"" r 33: 23
t LjS "taj&BP' J
BSM
Friday, September 19, 1975
End of independence
In order to protect freedom of expression, both editorial and artistic, a
buffer must be placed between campus media and the political structure
which supplies them with some of their funds. That buffer has traditionally
been the Media Board, an overseeing body composed of some Student
Government representatives, some professional members, members at
large, and representatives from each of the campus media.
That buffer has now been destroyed by action of the Campus Governing
Council. The entire concept of balance and expertise has been destroyed
with the passage of bylaws never seen nor approved by the Media Board.
The official bylaws of the Media Board, signed by the Student Body
president and CGC speaker, were lost when the Media Board was ousted
from its office and its files were placed unlocked and unguarded in the lobby
of Suite C. Although several copies of these bylaws exist (including copies in
the appendices of the Student Government Code), the new chairperson of
the Media Board, Dick Pope, took it upon himself to draft a new set of
bylaws and present them to the CGC. No other Media Board members saw
these bylaws.
These bylaws have not been passed by the Media Board, as tradition, law,
the former bylaws and common courtesy would seem to dictate. For that
reason alone the action of Pope, the CGC Administration Committee and
the CGC is repulsive.
More frightening than this seizure of prerogative, however, is the fact that
the new board does not permit either professional representives or anyone
associated with the campus media to vote. The only voting members are
appointed by the president, the CGC, the Graduate and Professional
Student Federation, and members selected by these appointees. And the
new bylaws are riddled with provisions for CGC intervention in any Media
Board actions.
In other words, the independent Media Board is gone. Can independent
student voices in the campus media long survive?
Grading the graders
At 4 p.m. today in Hamilton Hall auditorium, the Faculty Council will
convene. For most students, the purposes and procedures of the council are
obscure, if not completely unknown. Today at 4 p.m. is a good time for
students to learn a little more about the council, its goals, and the kind of
persons who people it.
A committee of the Faculty Council, under the chairpersonship of
Provost J. Charles Morrow, has proposed a re-evaluation of grades which
would make A's rare, Cs common and current levels of performance the
equivalent of one letter grade lower than currently received. Today's A-level
work would be graded as B-level work under this proposal.
This proposal comes without benefit of student commentary or input. It is
a complete distortion of a proposal by Professor James Leutze of the history
department to permit "plus and minus" gradations between letter grades in
order that greater precision in grading can be achieved.
The committee proposal can do only harm to the graduates of this
institution as they leave to compete for scarce slots in graduate and
professional schools and in the job market.-As long as other schools do not
revalue their grading systems, Carolina graduates must face unfair
competition, ..... v; ... -
Faculty Council Chairperson George V.. Taylor has shown the
resoluteness and good sense to openly oppose the "downgrading" scheme.
The Campus Governing Council has passed unanimously a resolution
condemning it. Now individual students must convey their objections to the
Faculty Council as a whole.
It is in the interest of every student, from the full-time beer-guzzler to the
half-crazed Wilson bookworm, to oppose this grading change. That
opposition should be expressed today in the auditorium of Hamilton Hall at
4 p.m.
A lot of students will have the chance to learn a lot about those professors
active in faculty government.
DU and the rest of us
The approval by the Chapel Hill Board of Aldermen of a special use
permit for proposed renovations in the Delta Upsilon fraternity house has
ended a long controversy over the use of DU property. Both the brothers of
Delta Upsilon and the neighbors on Rosemary Street had to compromise
ultimate objectives, but the final resolution of the conflict should permit
some degree of harmony in that section of town.
The aldermen wisely permitted the DU house to improve its property and
to expand its quarters. As fraternities and sororities grow and change in
orientation, changes in the structures that shelter them must be made. The
reliance upon some architectural design revisions and upon municipal noise
ordinances is superior to the reliance upon total restriction by denial of the
permit.
Controversies over Greek houses in residential areas are likely to
continue. Legal actions requiring the relocation of such houses is
undesirable because of the cost to the houses in terms of property loss and
disrupted histories and traditions and because of the strain between the
town and the University community such actions would produce.
This kind of controversy underscores the need for students to register to
vote and to exercise their votes in the upcoming November elections in
Chapel Hill and Carrboro. Even newly arrived students can register to vote
after 30 days residency in either of the towns.
Students, University personnel and individuals not related to the
University must live and work together. We must also, therefore, govern
together.
Slip
Cole
Star JIM
83 r d Year of Editorial Freedom
Daily
Jim Grimsley
Managing Editor
Greg Porter
Associate Editor
Ralph J. Irace
Executive Editor
Jim Roberts
News Editor
Robin Clark
Features Editor
Susan
Shackelford
Sports Editor
Barnie Day
Projects Editor
Joyc8 Fitzpatrick
Graphic Arts
C. Campbell
Editor
Tom Boney Jr.
U.S. should not give up canal
Secretary of State Henry Kissinger
recently concluded widely publicized
negotiations on a Middle East settlement.
Not so well-known, but equally important,
are ongoing State Department negotiations
which would eventually give away the
Panama Canal, an important territory
owned by the United States.
The thought of giving up the canal began
in 1964 when riots inspired by Panamanian
socialists broke out over continued U.S.
ownership of the canal, which divides the
small Republic of Panama
The United States bought the land to build
the canal from the Republic of Panama in
1903 for $10 million. Additional payments to
neighboring Columbia, to a French
company which had unsuccessfully
attempted a canal, and to private property
owners in the canal zone brought total cost
of purchase to $166 million. This figure
makes the Panama Canal Zone far and away
the most expensive U.S. land acquisition
far more than the $15 million paid for the
Louisiana Purchase or the $7.2 million paid
for Alaska.
Congressman Daniel J. Flood (D-Penn), a
long time foe of the canal giveaway,
sarcastically says the return of this property
"would be dangerous precedent for the
return of the Gadsden Purchase to Mexico
or Alaska to Soviet Russia."
The construction cost of the canal, built
between 1904-1914, added $380 million to
the U.S. investment.
The $166 figure includes yearly payments
since 1914 to Panama as compensation for
lost revenues to a Panamanian railroad
which preceded the canal. The annual
payment is currently $1.93 million. This
amount is often mistakingly referred to as
the "rent" the United States pays to "lease"
the canal.
The 1903 treaty, however, specifically
grants to the United States "in perpetuity the
use, occupation, control" of the canal and
canal zone. The U.S. agreed to buy, not rent,
the 10-mile-wide, 51 -mile-long strip of land.
Senator Alan Cranston (D-Cal), a
Carlotta du Val
Life among the hehaviorists
A student's perception of an academic
department of a large university is often
molded by rumors around the dorm or
quickie exposure to that department
before drop-add has ended. Such
questionable sources of information can
lead to confusion (No, Seymour, Art
History has no nude models). The
following interview with Dr. B.F.
Skinhead, UNC psychology professor,
is an attempt to clarify misconceptions
about the psychology department. His
name has been changed to harass the
guilty.
Q. Dr. Skinhead, is it fair to call
psychology the study of human nature?
Dr. S. Absolutely not! We
psychologists do not study human
nature at all. Sometimes we do study
rat-nature and pigeon-nature, but never
human nature. Psychology is the study
of human behavior. At UNC we are all
behaviorists, except for a few
professors, but they aren't going to get
tenure anyway.
Q. What do you mean by
"behaviorist"?
Dr. S. A behaviorist is one who
studies behavior with the intent to
predict or modify it. For example, in
one experiment we wired a six-month-old
baby boy with a special bracelet.
Whenever he wet (behavior) we shocked
him (reinforcement) to modify his
action. Three days later he died of a
burst bladder just when we almost had
developed a reinforcement paradigm to
make him quit crying.
Q. What is the purpose of such
experimentation?
- - , rr
Hot SUtS
proponent of surrendering the canal to
Panama, said in 1971, "This Nation has been
upholding in the Canal Zone the remnants of
the 'Big Stick' policy." This is the general
thrust of opposition to continued U.S.
ownership the mistaken belief that the
canal zone represents the worst aspects of
colonialism.
Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Mass) calls
U.S. ownership "an embarrassing
anachronism."
There is, however, absolutely nothing
about which the U.S. should be
embarrassed. The canal is the lifeline of the
economy of the Republic of Panama. The
per capita income is the highest in Central
America. Thousands of Panamanians are
employed to work on the canal, comprising
three-fourths of all canal employees. And the
U.S. is directly and solely responsible for the
construction, operation, and success of the
canal from which the Panamanians have so
prospered.
One of the major reasons many oppose the
canal giveaway is the government to whom it
would be given.
In a military coup of the late 1960's,
Brigadier General Omar Torrijos assumed
dictatorial power in Panama. His leftist
leanings are viewed with alarm by opponents
who foresee communist control of the vital
waterway.
The U.S. has always operated the canal as
a nonprofit, commercial convenience,
allowing ships of every country including
communist to pass through, all paying the
same tolls, established in 1914.
Whether reciprocal fairness and price
stability can be expected from the Torrijos
regime or subsequent rulers is doubtful.
Since over 20 per cent of all canal traffic is
sailing to and or from U.S. ports,
unrestricted access is of vital importance to
the U.S. economy.
The real irony of the whole situation is
that the U.S. State Department continues
negotiations despite clear and emphatic
Congressional disapproval.
Dr. S. Why, with these techniques
psychologists could rule the world! If
only we could get everyone to wear the
bracelets ...
...... v:::-' .'. . ''.'.'
" " " " T" '' j
Ratification of a new treaty would require
approval by two-thirds (67 members) of the
Senate. Senator Strom Thurmond's (R-SC)
resolution disapproving of the proposal has
37 sponsors 18 Democrats, 19
Republicans more than enough to block
ratification.
On June 26, the House passed
overwhelmingly (264-164) an amendment to
the State Department appropriations bill
prohibiting the use of any funds to finance
negotiations which would relinquish U.S.
sovereignty over the canal. (The Senate has
not yet concurred with this provision.)
In the September 12 issue of National
Review, Dr. James P. Lucier, Chief
Legislative Assistant to Senator Jesse Helms
(R-NC), discloses a letter (released in
Panama, but not the U.S.) from Secretary
Kissinger to General Torrijos written after
the House vote.
. . . want you to know that in spite
of these things, am still engaged in
the search for a final and just solution
to this problem and the establishment
of a new and more modern
relationship between the two
countries (emphasis added).
Kissinger also refers to the duly-elected
representatives as "those who do not want
progress," who are doing "all in their power
to impede or discourage new advances."
Since the proposed treaty would involve
giving away U.S. property, the House would
have to agree (Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2
of the Constitution) which, at the present
time, seems highly improbable.
The State Department should follow
Congressional directives and terminate
immediately its negotiations with the
Torrijos government and perish the thought
of turning over this valuable area to an
unstable, leftist dictator.
Tom Boney Jr. is a senior journalism major
from Graham, N.C.
Q. Are there
any immediate
applications?
Dr. S. Sure! We use our methods to
treat the mentally ill; schizophrenics,
victims of paranoia or depression,
politicians and other
psychobanananuts. We also work
toward the rehabilitation of convicted
sex offenders. This often overlaps with
our therapy for politicians. Our
methods range from shock treatment to
psychotropic drugs. Sometimes, in
more obstinate cases, it is necessary to
use stronger reinforcers like enemas,
castration and induced vomiting.
Q. It has been suggested that
psychology, because of its origins and
principles, is not a "true science" at all,
but a social science.
Dr. S. That is not true. All those
expensive laboratory wings in Davie
Hall were built just to dispeLsuch a
rumor. Why, every semester in our
experiments we shock, mutilate and
destroy thousands of white mice and
stupid pigeons all in the name of
science.
Q. But what about the early
psychologists and their work?
Dr. S. They were all dreamers and
fatheads. Now we are behaviorists! We
don't need old Frood.
Q. Do you mean Freud?
Dr. S. Whoever. He didn't get tenure
either.
Carlotta du Val is a pseudonym for a
graduate and professional student from
North Carolina.
deserves
funds
To the editor.
O'Neal should explain the BSM funds
freeze clearly or be ousted. Or both. He has
shown irresponsibility to the student body.
Tell me, O'Neal, why the BSM should not
have their funds? They do a lot for
themselves and many others. I don't know of
any local organization or activity (maybe
sports) which can equal or come close to
matching the vitality and diversity of
interests within the BSM. The freeze is a
regression for the community, not just the
BSM. I want to support the BSM out of my
fees and you won't let me, O'Neal. Why? 1
think you made a tactless mistake. Make it
better. Now.
Kirk Johnson
107B Hanna St.
Carrboro
The truth on sword blades
To the editor.
The recent debates pertaining to the BSM
and its choir, money, and other interesting
things reflect the continuing skepticism and
kindergarten mentality of the "liberal white
elite" whose curious orientation has been to
criticize that which it does not comprehend
or want to comprehend, thus rendering
anything "black" as a threat or possibly as a
viable creative mechanism imposing its force
upon the general academic and social
community in Chapel Hill, N.C.
I like to quote Mr. Paul Green who
recently gave his view on the melting pot
theory.
Americans are a mighty people;
they are powerful but they do not have
the wisdom or common sense to
match that power.
If indeed we are to produce a new
America, it must evolve out of a spiritual
harmonization of the races whereby mind is
the focal concern and color is not an arbiter
in the relationship.
I say the dialectic of the North American
Anglo is vapid and remains entrenched in a
colloquialism which denies or wantonly
refuses to recognize the importance of the
African-American population.
The truth will roll on sword blades and
nothing else. Salaam,
Bro. Malimu Baba Omowale
Rage, uproar and protest
To the editor.
Rage, uproar, protest! They seem to have
an effect that hides objectivity and closes the
eyes of many from seeing the views of all
sides. The protest and pressure on behalf of
the Black Student Movement Gospel Choir
raised by the BSM turned Student
Government away from its normal
functioning in what I consider a highly
abnormal process. It seems as if the legal
process that we have to work with can be
thrown out whenever a serious enough issue
creates a shout of protest.
This shows that students can demand
action and can influence their elected
representatives. A recent example of student
influence is the release of the DTH funds
when students demanded a paper.
I ask that the student body raise its head
and voice its opinion on this issue. Come this
Tuesday night to the next Campus
Governing Council meeting at 7:30 in the
Craige Green Room.
Make your presence felt:
Zapp Jennings
CGC representative
An abstract process?
To the editor
Somehow 1 can't believe that the Faculty
Council committee seeks to punish the
students of this university for being just that
students of this university.
The ridiculous proposal to unilaterally
revamp the present grading scale totally
ignores many realities. The Council has
apparently forced itself to forget the fact that
ours is one of the most academically
respected universities in the nation. They
have ignored the very important concept of
student input. When faced with the near
certainty that students interested in graduate
and professional schools would be at a
competitive disadvantage. Provost Morrow
attempts to explain this away by saying that
"Grading is an abstract process.T???)
Furthermore, it is my opinion that such a
change would lead to a large increase in that
phenomenon called "brown-nosing." There
is certainly no need for more of that.
For some reason the term "stultifying
bureaucracy" comes to mind.
Mark Randall
1424 Granville West
The Daily Tar Heel welcomes letters to
the editor. All letters must be typed,
double-spaced, on a 60-space line and
should not run over 50 lines
(approximately 300 words).
The Daily Tar Heel reserves the right to
condense letters and edit for libelous
content or bad taste. Letters will run as
space permits and according to their
timeliness.