4
Wednesday, May 3, 1972
University Daily Kansan
Readers Respond
KANSAN comment
Editorials, columns and letters published on this page reflect only the opinions of the writers.
Again We Protest
Again a sizeable group of students and townpeople have planned a demonstration against the Vietnam War—this time against the American escalation of the air war in North Vietnam.
Protest against the war began with a few anti-war student factions, spread, became very chic, then faded in popularity, and by the 1950s it had become the Nixon Navy case could say with some confidence that the war was no longer an issue.
Pollsters find that a majority of Americans have had enough of the war—yet protest against the current escalation has failed to reach the sympathies to a broad segment of the population. The divisive lines are being drawn again. Is it protests against the war, or the war itself, that sets protesters on high ground in sympathy? Unlike James Reston of the New York Times, I do not think that renewed war protest will cinch Nixon's reelection. He has made promises that he is having a hard
time keeping, in spite of his soggy rhetoric.
war protest in the spring of 1972 is heavily laced with cynicism and the memories of Kent, Jackson and countless hours spent in picket lines and moratorium rallies. Yet, again we protest. "Stop the war now, bring the boys home," we say for the thousandth painful time. All to no avail. My conscience, though, says stand up, let them (who are in 1972) know I am repulsed by bombing for peace.
The war, almost over so many times, has left a painful wound on the American conscience. Protest opens that wound and exposes the nerves underneath to probing—sharpening the once dull pain. The pain and sacrifice brings nothing but political mumbo-jumbo and ascending cynicism. The feeling of futility in protest is boosted by Nixon and Kissinger's secret deals, proposals and trips.
Again we try now. November is five months away.
—Thomas E. Slaughter
Dillon's Office
Senate, Peace, Summer Housing...
To the Editor:
I write this letter as a protest to certain actions of the University Student Senate, which were not being followed in our actions at the Kansas Relays.
According to THE UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS CODE:
"It shall be the privilege of the Student Senate to address itself to the faculties, students and staff. It shall be the responsibility of Board of Regents on any matter relating to the University and its operation" (ARTICLE III, II).
I firmly believe that it is not the function of the Student (as outlined by "... any matter relating to the University and its operation") to make statements which are opposed to the re-escalation of the Vietnam War. Nor is it your privilege, when representing the University Student Senate, and the students, to make any such statement, or to make any statement to be made with your approval and permission.
When the University Student Senate was established in 1869, it was unanimous to formulate such rules and regulations as it shall deem wise and proper for the control and management of University . . . which directly
and primarily affect the students — (including) — student rights, privileges, and responsibilities. (etc.) . . . (UKSC Article II, Section 4). It was not established to serve the functions of a communicator in the university or the surrounding community
I have no complaint with any person, private or public, who requests to see me. I do, however, believe that these views should be given as the individual's, not as those of the Body or the populace generally.
Therefore, it is my request that you, and the University Student Senate, designate those designated by your office, those you are representing your office.
Tharp's Ideas
—Richard A. Stein, E-1, U.S.N.
Soph.-Sch. of Fine Arts
To the Editor:
I would hope that those who read Mike Tharp's guest column in *The New York Times* uprusth of the local peace "movement" "were as humored as I was. It seems that Mr. Tharp has worthwhile point of all his worth, while point of all his MVP role to substantiate all or any of his major claims
concerning the effectiveness of the recent protest activities.
The three aspects of the recent
disagreements in the United
disagrees appear to be: (1) their
purpose; (2) the methods used;
(3) the responsibility of the
institution.
(1) The purpose of these new actions certainly isn't to politicize the people but, rather, to counter them by countenance to counter Mr. Nixon's preference to dehumanize the war which he does by channeling the military energy through nihilists rather than through men.
(2) The methods of protest Mr. Tharp warns against have proven effective. Surely the people are educated as to what is happening, but history has shown that they will soon become aware and active. Demonstrations have proven to be that prod in spite of Mr. Tharp's warnings.
(3) If the organizing of protest activities swells one's ego, that is incidental to his purpose. The fact is the demonstrations were not peaceful and should continue to be under the same leadership.
Obviously Mr. Tharp should have shown more responsibility in assessing the purpose and success of the protest activities.
-Irvin C. Mattick Hays sophomore
men, women, and children? Ward would, I imagine, say no. But on what grounds? The fact that they are innocent cannot be argued against, but the would have to agree with our argument against Miller and Scott as to their ethical imbecility. I suspect, however, that Ward is merely confused, and that he has no classical at best, chastice at worst.
"Voting" our editorialist continues, "like speaking, is a way of expressing opinion. I vote in the right to do what they will their freedom of speech is infringed. Voting, of course, is an opinion. It can be rape, murder, and assault. In all these cases an opinion is expressed. But not merely opinion. Unlike speech, but like voting, it is carried with a coercive aspect. Voting is an act forging other persons who disagree to our will. It is not a means to legalize pot, grant pardons to those previously convicted, and hold a student opinion poll on the subject is an act of self defense or an act of protest. It was to stop algebra already occurring. At the very least a vote against the resolution was an act in support of those perpetrating the crime against those attempting to hait it.
McGovern's Defense Posture
James J. Kilpatrick
Mary  Ward's  editorial attacking those of us who do not want David Miller and Louis Scott representing us on SenEx ability to read even the simple sentences. Her column is so beside the point as to make the most charitable interpretation of her position that she did not receive a letter in last Tuesday's Kansan.
such other fields as welfare reform, the gentleman from South Dakota is farther out yet. *CHEKER* 1972
Ward attacks the conclusion without mentioning the reasons for that conclusion but her defense has a bit of doubt. We believe that under some circumstances it is OK to use force and violence against a woman. I explain just when we are so justified! We may bomb innocent
Ward continues that "it is possible that Miller and Scott, unlike dZerega and his associates, were aware of this campus which we were opposed to any legislative approval of marijuana." We, of course, are well aware of such students as I wrote. We have run polls in Western Civilization classes, which are good random samples of Liberal Arts students. We found 95 to 100 percent of our students to be in favor of legalization. I polled nine such classes. Senators Miller and Scott were elected from the College of Liberal Arts. In addition, neither Miller nor voting this as a reason for voting no.
Copyright 1972
Washington Star Syndicate, Inc.
Ward's Edit. To the Editor:
that McGovain is not concerned, at the Soviet Union's relentless gains in first-strike nuclear capability.
I m McGwenn an extremist as to national defense? In my view, yes. And voters may discover, as the campaign rolls along, that in
Ward writes that "I could never believe that anyone who disagreed with that opinion (the one that Miller and Scott believed and ethically insensible," in disagreement with my position that such a person was I wonder whether Miller and Scott would implications of her presumably sincere statement? My charge against Miller and Scott was "every man or woman should be free to pursue his or her own interests as he or she deems best, so long as neither he nor another person" of "every man or woman should be another person." If this sentiment is agreed with, then it follows that no person is justified in impeding the basic rights of peaceful persons, as was the point of our resolution Miller and Scott's reasonable standard such an attempt.
But all this is beside the point. Does Ward believe there to be evidence for the case? Apparently she does not, 1, for one, do not care if 99 per cent of the people vote to invade the United States or still wrong. This, and not the fact that neither Miller nor Scott are the overriding issue, is the overriding issue.
While admitting that I do not have a pipeline to God about what they believe, whatever a person's ethical beliefs may be, they do have a legitimate role to play when you represent them. You represent you. Since the Kansan refuses steadfastly to inform their readers of how Senators are representing themselves, representatives are about all any of us have in evaluating them. Further, ethics provide a fairly stable basis for how they will vote in the future.
At a time when the Soviet Union is dramatically expanding its naval forces, a President of the United States Navy from 695,600 to 471,000. He would cut the fleet from roughly 700 ships to 341. He
He would recommend that the Air Force be cut from 738,000 to 516,000 by increasing the number of interceptors "by slightly more than half." For the time being, he would preserve the Minuteman missile system, but "plans to upgrade Minuteman systems" are proposed. Deployment of the Safeguard system "should be halted". Prototype development of the B-bomber also "should be halted". Deployment of the F-15 "should be ended."
WASHINGTON — Several months ago, not long before the primary in New Hampshire, Senator George McGovern called a press conference to release a 56-page statement of his views on national defense. Few persons were taking McGovern seriously during his time in office, play in the press; it drew some editorial comment, pro and con; if faded from the news a few days hence.
McGovent went on to startle the experts in New Hampshire; he broke even in Florida; he swept to a solid victory in Wisconsin; and last week in Massachusetts he held home control of the vote. At this writing, he leads the field in terms of committed delegates. A great many persons are taking him seriously now.
has small use for aircraft carriers: He would cut their number to 120. He envisions only 130 escort vessels; in this field "no further construction is required." He is doubtful that amphibious assaults ever will be needed, and it preserve only enough vessels to serve a single Marine expeditionary force.
The Marine Corps now numbers roughly 207,000 men. McGovern would out its strength to hold the Nazi occupants three combat divisions to two.
Yet many experienced observers—men who could not possibly be ridiculed as Colonel Blimps or as victims of paranoia—disagree strongly with the McGovern recommendations. They see potential danger to the national security that McGovern does not see. They are concerned, in ways
The Senator's carefully detailed statement on "an alternative national defense posture" thus invites our reexamination. It represents the candidate's considered thinking on an issue of great national importance and McGovern would recommend if he were elected President of the United States.
Ward manages to confuse my personal reason for getting involved because general reasons have helped me the people have for urging Miller and Scott's resignation. These reasons rest on the fact that we wish David Miller off of SenEx is his running for State legislature in the coming year, and between representing the students on SenEx and trying to convince the majority of voters in the state to represent them is ominous.
To the Editor:
Summer Living
As a self-supporting student operating on a limited budget, I feel compelled to a plea for more people to enter the saturated point (less than 50 per cent occupancy in many complexes) as new apartments are being built and benefit everyone in the long run.
Recent articles in the Kansan have pointed out the advantages of off campus housing as opposed to the sterility and increasing stress that come with having one's own place, and determining one's own menu and life-style can be rewarding, but not without the risk of being finding even these costs prohibitive. When I questioned one local landlord concerning his recent rent increases, he measured 1520 per cent students were receiving substantial support from their parents, they could easily pay higher than comparable 1520 per cent higher than comparable housing elsewhere.
In justification for these drastic reductions, the Senator makes a number of excellent points. He observes, for example, that the armed forces in 1969 were about 20 percent less in colonels and captains, with a total force of 3.5 million men, than there were at the peak of World War II with a force of 12 million. He denounces, with great justification, the scandulous waste and bungle defense programs of recent administrations. His recommendations would produce armed forces "both leader and tougher than those now in being."
The Army has an authorized active force of 942,000 men. McGovern would cut this to 648,000. He recommends a limit of ten general purpose divisions, and one-third levels. As part of its NATO commitment, the United States maintains four and one-third divisions in Europe; McGovern would cut this to two. He would of course withdraw all land and air forces from China. The remaining troops in South Korea should also be returned to the United States."
Gus dIZerega Lawrence graduate student
On paper it looks as if Miller were always with the winning side—in reality it makes his voting record more misgled. He has been an ardent member of his constituency to tell where he stands. The only exception that I remember in this behavior revolved around his wanting to give Athens even more money and Auditing had recommended.
McGovin places the nation's "baseline" defense budget, excluding the costs of Vietnam, at $75.5 billion in the current fiscal year. He would reduce this figure to $48.4 billion by 1975.
Once again I, along with a substantial number of my fellow students, am faced with the prospect of finding an apartment in Lawrence for the summer of 2017. My parents appalled at the grossly inflated rents charged for anything inhabitable.
We see the recent action by the Student Senate in raising the activity fee an additional $2.00 as required by the student referendum of last semester. In that referendum, the majority of those students who voted expressed the desire of decrease in the student activity fee.
My letter gets too long, but these are not simple issues. If Ward would spend more of her time with students less of it pontificating her pseudodiversity would have better quality writings and, who knows, maybe our student leadership would stand for something more solid than inference.
—Gus diZerega
Ativity Fee
Garry Wills
-Greg Justis, Maize Junior
he choose to change his vote—for the winning side!
To the Editor:
Nixon on Television
I shudder to imagine what he will do on SenEx during a crisis. Maybe he will abstain.
Here he gave his first hint of some doubt. Yes, he admitted, he
Miller has also displayed a degree of deviousness that i. at any other time in anywhere else. During last Wednesday's budgetary meeting Mr. Miller, the assistant votes were taken. Time and again Müller abstained until after the call was made, for anyone who did not appear. Then and only then did
But what's the point, I finally shouted at him. Why keep doing it?
He lifted his dripping head and answered through a pulpy grin: "To save face." Copyright, 1972, Universal Press Syndicate
This seemed aggressive, as well as senseless, behavior; so I asked what he had against the wall. "Nothing," he assured me, admitting it might have looked that way when he was also punching the wall with both hands. But—look! one hand was now almost all the way out of the other. If he showed me his bandaged mitt, red and torn from the rough brick surface).
I met a man beating his head against a wall. We went about it in hatematter, and the comic were it not so pititable. Blood streamed down from his battetter scalp and countenance, killing me while we teaching all the way to his feet.
If the Student Senate is representative of the students on this campus, then it follows that he should consider what he considered. It seems that the referendum was a colossal hoax and his desire destined to become a reality.
Why did he want to prove that?
"To show this cranium won't crack."
"To prove I can't be forced to stop beating my head against the wall."
What made him think his cranium would not crack, but he wouldn't. But what made him so certain? "This"—and he stepped back a few paces, lowered his head, and charged the wall like a crazed
"A lot of people are depending on my cranium. How would it look to them if I stopped now? They would lose confidence in my voice and I was rarned face with a slapping sound into the wall again."
But if he had nothing against the wall, why did he keep beating against it?
The effort proved too much for him; so he shrugged his shoulders, got in several more solid bangs, and said, "It doesn't matter how much you want to situation. What matters now is that I am here. And once I'm here, I won't let this be the first time I ever had to say 'quit,'."
The dismaying part of this performance was its dogged determination. At times he would croon rather absentmindedly against the bricks, softly rocking his face as a bloody pail as if it were a bloody pillow.
Didn't he think this particular proof of his head's toughness might be ill-chosen? What kind of head is it, after all, that demonstrates its virtues in this manner?
Then he would reawake to duty, and thud his own head's life recklessly into the inert surface, trying to make it fight back, as if wanting to give the bricks a brain to fill the bricks were debraining him.
did not like this particular contest. Why, then, had he got involved in it? It broke his rhythm a bit for him to scratch himself. He tore open from its wounds, to remember how it all had started.
Any why was that important?
With an increase in tuition and fees next semester as a result of the students having to pay for Wescoe Hall and the Student Library, it is that much more of a “pitch” on the student's pocketbook.
In view of these actions, it is no wonder that vote turnout for student elections and candidates become nothing but a joke!
-David M. Cicotello,
Windbair, P. freshman
-Steven Songer,
Seneca sophomore
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
America's Pacemaking college newspaper
Kansan Telephone Numbers
Newsroom—UN 4-4810
Business Office—UN 4-4328
Editor
News Adviser
Business Manager
Business Adviser
Chlp Crews
Del Brlakmam
Carol Young
Mel Adams
Griff and the Unicorn
By Sokoloff
"Copyright 1972, David Sokoloff.