4
Thursday, October 29. 1970
University Daily Kansan
KANSAN comment
Let's Have Liquor by the Drink
By TED ILIFF
Once again, Kansans have a golden
bestest their attitudes toward
themselves and.
This time liquor by the ounce is the issue, and some Kansans seem intent on showing the nation that Kansas is truly a war zone and are decent by opposing the resolution.
"No saloons in Kansas," they cry, "Liquor by the drink promotes alcoholism," they warn. "Don't legalize dens of iniquity," they plead.
How absurd.
The dry forces seem to ignore all the data, national trends, and public attention.
In lieu of bland statistics, which often can be twisted to promote a certain point of view, let us look at the common sense angle of the resolution.
their emotional, archaic tirades against the resolution defy common sense.
Kansas is one of six states that are still dry. Why haven't the other 43 states become hot-beds of sin, alcoholism and drug abuse? Why aren't the states being wiped out by drunk drivers? Why have alsoolheim and drunken driving become serious problems in Kansas without bars? And would liquor drive rapidly multiply these problems?
The answer to the last question is no. Alcoholism is a mental disease, not a
The State of Education Escaping that Plastic Bag
By JEFF GOUDIE Assistant Campus Editor
Perhaps nowhere is the Protestant ethic so deeply ingrained as in the American form of compulsory, categorized education.
The proponents of this doctrine say there is little wisdom in dreams and no knowledge in self instruction. So they place us within the narrow confines of the mythological world, but we bag through which we view the world. But to their dismay, we simply offer recipes for peace and prosperity and lambast the mortals who are bangling it until then we don't make even a whispered request for entry into our jailers' world.
Many of us refuse to join their society and feel little interest in its continuation, and that is sad testimony to the failure of our present educational system to give us a sense of the vastness of nature or the community of mankind.
John Gardner has written, "instead of telling young people their task is to stand a dreary watch over ancient values, we should be telling them the grim but not ugly things; it is their task to recreate those values continuously in their own behavior."
Education unsupplemented by action and access into the larger, outside world is just not real. As Paul Goodman writes, "The more I learn about performance; it is largely carried on for
its own sake."
If the university is to justify its existence, it must begin by instilling in its students a feeling of common human values and priorities, a functioning morality. It must serve to vivify the mask and nurture it into an alive and singing soul. To do so, students student time to cloister himself with dreams, reflection and introspection. Scholastic achievement must be secondary to an insight into the nobility and dignity of man. Only with an education that is this fundamental can students hope to be saved from a seemingly inevitable rendezvous with annihilation.
It is the university's peculiar task to synthesize learning and conscience, to make Thoreau's vision of an in-person school more accessible to manchman of the public welfare. Our primary concern should be to integrate ourselves so fully into life that it is impossible for us to disassociate ourselves from what we are doing or to salvage what is good in that moment.
The sultent must see the qualities he has been taught come to life and he, in turn, must live to recreate these qualities in his own surroundings. The narrow road must widen and fork into multiple paths and then we must rest, reflect and cast our thoughts in a new mold. And we must undertake to fulfill the very real need to know our fellow man in a whole new way of knowing.
It Just Grew (On You)
Good grief! A birthday slipped by last week without due editorial notice!
Charlie Brown, the cultural waif of "Peanuts," is 20 years old (and doesn't look like him).
Charles Schulz's creation has grown in two decades from an obscure comic strip character to an American social institution, which isn't bad for a blockhead.
United Features Syndicate agreed to handle the strip in 1950 at $80 a month. Charlie Brown and the gang are now seen regularly in more than 1,000 newspapers in the United States and roughly 100 papers in 41 foreign countries.
The cash register rings to the tune of about $50 million a year, counting a percentage of the profits from Peanuts toys, T-shirts, lamps, coloring books and whatnot. And even money-grubbing Lucy can't argue with that.
Charlie Brown, Lucy, Linus, Snoopy and the rest are more familiar to many Americans than are political and pop culture figures.
The Peanuts gang broke into television with its own holiday specials, appeared on stage in the off-broadway production of "You're a Good Man, Charlie Brown" and recently starred in a full-length movie.
And why not when the mishaps of life seem too much to bear, who comes up with a one-liner to make your troubles, if you have one? And why not when Who's better at defining happiness or
friends or love?
Charlie Brown illustrates that life is just one big losing baseball season, but his pals offer enough escape valves to make it worth playing.
Snoopy, the fantasy that anyone would love to own, whisks away in his Sopaph Camel to do battle with the cheers of the world ring in his ears.
Linus clings to his security blanket and wields the sympathy of millions who wish they could be heroes.
Using childhood memories, many observances and a little philosophy of his own. Schulz has the grade school set up for him, but he knows both but never really thought about it.
Lucy, the abrasive female, sits behind her psychiatrist booth and sells insults at five a.m.
The slightly fabricated English theme, for instance, that Linus turns in with the remark, "You have to know what sells." Or the realization that, no matter where you fly your kite, that kite-eating tree is going to get it.
For twenty years, newspapers have been telling us what's going on in life. The editorial page has been telling us what to do, and the newspaper has been telling us what to think about it.
—Cass Peterson Assistant Editor
Happy Birthday, Charlie Brown.
product of easy access to booze. The Federal Bureau of Investigation and Rutgers University have conducted extensive research on alcoholism, and both have found no correlation between liquor by the drink and alcoholism.
Concerning drinking and driving, a potential drunken driver in Kansas now has two places to go for a drink: a private club or some other secluded location. In both instances, he will be drinking from a cup of coffee. A suggestion probably will drink more and drinks than he will in a bar, where drinks can be weaker and more expensive.
Economics is another area where common sense favors liquor by the drink. With the present "private club" system, where a person buys a bottle and has drinks poured from it, no tax revenue is generated in that liquor by the drink would go a long way to relieve the fiscal problems facing the state, especially in education.
Another benefit will be increased employment. If, for example, 3000 bars open after the laws are established (an arbitrary number suggested by several motel managers), each bar will require at least I2 hours a day and require least five or six employees. About 18,000 persons would thus gain employment.
Also, tourism and convention business in Kansas would be substantially increased. Because of its location, historical attractions and burgeoning park and recreational facilities, Kansas has many dollars in tourist and delegate business that has been neglected and lost, partly because of antiquated liquor laws.
We must keep in mind, however, that the attitude of bars is just a poll of attitudes and light on our own.
It the resolution passes, the legislature must still draft the new laws, and the United Drys will still fight to make the laws as limited as possible.
Several supporters of liquor by the drink fear the drys will lobby enough to force the legislature to put the dry or wet decision in the hands of county governors. If they may draft general liquor control laws but allow each county to have the final say.
This would be indeed unfortunate. First, most of the urban or suburban counties, such as Sedgwick, Johnson, Wyandotte, and Shawnee, would probably allow bars, but most rural counties wouldn't.
Thus, a Lawrence resident would be forced to drive to Topeka or Overland Park to take advantage of a "state law." Driving time and distance for the few inevitable drunken drivers would be reduced. The police would kill themselves or someone else. If there was a bar down the street from their houses, this hazard would be avoided.
A county wavering on a decision to allow bars may decide against the idea when it considers the possibility of nonresidents' flocking in to have a drink.
Worst of all, what would happen to the tax revenue? If only a handful of counties allowed liquor by the drink, the tax rate on it would be higher and dry counties would profit from funds collected in wet counties. Bar patrons in Topeka would be helping pay for schools in Goodland; Overland Park drinkers in western Kansas roads that they would buy.
It seems only fair that if liquor by the drink is not legislated state-wide, then wet counties should be allowed to keep all liquor revenue for their own.
It will be fortunate if Resolution No. 1 passes by a resounding margin. An overwhelming approval will show the legislature that Kansans are ready to enter the 20th century. They would then a mandate to institute comprehensive legislation among Kansans deserve the privilege of going out for a drink, and the advantages of liquor by the drink far outweigh the few minor disadvantages.
Griff & the Unicorn
Copyright 1970, University Daily Kansan
With many another efface snob, it has always been my belief that Richard Nixon represented the apothesis of corruption; that there was no thought, no belief, no body, no thing; that he would not bend, nor could. That he was—in the bankrupt parlance of Time—a "clever man," a "shrewful political realist."
The commission's conclusion had been that pornography was primarily an entertainment, that it represented very little threat to anything, that laws lording it would only increase its attraction, promote disrespect for law, and make yet another group of ordinary people into criminals. This meant that he would have to merit discussion, much less debate. But Mister Nikon did debate it, and in what John Calley of the Kansas City Star called his "strongest language," denounced it;
It is becoming clear, however, that this view is naive and worse, optimistic. For Mister Nixon is not the only person who has been before we go on—or before, at least, I go on—that as such he represents the triumph of democracy in America; he is mediocre man come to power, but he is a mediocre man coming to failure, the ideal—second only to Eisenhower, his mentor —of the cult of unconsciousness, a "natural" religion for drug culture that, amazingly, opposes hate.
Nixon and Pornography: Cashing In Investment
Mister Nixon really believes that Vietnam is "our finest hour," believes that the poor are the principal recipients of welfare, believes that the ABM is a "chip" in the arms limitation talks, believes that China, being the most populous nation in Asia, represents Asia's gravest threat, believes that General Motors is free enterprise in action, and believes that President Bush's Commission on pornography, that "smail" was the graves corpeter of American morality and Wester civilization (in that order).
BY DAVID PERKINS
Kenanne Weiter
Pornography can corrupt a society and a civilization . . . (it) could poison the springs of American and Western culture and civilization. We all hold the responsibility of keeping America a great country—by keeping America a good country.
Kansan Writer
Now, even if Nixon were clever enough to suppose that sexual liberty was a threat to the capitalist economy, it would still not be sensible to denounce pornography. For porchography is, if anything a substitute for sexual liberation. But much more importantly, even though Marcuse and others were in danger of losing their jobs by society to increase production, the situation is exactly reversed today. Sexuality—and not alone genital sexuality, which was always permitted—is being stimulated now as a substitute for work. There simply isn't enough to do, and to avoid embarrassment, the substitute is used to amuse them sexually. In this way liberalized left is seen as not in opposition to the old society, but as an essential segment of the new
Such a man and such a people are not to be overcome with "revolution." It should be clear to everyone by now anyway that our violent "revolution" today is really something far more personally significant, namely revenge, and has almost nothing to do with social change.
But Nixon represents who he is. He is, therefore, an extremely popular man. To look into the faces of those who greet him at airports is to see what one might have thought impossible: are here people treated themselves in Nixon, who in the political relations of democracy, are hypnotized by him-love him.
Repressing marijuana when in fact its dissemination would be a serviceable anesthetization program, while its repression becomes a cause of legal prohibition. It is the revolution in order to elect a repressive government that will create a revolution is not clever. Assuring the sensibilities of the dultest people in the country by blasting pornography or any of a hundred other forms of illegal content is solvings for real survival questions is not clever.
One of the greatest mistakes of the New Left was its assumption that the government understood it. They fell as heavily as anyone for the myth of "cleverness."
For example, Nixon warms us of ecological disaster, but intends to spend almost nothing to avert it. But because the ecological crisis is real and we must acknowledge that it is inevitable, we must conclude that he is either too ignorant to understand the crisis, and or too ignorant to understand that the ordinary demagogic appeal, the ordinary corporate favoritism, the ordinary corporate longer "no longer shrewd," but innately self-destructive.
But it should be clear now—as Nixon's pronouncements on pornography provide yet more evidence; that Nixon, Mitchell, et al must no longer be viewed as a moral authority of virtue of crime—stop or actual physical deyne incapable of assimilating the present. With most of us, and with the great silent majority to an extreme degree, they suffer cerebral overload, and in crisis they experience post-traumatic shock to old, perhaps juvenile, patterns of behavior.
But Nixon does not know what is going on. He to respond to old visions, discredited ideas (particularly that of demagoguery as political rhetoric) in order to ensure he measures of his ignorance, he is suggesting actions that are harmful to himself and to the group he represents. In that regard, by the way, he might be able to do something about it. The American man's—death instinct). The herd animal hasn't the courage to commit suicide; instead he elects leaders who he knows will do it for him. He doesn't need to persuade him urgently on his ability to trivialize important issues.
Nixon's pronouncements on porchography are ungainly only for a minute. He means it. You bet it.
society.
FROM OTHER CAMPUSES
From
From THE DAILY CALIFORNIAN University of California at Berkeley
Editor's Note: The article that follows was received by the Daily California as a letter to the editor, which was endorsed by the Senior Editorial Board as a guest editorial. The editor is freshman Jonathon King.)
This fall brings 3000 new freshmen to the University. As in any other year, the new yearlings are quite eager and anticipate a year of great expectations. However, most of them are being turned off by procedures, disconcern, discourages action, and outward indifference towards them. This may be the reason for many students dropping out after年夜, this doesn't have to happen.
The jump from high school to college is a very big one, yet many times one has to explain that they are new and don't understand, just to get a straight answer. When one doesn't understand quite madding when someone acts defiant towards them.
For returning students, the many awkward and tedious procedures are nothing new. Yet somehow these same students feel that the procedures that they learned through experience. Many people act incredulous towards sociated "stupid" questions and usually answer with terse, quick replies when they don't offer an adequate answer.
To anyone in a position where they come into public contact, let them know you are here, cloud, and try to help. Put yourself in the other person's place; think about what he feels and be courteous, importantly, be courteous. Courtesy
Many offices ignore people who walk in the door, and for a new student, this can be quite perilous. Teachers often catch someone's attention.
Freshmen Eager for Year Of Expectations, Then...
is the greatest catalyst of respect and understanding today.
By understanding the freshmen, maybe much of their energy won't be so turned off as it
has been. This energy and ambition might be rechanneled into something constructive. It hurt to be courteous, just try it.
I am only 10-90 years old. Some of my friends say there is no such thing as pollution and it's all a big scare. But if you read it in the newspaper it's true. Please tell me the truth, is there really pollution?
By BUNNY MILLER From THE HIGH LIFE McPhernion High School
Virginia Revisited
Virginia Public
Virginia, your friends are wrong. They are being skeptical when there is no time which can be wasted on skepticism. They do not believe in anything they cannot see. The noxious gases and poisons in it are indeed are indebted to there and no amount of stricth head-holing will make them realize.
Maybe the goldfish in your bowl have not died of bad water, but that doesn't mean that the fish in the nearest stream are not being affected.
Ah, Virginia, in all this world there is nothing else as real and pressing as the problem of environmental pollution. In as little as ten years from now, unless you and your friends change your attitudes and begin to work against it, pollution will devour the earth.
Not believe in pollution? You might as well not believe in the power of politics. You might not be able to go outside and catch a bit of fish. You might not be rumored that in New York you can do just that) but that is no reason you're not involuntarily breathing it in or taking it in through your ears.
Yes, Virginia, there really is such a thing as pollution. It exists as certainly as automobiles, jet planes and disposable containers exist. And you know that these things are just a few of the thousands of other things that contribute so far that it will some day smother itself with its own progress.
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
KANSAN
An All-American college newspaper
Kansas Telephone Numbers
Newroom- 4-UN 81-180
Business Office- U4-UN 4328
Published at the University of Kansas daily during the academic year except holidays and examination dates. An admission fee of $10, semester 1; no fees are required on behalf of Lawrence, Ks. 60014. Goods services and employment advertised offered to all students without good services are not necessarily those of the University of Kansas or the State Board of Education.
Editor
Member Associated Collegiate Press
i c o t t i c e
e l p r i a s i o n
a c c o s e d f o r
r d a r s e d
p l u
a s e n t u r e
c y c k e s
e l
monroe Dodd
REPRESENTS FOR NATIONAL ADVERTISING BY
National Educational Advertising Services
DIVISION OF
READER'S DIGITAL SERVICES, INC.
360 Los Angeles Street, New York, N.Y. 10017