Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / Nov. 1, 1985, edition 1 / Page 8
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
8The Daily Tar HeelFriday, November 1, 1985 mm satlg Slar Mar 93rd year of editorial freedom ARNH RlCKERT AND DAVID SCHMIDT VJitor l-Jitor READER FORUM Editorial insinuations wrong, wrong, wrong Stuart Tonkinson Ben Perkowski Dick Anderson Janet Olson Jami White Andy Trincia Managing Editor Associate Editor Associate Editor University Editor News Editor State and National Editor Loretta Grantham City Editor ' MARK POWELL Business Editor Lee Roberts Sports Editor Elizabeth Ellen Arts Editor Sharon Sheridan Features Editor Larry Childress Photo Editor Stabbing South Africa Wednesday's by-elections in South Africa confirmed the diamond-hard resistance of a large segment rof the white population to any dilution of apartheid. A far-right, white supremacist splinter party has won a seat in the country's parliament with claims that the govern ment is yielding to foreign pressures for rapid reform. President Botha, interna tionally abused for not introducing reforms more quickly, probably now will slow the present snail's pace of progress. For the West, the lesson should be clear: to excise the evil heart of institution alized racism, abandon the crude club of public denunciations for the scalpel of divestment. Whites in South Africa are uneasy about mounting domestic violence and international isolation. In all five seats contested Wednesday Botha's rightist Nationalists appear to have lost ground to overseas vestiges of the German Nazi party. Each new Cape Town riot, each new public blast from American and Western European political leaders, weakens support for liberals and boosts the popularity of law and order Neand erthals. Short of violent revolution, the only political alternative to Botha would seem to be the folks who want to "unleash" the army and the police on black demonstrators. U.S. policy should be to push Botha to make reforms as fast as possible without so irritating white public opinion that someone much worse takes over. To accomplish this balancing act, the instruments of pressure must be chosen with greater care. Ringing speeches by politicians may build careers, but in South Africa the result is quotable grist for patriotic whites determined not to allow foreigners dictate how they run the land. Economic pressure is strong and silent. Legislated curbs on imports from South Africa, such as the U.S. ban on the sale of kruggerrands, help to the degree they deprive South Africa of the foreign exchange it needs for imports of its own. More valuable are the quiet refusals to invest or extend fresh loans by U.S. corporations and banks under pressure from this country's divestment groups. These decisions have already inflicted serious disruption on the South African economy, increasing unemploy ment and forcing the Sept. 1 moratorium on the repayment of the $14 billion South African short-term foreign debt. The standard argument against eco nomic sanctions is that blacks are the first to lose their jobs in a downturn. That remains true, although this year's experience has been that whites are also sent home. But what is important is that economic pain also makes South Afri can businessmen squeal and demand that the politicians do something. Right now South Africa's foreign bankers are linking the , restoration of credit to a peaceful return to order in the black townships. Businessmen who need foreign currencies to buy imported inputs for their factories are pressing for a quick settlement. With every month of violence, South Africa lurches closer to a confrontation between white supremacists and black radicals. To encourage reform, the United States must seek to bring the whole business community to the side of moderates. Don't bash Botha in public: slip knives into his economy in private. To the editors: In regard to the DTH editorial . "A few bad apples' (Oct. 30), we, the Carolina Club, have a statement to describe the author. There's no need in maintaining the suspense, so we will give you the statement: "I just didn't have my facts straight in this editorial." Now, to set the record straight, let's begin with paragraph two of this masterpiece. The author states that I, Richard DeBusk, was an "undersigned supporter" of a pam phlet published against Doug Berger's candidacy. Let there be no mistake. I was not only an "under signed supporter," I conceived, wrote and designed the pamphlet. But that is not as important as your next blunder. You go on to say that Doug tried to take people to the Honor Court over the affair, with one of the people being a Campus Governing Council representative misusing Doug's name. Well, you are absolutely wrong. You are referring to the poster that depicted Doug as a socialist candidate for student body president. Neither I nor the Carolina Club had anything to do with that poster. I personally informed a DTH reporter of who printed the poster when she was doing a story on our anti-Berger pamphlet, but for some reason she chose not to print it. A CGC District 14 representative and an accomplice were accused of improper distribu tion of the poster simply because they didn't have the intestinal fortitude to put their names on it. Both I and the Carolina Club considered the poster deplorable because the author did not acknowl edge it with his name. We do not believe in making anonymous attacks on people. You should know that by now; our name is on everything we do. Get your facts straight, gentlemen. It's bad jour nalism to misrepresent people. Now let's move on to paragraph four of the masterpiece. You seem to imply that I called the DTH and cussed out one of your desk editors. Let there be no doubt in anyone's mind I did call the DTH, and Ch urch, politics historic mix To the editors: , Throughout America's history, church groups have sought to influence public policy. The political issues on which churches have taken action have often been moral and spiritual issues long before they ever surfaced in the political arena, e.g., abortion, birth control and homo sexuality. As matters of historical fact, the colonial clergy played a major role in precipitating the American Revolution. Other prom inent examples of church efforts include elimination of dueling in the early 19th century, the anti-lottery campaign, advocacy of freedom of the slaves, and the civil rights movement of the 1960s and resul tant national legislation. Contrary to the fears expressed by Alan Reinach ("Legislation won't make U.S. Christian," Oct. 28), there is no "widespread promul gation of a theocratic political model that would transform Amer ica into a 'Christian' nation." No one is advocating legislation to "estab lish" one religion, sect or denom ination over another. Churches are simply exercising their constitu tional right and moral responsibility to speak out on particular issues. For this, there should be no double standard applied one for reli gious groups and another for other organizations and individuals including actors, athletes and tele vision personalities who speak out on political and social issues. In the words of Justice William Brennan, "That public debate of religious ideas, like any other, may arouse emotion, may incite, may forment religious divisiveness and strife, does not rob it of constitutional protection . . . The mere fact that a purpose of the Establishment Clause is to reduce or eliminate religious discussion, association, or political participation in a status less preferred than rights of discussion, association, and political participa tion generally . . ." (McDaniel vs. Paty). When the political realm chooses to meddle in affairs long considered to be religious, one might ask why the church should cease activity, when their methods are legal and constitutional. Jeffrey Parker Apex I did speak quite rudely with whomever answered the phone. My apologies to this unsuspecting person; my insults were intended for Arne and Dave. But even with this , seemingly simple accusation, you once again got your facts wrong. I did not call concerning the "God is dead" quotation. I called concern ing a front-page story about an anti- ' apartheid pro-divestment rally in front of the Chapel Hill post office, and another unobjective, liberal editorial on the Back Page. You go on to say that I called you all "commies" and "faggots" for run ning the quotation. Wrong again. Aside from you being wrong about the quotation being the issue, I did not call you "commies" and "fag gots." However, I did say that it seems (in my opinion, of course) that all the DTH will write about is communists and faggots. Espe cially on the Back Page. That's still my opinion, and yes, guys, I "picked up the phone and called" the DTH office. Now let's talk for just a minute about the last paragraph of your moving . . . well, uh . . . editorial (there's a word for it, but I don't want to speak for others). You sarcastically attack my responsibil ity as president of the Carolina Club, as well as belittling the organization itself. As for my responsibility, I go a great deal further than most people on this campus would simply by putting my name to the negative material our group prints. We're proud to put our names on the material because we're proud of what we believe. We also feel that people have a right to know who is attacking them. As far as you belittling our organiza tion, you are partially right, we are not that large, but we do have student leaders supporting our cause. Don't overlook these facts, too: Among others, our anti divestment poster was signed by two campus governors, a CGC represen tative (not the one mentioned above) and an ex-Residence Hall Association president. Yes, there is a statement to describe your editorial writing. We gave you that one at the beginning. Now here's one for the bonus points. Around the inner circles of the Carolina Club, we have a word specifically for "fellows like you." Remember, more than one answer may be correct. Richard W. DeBusk President, The Carolina Club Tonkinson 's grudge makes for pathetic rambling The grim reapers Crum crybabies nothing new As you pull on those oh-so-comfortable faded jeans and look forward to savoring tonight's first cold and frosty one, take a moment to thank the farmers who provided the cotton for those Levis and the hops and barley for the ales you quaff. The farming industry is in the midst of a severe, seemingly never-ending economic crisis. Many small farmers in North Carolina and across the nation are struggling to break even, much less put food on their own family's table. Despite the efforts of President Reagan, these few remaining symbols of the simple American lifestyle will fortu nately continue to receive government subsidies to keep them in business for now. The Senate on Wednesday narrowly defeated a proposal from Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana to put a one-year freeze on direct income subsidies to cotton, grain and rice farmers. Even though such a freeze was a major tenet in Reagan's farm package, 12 Republican lawmakers (mostly from the farming states of the Midwest) jumped party lines and voted against the controversial freeze. But the program is not yet safe from being plowed under. The 51-to-48 margin came as a surprise to Sen. Robert Dole of Kansas, who was pleased that the vote was so close. "Maybe it is time to sit down on both sides of the aisle and work out a farm bill," he said after the tally. North Carolina's own Jesse Helms, chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said he opposed the bill when it left committee. Helms added that the current program allowed for "an arbitrary standard used to determine how much subsidy is to be transferred to the farm sector." For once, perhaps his fellow senators should heed the advice of their N.C. peer. The system needs overhauling the proposed plan would allocate $25 billion more than originally intended. But implementation of a one-year freeze (or a freeze for any period of time) could cause irreparable damage and send many farmers over the edge. If the system needs fixing, then fix it but Senators, please don't kill it. If killed, a piece of Americana will die right along with it. Continuation of these subsidies is vital to the survival of America's small farmer. So tonight, when you hit Henderson Street and Troll's and He's Not Here, hoist one for the guy who put that beer in your hand. To the editors: I have certainly heard the cry "Fire Crum" before. I was an undergraduate during the first three years of Dick Crum's tenure here. During his first season, grumbling among students and alumni was ominous. And it was not a success ful season. But then, in the next three years, UNC improved dram atically, with successive bowl victo ries over Michigan, Texas and Arkansas. The grumblers were quiet but now they're back, it seems. I think that the idiocy of these few students' attempt to publicly humiliate their team's coach is beyond almost anything I have seen since I first came to Chapel Hill. Go on, guys, see if you can get the coach fired. Maybe you will suc ceed. But take a good look in the direction of Raleigh; that's the future of those who want instant gratification. I urge all true Carolina fans to stand up for your team and your coach. Mike Maness Chapel Hill CORRECTION In Wednesday's letter "The Back Page is turning into a PTL forum," the last sentence should have read, "God bless everyone," not "Our God bless everyone." The DTH regrets the error. To the editors: How surprising are the lengths to which Stuart Tonkinson will go to assuage his wounded ego! It appears that he has nursed a grudge against me ever since I referred to him in one of my letters to the editors as "constitutional lawyer and rocker extraordinaire." I, on the other hand, read his colorful description of me with great amusement ("A code more honored in the breach," Oct. 31). However, there are one or two factual details about that early morning meeting in Davis Library that Tonkinson misreported. First of all, while it is true that I have been here a long time, it is not true that I have been here "since the first NCAA championship." If Tonkinson was referring to the first NCAA championship won by UNC (as opposed to the first NCAA championship ever his writing is remarkably unclear for a senior English major), this occurred in 1957, a year before I was born. I do remember the last NCAA cham pionship won by UNC, however, and I presume Tonkinson was a freshman at the time, so he probably remembers it too. But this is all beside the point. I was really in the basement of Davis Library attempt ing to tunnel my way out of the University it might be the only chance I have. But just as I was about to break through into the basement of Alexander, who should suddenly appear but Biff Crockett, Nerd Extraordinaire, asking me if I would help him with another of his never-ending girl problems. To top it all off, he brought his Big Brother with him in an attempt to intimidate me into helping him! I made a lunge for Crockett but he dashed out the exit and left me to face his Avenger. Second, it is ludicrous for Crock ett to imply that I could feel threatened about my perspective requirements since I did not do my undergraduate work here at UNC. Where I went to school it was easy to fulfill one's requirements because the administration had this twisted idea that seniors should be allowed into the classes that they needed to graduate. Consequently, I have a solid, well-rounded education, unlike Tonkinson, who appears to derive most of his knowledge about English and history from Mickey Spillane. Finally, it is pathetic that Crock ett should accuse poor Charlie of being a stooge for the administra tion when her only crime was to refuse to go through the Mangum Haunted House with Tonkinson. Talk about sour grapes! Overall, the evening was a waste. Not only did I not make it into the basement of Alexander, but Biff Crockett's Big Brother accused me of writing nasty letters to the DTH and threatened to respond by writing interminably boring columns about rock music, and this despite his own obvious lack of expertise in the area. He then gave me a two-hour lecture on his right to free speech. Of course, by that time I had drifted off to sleep . . . One final note to Stuart Tonkin son: I hope you're not planning to take Latin next semester for your perspective requirement. After all, they don't call me Curve Buster for nothin'. Scott Carson Dept. of Classics A bookstore also rises Take off your Ray Bans, boys, and have a seat. Perhaps I can interest you in a copy of Le Monde or a book of Allen Ginsberg poetry? So you don't read French. So you dont read. Linda's bar has passed away, and what we have now is quite a different story. Shelves of stories, in fact. What was once one of Chapel Hill's more laid-back, beer-drinking kind of places has turned into the Hardback Cafe, an eating establishment in a bookstore. When it opens next week, it will attempt to transform beer-quaffing masses into civilized folk self-appointed expat riates who read only to be seen. Think of the styles that could emerge black berets, black turtlenecks, little round glasses and silk scarves. Everyone could look like the first generation offspring of Andy Warhol and Truman Capote, with cross references to Zelda before the breakdown. Won't everyone look pretty? Isn't it pretty to think so? But why look so pretty? No one's going to see it. In the Chapel Hill Town Code, there is a section that forbids the conducting of business on the street. That means no quaint Cinzano umbrel las from under which anyone can view the passing world and be viewed by it. If no one can see this cafe society, then what good is it? Far better is Spanky's window, where a couple can sit with only ice-cold Molsons between them and only plate glass separating them from the world. Infinitely better is Frat Court, where everyone can see everyone in a single glance. Never mind the rank smell of stale beer and the unpleasant clatter of can kicked by clumsy feet because there he is and. there she is and those two, and that group of girls over there. Take your Ray Bans back, boys. Society is fine just as it is. Never mind the expatriate pose that does not amount to a thing. There's not much good in a cafe in a bookstore if you can't be seen while reading. Especially if you look good doing it. If they don't change the Town Code and put a couple of tables on the street outside the Hardback Cafe, no one's going to read a thing, and that's all there is to that. . 'We're outta here.' x X V i - Benjamin Scott Perkowski & Richard Webster Anderson, 'DTH' associate editors who left the Back Page this day, November 1, 1985. B.P. D.A.
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Nov. 1, 1985, edition 1
8
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75