dickson said Thursday that the first time he heard Hubbard's accusations was when a DTH reporter showed him the statement and asked for his com ment. He could hardly be expected to say anything except he has "no intentions" of giving Tyndall the boot. The UP ought to be smart enough to know that if it really wants Dickson to get a new Elections Board chairman, a public statement is not the way to begin going about it. Probably the only thing it created was sympathy for Tyndall. Crybaby politics is as worthless as dirty politics. Let's get that bi-partisan committee suggested to set up a political code of conduct in operation soon. Sty Satly war 72 Years of Editorial Freedom g The Daily Tar Heel is the official news publication of the University of North Carolina and is published by : students daily except Mondays, examination periods and ? :x vacations. Ernie McCrary, editor; John Jennrich, associate editor; Barry Jacobs, managing editor; Fred Thomas, news editor, Pat Stith, sports editor; Gene Rector, asst. sports x editor; Kerry Sipe, night editor; Ernest Robl, photograph- x er; Chip Barnard, editorial cartoonist; John Greenbacker, political writer; Ed Freakley, Andy Myers, Lynne HarveL jx :x" Lynne Sizemore, David Rothman, Ray Linville, staff writers; Jack Harrington, bus. mgr.; Tom Clark, asst. bus. mgr.; Woody SoboL ad. mgr. second class postage paid at the post office in Chapel : S Hill, N. C. 27514. Subscription rates: $4.50 per semester: :$ S S8 per year. Send change of address to The DailyJar :$ : Heel. Box 1080. Chapel Hill, N. C, 27514. Printed by the : Chapel Hill Publishing Co., Inc. The Associated Press is entitled exclusively to the use for republication of all local news printed in this newspaper as well as all ap xj x news dispatches. 1 ' ' They Think So Rolling Stones Have Sex? Letters To The Editor By JONATHAN YARDLEY Greensboro Daily News SOMEWHERE IN THE GREENSBORO COLISEUM The Rolling Stones require the talents (if that is the word) of a Tom Wolfe. The ordinary prose of an ordinary journalist fails them. Their sounds (zowee! ! wow! ! kerbangggg ! !, Mr. Wolfe might say) escape description, and in fact I am not at all sure they are worth describing. The Rolling Stones, unlike the Beatles or the Vibrations (who appeared on the program with the Rolling Stones), are resolutely un wholesome. If they have any sense of humor the Beatles certainly do it was not on display here Friday night. If they have any real talent for rhythm and blues the Vi brations do it has been ignored. WTiat the Rolling Stones do have, or think they have, is sex. The leader of their band is someone named Mick, and Mick's stage maneuvers are a sight to see; they make Elvis Pressley (remember him?) look like the chaperon doing a fox trot. Mick's ap peal seems to lie in his physique, which is skinny; his hair, which comes dangerously close to his shoulders; and his lisp. Love Those Lips Mick's lips are surely the most remark able lips ever nurtured on the face of man. They are immense, two great flapping hunks of flesh that reduce the rest of his face to embarrassment at its inadequacy. But they exercise, as all distortions do, an undeniable fascination mainly among the girls, I trust. One of those most fascinated is said to be Baby Jane Holzer (wowee!!! zam!! the most!?), whome my cafe so ciety correspondent reports has been seen with him at various discotheques and the like. ! Wynn-Lipsitz Reasoning Questioned Editor, The Daily Tar Heel: The letter from Lewis Lipsitz and Wil liam Wynn urging students to participate in the March on Washington for Peace in Viet Nam deserves an immediate reply. I respect the professional reputation of these distinguished scholars. I respect their hu manitarian motives and in no way ques tion their sincerity, their loyalty or their right to dissent. I do, however, question their seasoning. It is, perhaps, understandable that these scholars, in their deep humanitarian con cern, should fall into the trap of substitut ing emotionalism for rationality and in do- - ing'so find it necessary to change facts to fit their favortie theories. This is something that many academicians are all too fre quently guilty of. I believe that in this case, as always, the students will insist upon cutting the layers of verbose obfusca tion to get to the core of the matter to the truth. Where facts have been concealed and distorted in a cloudbank of ambiguous ter minology, it is well to make a point by point analysis if one wishes to get at the truth. The following is such an analysis of the Wynn-Lipsitz letter: (1) The authors would like to say (though they seem to be rather reluctant to come right out and say it) that American assist ance is the same as North Vietnamese ag gression. To this end they refer to North Vietnamese action as "intervention". But the fact, is that when one sovereign nation sends across the border of another sov ereign nation thousands of trained, armed, professional agitators whose purpose it is to foment revolution, such action is not "inter vention". It is aggression. It is invasion. The fact is that the United States is show ing incredible restraint in not wiping the collectivist aggressors in Hanoi off the map. Just as it wiped off the map that other collectivist mob the Nazi farty. (2) The authors wish to say that the American - South Vietnamese element and the Chinese - North Vietnamese element are equally guilty of bringing about the "terror, death and destruction" in the South. To this end they refer to both elements as "belligerents". The fact is that according to this logic, both the "belligerents" Nazi Germany and the United States share equal guilt for the terror, death and destruction of World War II. (3) The authors say with emotion (ignor ing rationality) that they are against war. The fact is that it is impossible to be "for" or "against" war. The word "war" is a description of a state of affairs and it is impossible to be for or against a descrip tion. The question is whether the authors are against the cause of war: aggression. Apparently they are not. (4) The authors would like to say that the South Vietnamese government is not as freedom-loving as It should be. That may be. But the fact is that we know for a certainty that the North Vietnamese gov ernment is not a freedom-loving one (though the authors imply that it is, apparently be ing of the opinion that totalitarianism x means freedom, at least in some cases). (5) The authors would have us believe that the American presence in Viet Nam. But the inescapable fact is that there is an issue. An issue which goes far beyond the borders of Viet Nam. Indeed, an issue which has nothing to do with nations, but with something far more important people. In dividuals. It is an issue which has to do with the slaughter of the people of Hun gary, the streams of refugees from Cuba, the captives behind the Berlin wall. It is an issue which has to do with all the individuals who are locked in collectivist orisons all over the world. It is the same issue we have had throughout man's his tory. And the parties to the disagreement are the same: the Individual, who asks only to be left alone, and the Collectivist Mob which is determined to enslave him; the Individual, who insists that means are just as important as ends, and the Collec tivist Mob, which is prepared to endorse any means including the initiation of physical coercion to achieve its ends. It is unfortunate that the South Vietnamese nation has been turned into a battlefield for resolving this issue. But let us remem ber that it was Peiping and not Washington which made it so. That it was Peiking and not Washington which created the terror, death and destruction of which the authors speak. The simple fact is that the authors should not be leading a peace march to Washing ton, but to Peiping. (6) The authors would have us believe that the American presence in Viet Nam is impractical, futle. The factjiowever, is that American action is much more than a gesture of assistance to South Viet Nam. It is a display of conviction, of resolve, of spirit. It is visible proof that Americans believe in what they say they believe in and are prepared to stand for those beliefs whatever the cost. Americans are dying in Viet Nam not just for America the geo graphic location, but for America the Idea. And if it is futile to die for an idea par ticularly the idea of freedom then I won der if any man has ever died a meaningful death. Or lived a meaningful life. America (though it may be changing) is still a nation of free individuals. I be lieve that the resolve of these individuals will remain firm and that their spirits will not falter in the face of the collectivitst mob, however large that mob may grow to be. As that old one-time expatriate Scott Fitzgerald once put it: "France was a land, England was a people, but America, hav ing about it yet that quality of the idea, was harder to utter. It was ... a willing ness of the heart." (7) The authors maintain that the col lectivists want peace. But they are unable to point to any "peace marchers" like themselves 'in Peiping or Hanoi. If the auth ors will show me one, just one citizen in those places who is openly picketing and marching to protest his government's im perialistic wars of "liberation", then I will believe them. Indeed, then I will even be prepared to believe that the peace-loving people of those places are free men who may freely voice criticism of their govern ment's foreign policy at any time they please. ! .... While you march on Washington in the cause of pteace, gentlemen, I hope you will pause to ponder the fact that in the very act which you perform you complete ly refute your own argument. And that, like Neville Chamberlain at Munich, you are not advancing the cause of peace but are, instead, promoting a wider-spread and more horrible war. I hope that you will pause to ponder the fact that, however sincere your hu manitarian 'motives, you are putting your stamp of approval on collectivist aggression. Paul A. Smith 654 Ehringhaus Lips and all, Mick was right here on the stage of War Memorial Coliseum on Friday night And so were the girls. Hundreds and hundreds of high-decibel little females, a few of them escorted by young men most of whom were rather glum throughout the proceedings. The young men were glum for two rea sons, I suspect: at their age it is considered manly to be unemotional, and then- girl friends were doing some rather embarass in things. (One of these young men must have been a budding sociologist: he set uu moving, unsmiling and unclappmg through the entire spectacle, and when the Rolling Stones left he just got up and walked right out. Probably to write a dissertation.) Up And Down Some of the girls embarrassed their boy friends by jumping and gyrating. But that pursuit was dampened by the over-zealous police, who announced that if anyone rushed the stage to welcome the Stones the loud speakers would be turned off. Since nothing could be worse than depriving the girls of the noise of Stones, they were respectfully stationary. The only near exception to this rule oc curred at the arrival of the Rolling Stones. To a girl they rose, shouting, screaming, armwaving, to greet these demigods. Since those of us toward the rear could not see, we had to rise. And thus we found ourselves standing for the Stones, something I would not as a rule do. It was the screaming that really em barrassed the boys. No wonder. These girls can scream like meemies. When To Scream There is, of course, an art to it. It must be done at the right moment a high note, a suggestive phrase, a flip of the hip. A little girl sitting near us had it right down pat. During much of the evening she simply sat there with her head in her hands, ap parently overcome by the glories of the eve ning. But whenever screaming time came around, she was right in their with the best of them, hands cupped around her mouth and eyes flashing. Once she was putting on lipstick when a good screaming moment arrived. She re moved the stick, screamed, then resumed lipsticking. Such precision demands respect. The final number was called "Satisfac tion." It is the Stones' big smash hit, and needless to say the girls were close to delirium. It was what everyone had been waiting for and when it was over the Stones dashed off the stage, without so much as a goodbye, as though their lives were in dan ger. They may have been. J Away They Went But what was puzzling was that there was no protest. All the girls screamed for' a second or two, but then they got up and mached out. Fulfilled, or sated, I suppose. Oh well, in a few years they'll all be grown up, married, with kids and bridge clubs, and somehow it doesn't seem likely: that Mick and his cohorts or some obnox ious disk jockey or "Satisfaction" will have: warped them. We all seem to survive, as: many a middle-aged Sinatra fan will attest (while he's smashing Bob Dylan records).- Zoom! righto! shazam!!! : Mike Jennings Consensus i Thoughtful supporters of President Johnson's Viet Nam policy are murmuring at the war's ; current dousing in holy water. They're willibg to show they agree with the administration, but they see no reason why we should aill march down to the Jordan to get dunked. Thee's every indication that we're ap proaching the point where a sincere oppon ent of the war can win his way back to grace only by shouting, "I was deep in sin, brother, but! now I see the light." Even lukewarm supporters will have to show their faith. The hallelujah bandwagon is be ginning to roll. Yet it's not Daddy J. who's at the reins. His may be the loudest "Amen," but he's not preaching the sermon. We are. We've decided it's time for con sensus, so we've jumped up and started spouting glory which, in this case, is that it's our patriotic duty to be of one opinion. Well, maybe it is time for consensus. But it's never time for consensus of opinion. On Viet Nam No that's not redundant. Consensus of opinion is a very different thing from con sensus of support. Witness the support giv en Goldwater by most Republicans. But the American tradition demands consensus of opinion m time of war, and that demand is beginning to assert itself. Alexis de TocqueviUe, the Frenchman who wrote Democracy in America, exam ined our burgeoning tradition in the 1840's. one of his comments on public opinion in America seems fitting here: n JlJ0 a-S the mairity is still unde cided discussion is carried on; but as soon as its decision is irrevocably pronounced, everyone is silent, and the friends as wSi assentinT f the measure assenting to its propriety" ed TheT never reay "ach ed the State de Toqueville describes but PPrSacheaCvhed Ume of ' S S !3wS Whenever support of national u T-""1 a matter of rather than of decision. She is aDnrnar.V!r. : ri wtiUI5 it now. conversion i r Betters The DaHy Tar Heel welcomes letters to the editor on any subject, particularly on matters of local or University inter est. Letters must be typed, double spaced and must include the name and address of the author or authors. Names will not be omitted in publication. Let ters should be kept as brief as possible. The DTH reserves the right to edit for length or libel. K X" IDtOT YEC 5TACTLEO II r . tt a k - ( MS I THOUGHT fT ) I- IT) '
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Nov. 19, 1965, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75