Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / May 11, 1967, 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
f)n Other Camvuses The Freedom To March As We See It And When We Get Rid Of These Grubbv Students. We Can Turn It Into Something Useful - Like Offices For Us. The Vietnam Referendui Challenged In Illinois With the days drawing short and tempers rising in proportion, the whole concept of the Vietnam referendum seems to have been distorted. There are four points in the vote proposed, though there are those (hawks) who argue that the whole deal is not balanced and that there should be as m a n y hawk choices as dove choices somehow on the theory that the students will . blindfold themselves and vote, so there should be as great a purely mathematical chance for a dove as a hawk vote to be cast. Even at this level, the argu ment seems ridiculous and could do nothing but hinder the dove chances if anything by bringing out a spite vote of students who aren't going to be hoodwindked into doing anything just because there are more chances to do it. However, hopefully the referen dum will go beyond that level of pettiness and nonthink. Keep in mind that the instruc tions are to mark the choice most nearly coinciding with the student's own views. Choice A: favors the defeat of North Vietnam through wide spread bombing and land inva sion. This seems to approximate the idea presented by General Curtis Lemay who wants to keep going until there are no two bricks left intact in the whole country. Choice B : recommends a contin uation of the present policy. This is the hang-up, for the hawks are claiming that this is a policy of good old middle - of the road. The hawks say this should be the third of five, not the second of four. r How the hawks, or anybody else, '; for that'Tmattef,r can "say the present policy doesn't imply es calation is beyond us. To check any of the facts corroborates our opinion that that U.S. is indeed in the process of escalat ing. Take for one small example Gen. William C. Westmoreland's Will BVP RIP. Battle-Vance-Pettigrew is dying. BVP dorm is being turned into offices for administrators and fa ' culty, probably by next fall, ac cording to the latest from the Di j rector of Housing. The residents haven't been told : yet officially, and they weren't . told at all until after room reser vations had been closed for a longtime. Granted Craige and James are nice places to live and hopefully the men in BVP will like it, be cause this is where they'll be. But the odds are that those in BVP . were there for the express purpose of not being 18 miles ; away out on South Campus. Many j who are in BVP have been there for at least two years and many more than that. They don't want to give up the large rooms, the accessability to both classes and Harry's. But they had no choice. Not even told about it in time to get : rooms in Old East or Old West or wherever they wanted to be. The third oldest dorm on cam pus. Almost an institution in itself. The home of Thomas. Wolfe the Great. Turned into offices because "they need the space." Why not the Alumni Building which most everyone will admit is the biggest set of architectural blunders ever massed under one roof? Our aesthetic sense is injured. Maybe a petition by all the resi dents presented to the Board of Trustees Friday might help. It's worth a try. appearance before the Congress asking for an additional 100, 000 troops. Or look at the bomb ing records and put on a map where we are bombing now that we weren't a couple of months ago. Or pick up almost any copy of the New York Times and see what else is going on with the war. Choice C says the U.S. should de escalate, stop the bombing in North Vietnam, and try to get negotiations going. This is the view held by Sen. Ted Kennedy who spoke here Tuesday night, and that of Al Lowenstein who made his whirlwind tour of the campus a week ago. If there is a voice of moderation expressed in the referendum, this is it. It says that bombing has not brought about negotia tions and a de-escalation might. If it doesn't, say these advocat es, nothing will have been lost, for they all have statistics show ing how fewer lives are lost dur ing bombing lulls than during more vigorous warfare. Choice D: says the U.S. should pull out of Vietnam completely and immediately. Though this view has not been argued by anybody as thoroughly as the rest, it appears that this is the viewpoint of the most radical of the leftists, most of the mem bers of the SDS and the carry overs of the old SPU. If someone feels strongly in his conscience that he has to burn his draft card, or a flag, or something else, that's his own problem. Provided of course, he's willing to pay the conse quences of trying to buck the whole system when he's in the - vast minority. . it v While we don't 'feel that" it' is a good or worthwhile thing to do oth er than keep our card safely in our back pocket, we can see where others might. Without go ng into the argument of wheth er or not it is unpatriotic to stand up this strongly against the sys tem where it wouldn't be to ex press doubts and questions, it seems that more can be accom plished when things are perform ed in a more orderly manner. And by more legal means. Yes, there are critics of the upcoming Vietnam referendum, and most of them are hawks. But it seems that they're not complain ing because it isn't fair, but rath er, because it is. - Bill Amlong, Editor Tom Clark, Business Manager Lytt Stamps, Managing Editor John Askew Ad. Mgr. Peter Harris, Steve Knowlton Associate Editors Don Campbell ....... News Editor Carol Wonsavage ... Feature Ed. Jim Fields .. .. Sports Editor Owen Davis .... Asst. Spts. Ed. Wayne Hurder ... .... Copy Editor Jock Lauterer Photo Editor Bruce Strauch Cartoonist Mike McGowan, Steve Adams : Photographer? Steve Knowlton, Hunter George, Karen Freeman, Donna Reifsni- der, Sandy Lord, Joe Ritok, Joe Coltrane, Penny Raynor, Joe. Sanders, Julie Parker, Mar.v Lyn Field, Ernest ftobl, Penny Satisky. The. Daily Tar Heel is the official news publication of the University pf North Carolina and is published by students daily except Mondays, ex amination periods and vacations. . Second class postage paid at the Post Office in Chapel Hill, N. C. Subscription rates: $4.50 per semes ter; $3 per year. Printed by the Chapel HiU Publishing Co., Inc., 501 W. Franklin St.. Chapel Hill, N. C. 12ht$ - I X&iYv'. mi i -it&ww mi crat a In The Mail TTh ii TO TVO To the Editors: There are luxuries which men of re sponsibility may not enjoy. For the journalist, one such luxury is thought less fervor. His medium is a potent instrument for persuasion, and it de mands that he always distinguish be tween statement of act and profession of faith. Friday's column "As We See It" was a regretable example of failure. The writer seriously misrepresented Wed nesday's debate on Vietnam by omiss ion and overstatement. If the descrip tion had been calculated instead of gushing, it would have meant an un forgivable abuse of the editorial plat form. As it was, the effect was dis tasteful. Daniel Davidson was described as an "inarticulate hawk" who was "de molished to a quivering heap of black feathers" by a presumably more arti culate Al Lowenstein. As I saw it, both speakers were ineffective. Both spoke without incisiveness or emotional con trol, and if Davidson plodded, Lowen stein babbled. Lowenstein was depicted as "coo ing triumphantly to all those who had given him a standing ovation." The standing ovation came after his frenz ied outcry against nuclear holocaust. Considering the militant crowds that turn out for "Vietnam debates" on this campus, he should have brought down the house. It was surprising to read, in Fri day's editorial, that Davidson did not explain why Lewenstein's proposed "enclave" strategy would not work 'in Vietnam. As a matter of fact, David son explained it so clearly that Lowen tein finally retreated on that point, saying he did not actually advocate the enclave strategy, but only questioned our present course. This, incidentally, is what is wrong with enclaves: if we hold any number of sealed - off strongholds and the enemy controls the vast, surrounding remainder of the country, then the enemy can go about the business of ruling Vietnam until our fortresses turn to powder. It is naive to believe there would be free elections in a communist South Vietnam any sooner than there will be free elections in .communist North Vietnam. Those Vietnamese democrats who could not be sheltered in our enclaves would fall on hard times, and the other few would sit by the telephone forever wait ing for negotiators to be proposed. Your writer asks two question: 1) Why are we in Vietnam? and 2) What good is it doing to bomb the north? Davidson did not adequately answer these questions, but they have been answered before. It is incorrect to say that our government sidesteps them. Though I am not privy to the deepest motives of our policy-makers, I find several good reasons for our presence in Vietnam. For ona things, as Davidson . said, we are buying time for the de velopment of popular government in other countries. This idea is not based ge On Loweiigteiii Continues on a simple "domino theory" linking South Vietnam's regime with those in other Southeast Asian countries. In fact, Davidson could have said, without ex--aggeration, that our action 'in Vietnam safeguards the chance for self - deter mination in all of the world's develop ing states. The ideological split amonp communists is drawn largely down tht line between world - revolutionists anxJ advocates of compstitive coexistence. The first faction still aims at the old Comintern goal of subverting Asia, Af rica, and Latin America, and thereby amassing human strength against the en circled capitalist countries. If the world revolution concept is allowed to suc ceed in Vietnam, its influence in oth er communist movements will be en hanced. Davidson mentioned our need to de monstrate that we will ensure the se curity of small nations. A state which is militarily weak cannot be expected to endure a marathon "war of libera tion" alone, and its enemies cannot be acclaimed as the people's choice mere ly because they have a superior organ ization for waging war. It is a fact we must face that most of "the people" u. a country such as Vietnam are neither pro - government nor pro - commun ist, but in fact apathetic. For them, the authority of the communist fac tion resides in its unchallenged ability to coerce them. If it seems absurd for us to be at war over one small country such as Vietnam, remember that war no long er erupts in massive movements of ar mored divisions or in air raids at dawn. It no longer is fought under the crude banner of "Lebensraum," but in the name of "national liberation." Appearing hesitantly in one country and then another, it is always portrayed as popular insurrection. If the slogans seem ubiquitous and the people seem always to be directed by professional, trained cadres, then forgive these na tional liberators. Their subtlety is not yet perfect. The bombing of the north is intend ed to put a high price on the ene my's logistical operations. To suggest, as some do, that hospitals and resi dential areas have been deliberately bombed is foolish. Even aside from be ing morally repugnant, such bombings would be militarily pointless. It is inevi table, however, that an attack on al most any target in the Hanoi - Haiphong area involved civilian casulaties be cause of the region's population densi ty, one of the greatest in the world. 'But what bothers me most about Fri day's editorial is not its viewpoint, but its alarming irresponsibility. Your writer has impatiently rejected the simple truth for an alloy , made with dreams and desires. In the latter half of his essay he's just plain tripping the light fantastic, indicting the government ' wholesale without justification. The impression is that the debate reveal ed our national leadership to be sinis The Student Senate at NORTHWEST ERN UNIVERSITY blasted an Illinois House of Representatives bill that would mako picketing unlawful at gov ernmental and educational institutions. Any person who violates the provisions of the bill would be fined not more than $1CC0 or imprisoned not more than one year. The Student Senate president was elected two weeks ago after running on a student power platform which includ ed two "bitch-ins" and subsequent mar ches on the administration building. A 19 - yaar - old UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA coed who recently ad vertised for a temporary mate so she could move out of a dormitory won't have to gt married after all. Eliza beth Freedman of New Rochelle, N. Y., has been accepted at one of Penn's housekeeping dorms next fall. Each of the dorms will house 18 women. Miss Freedman had placed an advertisement in a local newspaper two weeks ago for a temporary husband with an apartment so she could get out of her dorm. Class credit for outside activities will be given to students at the UNIVER SITY OF MINNESOTA who work in community action organizations in a new work - study program sponsored by the National Student Association. The program will encourage students of ur ban and community affairs to gain prac tical experience by working on com munity projects on a quarterly basis. They will receive three credits per quar ter for their work. The UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN Student Senate voted unanimously last week to' sponsor a campus - wide re ferendum on a bill which would end all faculty and administration power over non-classroom student affairs. The mea sure would strip the student-faculty committee which regulates campus groups of its powers and make the groups independent. ter and indefensible, when that was only the wish of the writer. This appears to be characteristic of the unbalanced values- held ; iJy' "some groups , on-cur campus.- Freedom of speech, it seems, is priceless and es sential to them only as it allows them to fill the air with their own invec tive, drowning other voices into silence. They adorn their politics with pleas for universal rights, good fellowship, and tolerance. They meet opposition with a fine stream of venom. If your writer and I went to the same place Wednesday night, we saw two different debates. That could mean that one of us fell asleep and had a pleasant dream. More likely, it means that both -of us listened with certain predispositions. The crucial difference between us is that I may be allowed my prejudice; your writer, being a journalist, may not. Sincerely, Dave Mayo Let's Be Fair To the Editor: What I found appealing about Al Low enstein's views on Viet Nam was that they seemed so sensible. Unlike some of the pacifists, Lowenstein apparently does not think that, if we only loved our en emies hard enough, they would be shock ed into a change of heart and abandon the error of their aggressive ways. Nor does he seem to harbor any repressed sympathies for the Utopian aspects of Communism which make him willing to overlook the brutal facts of life under present-day Communist governments. Lowenstein admits that if we simply pull out of South Viet Nam the Com munists will slaughter vast numbers of the people we are presently defending. Furthermore, he had an answer for the question which I thought would be his downfall: "What realistic alternative can you propose to our present policy in Viet Nam?" It was his answer to this question which made him so popular with the audience. He simply pointed out that our present policy has not brought about peace in Viet Nam, and that Gen eral Westmoreland does not look for an end to the war for some years to come. Under the circumstances, Lowenstein thought it might be a good idea to try another policy: stop bombing the North, withdraw into enclaves, and ask for negotiations. Again, Lowenstein showed himself to be very levelheaded. He admitted that the enemy might not negotiate and might choose instead to wait, hoping that we would get tired of the struggle and with draw. But, he pointed out, the proposed policy would at least throw the weight of world opinion on our side (for once!), and, more important, it would reduce the scale of the war, which would mean smaller losses for the United States in terms of men and materiel. It boils down to a choice between carrying on the struggle while following our present pol The study of Urdu, a dialect of the'.' Hindustani longue, will be the only re quirement at a paperless, testless col lege to be established at FORDHAM'' UNIVERSITY in New York. Students and professors will plan th;1 curriculum themselves and will choose where they will meet for classes. Urdu was chos-' cn as the required course because it would by a totally new experience for; the students who are members o the : class of '71 and because it would be a "challenge" to them. Said Dr. Eliza-'; bth Sewell, head of the college, 4 Ve hope to make life so interesting that ' the students won't need LSD." Former Alabama Gove. George C. . Wallace's car was pounded and rocked . by DARTMOUTH COLLEGE students after he addressed the student body last week. Wallace, shaken but not hurt, said, "They were trying to turn the car over and to knock in the top. That's academic fre2dom. That academic freedom -will get you killed." The stu dents, including Negro members of Dart mouth's Afro - American Society, wav ed placards saying "Wallace is a ra cist" and "Wallace killed my brothers." Letters The Daily Tar Heel accepts letters typed and signed. We welcome open discussion by all interested persons. Our policy is to. print all timely letters in the public interest. icy of continuing escalation and ever increasing costs in men and equipment, 'or standing pat in enclaves and continu r ing the. struggle on a greatly reduced scale while working for negotiatiqns. That Lowenstem's was the more sensible of the two alternatives was obvious to me and, apparently, to most of the audience. Lowenstein avoided extremes. He did not advocate that we simply give up and withdraw, nor did he advise us to attempt to wipe North Viet Nam off the map and risk war with Russia and China. If there are any serious flaws in his reasoning, I wish someone would write to the Tar Heel and point them out. Davidson certainly couldn't, and the letters I've seen have simply asserted that Lowenstein conld be answered with out attempting to do it. Tom Camaro Victory Village To The Edtior: I am apathetic. There is no doubt. As a resident of Odum Village since Septem ber 1966 and having no knowledge of my appointed governing body, having no knowledge of elections held in the spring (but not this year because I was apa thetic), having no knowledge of whom to call regarding broken-down equipment in the Jackson Circle playground (it will never be fixed now since it is to be torn down), I have certainly been apa thetic. I agree with the Tar Heel editorial. Let us forgive and forget what is past, but why wait until September 1967. Let us hold elections now. Spring is still with us. There is still time to be apa thetic with knowledge. Yours truly Moira S. Pearson Poem To Yank The Peters and other yanks : have their psychedelic : dictionaries to carry them thru the soulfull columns of the learning-factory tabloid. Fun, fun, fun, and a great learning experience to come where you're not wanted and criticize, complain, bitch. The cascading brain-juices in the hollow skull drip rats, toe-jam andr Groucho Marx and pachyderms, strikes and war dissent and sunflowers and Celia. Go home, Peter and other yanks, back to Greenwich and other cold places; back to the glue heads and free-mind poets. Go home, cool Peter, frigid yanks, GO HOME Bob Haisley Ray McGraw 309 Connor
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
May 11, 1967, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75