Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / April 2, 1986, edition 1 / Page 9
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
The Daily Tar Heel - Wednesday April 2. 1986 m ' n n n m ' ' laUg 94i flr of editorial freedom Stuart Tonkinson. imwc r CI RANT PARSONS, University Editor Bryan Gatis. News Editor KLRSTI N COYI.H, City Editor J I I.I. GLRBIZR, State and National Editor Scott Fowler, Sports Edi:or DANISH Smitherman, Features Editor Robert Keefe, Business Editor Elizabeth Ellen, Arts Editor DAN CHARLSON, Photography Editor RANDY FARMER, Production Editor mowtosilMeg into sprim The shanties were becoming an eyesore on the quad, and students were irritated. Something had to be done, so a "Berlin Wall" was built. It's simple. You see, it's a protest against a protest. The campus was defaced by the tin and wood shanty shacks, so the UNC College Republicans and Students for America remedied the situation by constructing a 50-foot-long wall of chicken wire and ripped bed sheets. That's logical, of course, except for one thing. It won't stop here. A group called Students Against the Wall (SAW) will form. They will say that oppression doesn't only exist in communist-bloc nations and South Africa. They will express their newly acquired political activism by digging a trench under the wall. The trench will symbolize that the problems of oppression go far below ground level. Once started, the chain reaction will gain momentum. A quasi-motive-reactionary group, Students Against the Wall Against the Trench (SAW AT), will organize. They will add the unemployed and those with social diseases to the list of oppressed. To illustrate their height ened awareness, they will construct a wooden bridge over the trench, shel lacked with employment applications. Standing on the bridge will be drama students dressed up like prostitutes, displaying the immorality of our social practices. Shocked that the bridge builders were so narrowly focused, : the Ultimately Concerned Group of Homo sapiens (UCGHS), will extend the list of sufferers to arthritic secretaries, acne faced teen-agers, underpaid psychiatrists and sweet-toothed models. The dominoes will fall in this manner, you see, until every major problem in the universe has been voiced. Groups will build their mockeries of poverty and symbols of oppression until an intricate network of tunnels, bridges, moats, towers and walls metropolize in a reactionary fashion all the way to Hinton James parking lot. But it's logically simple, you see, because each one is a protest of the former protest. The wall is a protest of the shanties. The trench is a protest of the wall. The bridge is a protest of the trench, and so on . . . It takes a while to grasp this complex procedure of seeking political reform. This chain is no doubt confusing, seemingly far-fetched, utterly ridiculous and not much of an exaggerated des cription of what we have now. Sotatioim creates a pFoMem Monday's announcement by officials of the Department of Housing and Urban Development to evict all illegal aliens from federal housing sounds great initially. Americans pay for that hous ing, Americans build that housing thus, Americans should live in that housing. Deeper consideration of this decision finds it to be short-sighted and ill conceived. Effective July 30, this ruling requires that "the public housing authority must promptly initiate and diligently pursue action to terminate the tenancy, and to evict the tenant by judicial action pursuant to state and local law." Anybody who applies for federal hous ing must submit proof of citizenship with documents such as birth certificates or passports. So what does this local housing authority do with the former tenants? , Whoops, the feds forgot to mention how to handle that one. Stephen Balis, HUD's attorney, said that "no alterna tive housing resource" would be pro vided by the federal government, but that the states or local authorities might handle it. Oh, of course. The states have millions of extra dollars laying around to support hundreds of evicted aliens (perhaps even The Daily Tar Heel Editorial Writers: Ed Brackett, Tom Camp and Dewey Messer Editorial Assistant: Nicki Weisensee Layout: Heather Brown, Laura Grimmer, Jean Lutes and Laura Rector News: Jenny Albright, Lisa Allen, Andrea Beam, Rick Beasley, Helene Cooper, Vicki Daughtry, Michelle Efird, Jennifer Essen, Jeannie Faris, Jo Fleischer, Matthew Fury, Todd Gossett, Scott Greig, Mike Gunzenhauser, Maria Haren, Nancy Harrington, Kenneth Harris, Suzanne Jeffries, Denise Johnson, Teresa Kriegsman, Laura Lance, Scott Larsen, Alicia Lassiter, Donna Leinwand, Mitra Lotfi, Jackie Leach, Brian Long, Guy Lucas, Jean Lutes, Karen McManis, Laurie Martin, Smithson Mills, Toby Moore, Yvette Denise Moultrie, Linda Montanari, Mary Mulvihill, Kathy Nanney, Felisa Neuringer, Rachel Orr, Gordon Rankin, Liz Saylor, Valerie Stegall, Rachel Stiffler, Joy Thompson, Elisa Turner, Laurie Willis, Bruce Wood and Katherine Wood. Kelly Hobson, Marie Thompson, Eric Whittington and Skip Williams, wire editors. Sports: Tim Crothers, James Surowiecki and Bob Young, assistant sports editors. Mike Berardino, Greg Cook, Phyllis Fair, Phil Gitelman, Paris Goodnight, Louise Hines, Lorna Khali!, Mike Mackay, Tom Morris, Kathy Mulvey, Lee Roberts, Wendy Stringfellow and Buffie Velliquette. Bill DiPaolo. Greg Humphreys and Billy Warden, sports cartoonists. ' Features: Eleni Chamis, Kelly Clark, Kara V. Donaldson, Marymelda Hall, Tracy Hill, Shirley Hunter, Kathy Peters, Jeanie Mamo, Sharon Sheridan, Suzy Street, Martha Wallace and Pam Wilkins and Susan Wood. . Arts: James Burrus, Mark Davis, Mary Hamilton, Aniket Majumdar, Alexandra Mann, Alan Mason, Mark Mattox, Rob Sherman, Garret Weyr and Ian Williams. Photography: Charlotte Cannon, Larry Childress, Jamie Cobb and Janet Jarman. Copy Editors: Roy Greene, assistant news editor. Karen Anderson, Jennifer Cox, Carmen Graham, Tracy Hill, Lisa Lorentz, Toni Shipman, Kelli Slaughter and Joy Thompson. Artists: Adam Cohen, Bill Cokas and Trip Park. Business and Advertising: Anne Fulcher, managing director; Paula Brewer, advertising director; Mary Pearse, advertising coordinator, Angela Booze, student business manager; Angela Ostwalt, accounts receivable clerk; Doug Robinson, student advertising manager; Alicia Brady, Keith Childers, Eve Davis, Staci Ferguson, Kcllie McElhaney, Melanie Parlicr and Scott Whitaker, advertising representatives; Staci Ferguson, Kelly Johnson and Rob Patton, classified advertising clerks; David Leff, office manager and Cathy Davis, secretary. Distributioncirculation: William Austin, manager; Tucker Stevens, circulation assistant. Production: Brenda Moore and Stacy Wynn. Rita Galloway and Rose Lee, production assistants. Campos . pFottes4eirs get wliat tEney imeed. thousands in states such as California with high illegal-alien populations). The states have been handed so many other expenses that have been historically covered by the federal government that surely they won't mind one more little tab. This is absurd, but what other alter natives has the federal government offered? If arrested, these aliens must be supported by society in prisons that are already overcrowded and, in some cases, dilapidated. If evicted and turned loose .to fend for themselves, they bring a sharp increase to the number of the nation's homeless a problem neither the federal nor state governments have effectively handled in the major cities. The only other alternative is deporta tion, returning the aliens to the despair or oppression they left behind in their native countries. None of these choices are enjoyable. The U.S. government certainly should not provide housing for foreigners when ; many born-and-bred Americans have no home. But sending these aliens to join the homeless is no solution; rather, it compounds a perplexing problem. The federal government must establish some guidelines on how to handle these illegal aliens. TTohnny Democracy marches by displaying 1 banners and posters of protest. He stands in the Pit in a dogmatic, eye-catching stance as the college crowd watches ' some with admiration, others with uneasiness. Johnny hears a chorus from a Rolling Stones song in the back of his mind, singing: "You can't always get what you want, and if you try sometime, youll find, you can get what you need." A guitar strums, with a horn playing softly in the background. Johnny feels the flood of adrenalin pervading his muscles. With an unfamiliar vitality, he walks with a springy and strong stride across the red brick Pit. He thinks to himself of how right his cause is. Fighting against apartheid, he's involved and concerned. Betterment of the human condition, civil rights. Who can challenge that? The crowd watches passively. His mind flashes back to the song. "You can't always get what you want. But if you try sometimes you might find, you get what you need . . ." Tempo increases. Drums come in; piano plays. A revelation comes to him. Protest is not enough. He needs more. Visibility. A sign. A monument. He builds a shack with rusted corrugated tin roofs and uneven wood with protest words spray painted on the side. The shantytown protests UNC's hand in South African apartheid. Withstanding wind, cold and rain he protests - not with words, but with commitment and determination. Fellow students pass by, and he hears their comments of how ugly the shanties are or what a campus eyesore it is. He smiles, content with its visible effect. He hears their jokes about building condominiums in place of the shanties and chanting, "Invest, invest." He smiles smugly, being on the side of morality. His mind flashes back to the song. "You can't always get what you want. But if you try Uondy f armor Production Editor abuse. Singing words going to vent our frus tration. If we don't, we're going to blow a 50 amp fuse." The feeling of protest grows within him. He becomes stronger, more confident. , He relishes in his shivers from the early morning cold, waking up with oily hair and unwashed clothes. The other students walk by squeaky clean, leaving a perfume of soap and shaving cream behind them that works its way into the shanty. He flips on his jambox. ". . . You can't always get what you want. But if you try sometime you just might find, you just might find, you get what you need." This is not Johnny's first protest. He protested the ARA meal plan and Contra aid. He was there for the candlelight vigil on Franklin Street. Johnny is an old and familar face. He sometimes wears a white-starched shirt with sweat stains on the back, a tie and a jacket flung over his shoulder; other times he wears tie-dye shirts and bell-bottomed blue jeans with holes in the knees. He does not isolate himself to campus matters either. He was in Selma in 1965; in Washington on the Capitol steps many times; sitting in post offices protesting the Vietnam war; protesting abortion in front of clinics. Johnny is a student, a worker, a preacher and a political activist. He's exercising his rights, and standing up for what he believes. Go, Johnny, get what you need. Randy Farmer is a junior history major from Charlotte. 4? r I ' " ; ' "Si gaSr.- .... - A !" s ni.i.uiimftiT v v.? r V ....jj!:-: f . .... , v. ..X" j & m r? n 1 mnp - - M... v 4 jVssuC ..Wai.v-., ? v -g Shanties teach To the editor: In a recent article concerning the UNC Anti-Apartheid Support Group and the shanties facing South building ("Shantytown to remain." March 25). Allen Taylor, tormer chairman of the UNC College Republicans, was quoted as saying the protests "are not to educate anyone, (but) to irritate people w hen they walk by." That's not completely wrong. However, it s not completely right, either. Contrary to Taylor's senti ments, the major reason behind the construction of the shanties was education. We, of the AASG, want people to inspect the shan ties, to ask questions, to judge for themselves the plight of the South African black. Our representatives who occupy the shanties 24 hours a day. seven days a week have free literature to further explain the civil, moral and eco nomic factors behind apartheid and the U.S.; UNC involvement in it. One shanty is furnished with photos taken in South Africa depicting the true home life of the blacks in the homelands. Another contains news clippings concern ing the continuous struggle of the blacks in their quest for equality. All are attempts to show the resident of Chapel Hill how the resident of Soweto and other townships live. All fall short, because no matter how ugly, unfurnished or primitive our shanties are, those in South Africa - are infinitely worse. However, as I said earlier, Taylor is not completely wrong. The shanties are there to irritate people. We want people to be irritated because South African blacks are robbed of their basic human rights, forced to live in places such as these. We want people to be upset because, due to unjust laws and an oppressive way of life, blacks are doomed to perpetuate this cycle of eternal poverty, almost from birth. Most importantly, we want people to be outraged, that the. United States and UNC are major culprits in the support of this racist regime. No matter how we feel, we, of the AASG, want people to make up their own minds. We encourage everyone to come by the shanties at any time and snoop around maybe even spend the night with lis. They might learn something. And if, after the tour, someone w ants to make a donation, support or even join our group, well, we can hook them up, too. The important thing is that everybody gets involved, one way or another. Eric Walker Junior Philosophy Speech Communications No lo negativism To the editor: I am writing in response to William Peaslee's recent article "The positive points of negative campaigning! March 18). If the title seems self-contradictory, that's because it is, and so is Peaslee's argument. Peaslee defends the kind of negative campaigning seen in the 1984 Hunt-Helms Senate race as "one of the most efficient ways of educating the voting public about the backgrounds of candidates and their unpopular stands on the issues." He claims that the type of negative campaigning found in the 1980 (Morgan-East) and 1984 (Hunt-Helms) Senate races "is based on well-researched, factual attacks on the opposing candi date's position, not false character assassination or attacks on the personal level." Anyone who owned a television, radio or had a newspaper subscription in 1984 knows that this simply is not true. ("What war did you serve in, Jim?") Peaslee asserts that East, Helms and Hunt based negative cam paigning on facts, and therefore none were guilty of "mudslinging." Negative campaigners must be truthful a distinction most essential to Peaslee's theory. A problem occurs in that the law does not mandate political adver tisements be true. The public must rely on the integrity and veracity of political candidates when view ing political commercials. If a candidate decides to make use of his prerogative to lie, the viewer must use his own discretion to distinguish bona fide negative campaigning from "mudslinging." Most negative campaigners do not blatantly lie about their opponents, however; they would lose credibility. Instead, they distort. Peaslee recognizes this fact and claims that such attacks are beneficial, forcing the candidates to explain their positions. In the Hunt-Helms race, he claims, "This caused greater voter understand ing of the two opposing platforms, because the candidates were con stantly explaining." The candidates may constantly explain, but the public does not constantly listen. The average voter does not read the newspaper or listen to the lengthy rebuttals. He remembers the 60 second blurbs thrown at him every time he watches a favorite television show or ball game. Although Peaslee cites two previous Senate campaigns as examples, a more pertinent case study of negative campaigning rests in the 1986 Republican Senate primary. David Funder burk accused Jim Broyhill of voting to eliminate Ronald Rea gan's strategic defense initiative. Broyhill voted for $1 billion in SDI funding, instead of $2 billion. Funderburk accuses Broyhill of 11,1 inMMM-,M,"'M",MMriiMiwi voting for Tip O'Neill's "big spending budget." Broyhill only voted for a Democratic budget plan (which called for a freeze in defense spending and reductions in the federal budget deficit) after all three Republican budget prop osals were defeated in the House of Representatives. Most puzzling is Funderburk's charge that Broy hill voted to give away the Panama Canal. Broyhill served in Con gress, and only the Senate votes on treaties. Our founding fathers would not, as Peaslee suggests, approve of "negative campaigning." This public slander threatens the integ rity of this nation's most basic political institution. Sandy Rierson Freshman Public Policy Political Science Ndt us vs. them To the editor: Why is it that people like Alison Malone ("Aid grants peace," March 26) see everything in terms of black and white or is it red, white and blue these days? Her simplistic notion of foreign policy is no longer surprising since so many today, including our benighted leader, adhere to such ideas. But why does she insist on taking the moral high road in advocating war? Her blithely tossed-off comment of "Nobody wants war, but if that is the only way to achieve peace in communist-based Nicaragua, then war it is!" reflects a shallow and dangerously careless attitude that needs serious reconsideration. I'm desperately resisting the continuous impulse to retch ever ytime I read another knee-jerk conservative reaction that espouses military might as the only solution to our nation's foreign problems. But, as a wise man once said, "Disgust is a poor substitute for thought." So, I'm going to think about why young conserva tives like Malone jump on the bandwagon of the "Us vs. Them" mentality that can only lead to a terrible conflict if the very real differences between our countries are not delineated and worked out. Who knows, perhaps I can come to a better understanding of single mindedness and begin to tolerate conservatives like Malone. Tom Holcomb Graduate English Silly us To the editor: The article, "Annoying advertis ing," in March 25th's DTH was a fine example of the worthless journalism that plagues this news paper. When I read the paper, 1 would like to see news, not gener alizations that everybody knows and that no one would argue with. Of course, ads annoy people and of course, some are more annoying than others. Well, so what? , Juan Osuna Junior Philosophy Expressly Laurie To the editor: What's the deal on this ad for American Express appearing in recent issues of the Daily Tar Heel? Is this a Laurie Anderson look alike or has the real Laurie given up her white violin to advertise plastic on college campuses across the United States? Please, Laurie, don't do it. Bob White Sophomore International Studies Letters policy Letters should be typed and double-spaced, with a one-inch margin. Please turn in letters by noon the day before publication date. The DTH reserves the right to edit for style, taste and clarity.
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
April 2, 1986, edition 1
9
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75