4
Tuesday, October 19, 1971
University Daily Kansan
KANSAN comment
Editorials, columns and letters published on this page reflect only the opinions of the writers.
Readers Respond
Working in the System
"Work within the system," we are told.
"Go through channels and you'll get things done" is the sage advice of our elders.
Well, we tried it with beer on campus and look what happened.
For two years students quietly worked "within the system" to get beer sold in the Kansas Union. In a spring 1970 survey, 64% of students mistimed for the sale of beer in the union.
The Board of Regents sat back and didn't interfere. They waited until we swam through all the channels and obeyed the course from the Lawrence City Commission.
And then they abruptly decided that yes, we could drink beer on campus, but not water.
It was a good decision in that, with administration approva, we will be able to drink beer in organized living groups, but the decision to not allow sale of beer in the Union appears both puzzling and pointless.
Fear that the legislature might crack its budgetary whip was the apparent motivation for the regents' decision. Legislators, the regents are told, are
incensed at the idea of our state universities becoming tavern owners.
But if it's all right to drink in the Union, then the prohibition must come from economic motivations. Free enterprise rears its proud head once again and the other day they were that we don't want the Union taking away business from the nearby taverns.
Yes, those are puzzling motivations.
But what is more puzzling is why the regents waited so long to make their decision. Why did they let all those people waste so much time in what turned out to be a futile effort to get beer sold in the Union?
Perhaps they wanted to teach us a lesson in democracy. Perhaps they wanted to teach us who has clout in regents meetings. It's obviously not the case that the presence of legislative discontent were more powerful than two years of university effort.
It's called working within the system.
Don't laugh. Instead, let's all buy six-packs at the Gaslamp and head down to the Room for an afternoon of relaxation.
—Pat Malone
Garry Wills
Ethnic Studies And Power
When black studies were introduced into the college curriculum, one argument was that "the reduction ad absurdum" that is; if we are going to have more research in Irish studies? Couldn't the whole curriculum be spinnered into chauvinistic ethnic stereotypes?
The same argument has returned, but as a reality, not an absurdity Ethnic studies boomed and Sunomaa Nan balanced its ethnics rounded out its program with such courses as the Eastern and Southern Ethnic Studies seems that white is beautiful, too. And that academic "equal time" calls for white studies to balance black studies, brown and yellow studies. And that equal time "equal time" approach is liberal cover for programs that did not fit the liberal curriculum and jacency, the professors once thought, meant being "color-blind" in the classroom. When blacks would not let this polite race impartiality was bound to say color was all right if you in cluded all colors.
That is nonsense, of course.
The black studies movement was confessedly insurgent, partial, and political—as was the resistance to it. This is not a new phenomenon of black history is possible. It has been a specialty within history and sociology departments, with its own recognized scholarly journals and high names (Du Bois, Fraser, Quarley), since the 1890's.
But that is the point—it was a scholarly field, with a recognized place, not a set of degrees or degraduates, demanded (non-negotiably) by means of strikes, and resisted by the public alike. This was college teaching with an admitted bias, not mere scholarship—so scholarly the sources drawn upon.
migrant assimilation (or non-
assimilation). Or part of
religious studies—e.g., Father
M. Mayry's lectures
in Yale.
For we have had Irish studies. Jewish studies, German American studies all the history departments—e.g., the Oscar Handlin studies of immigration or the study of psychology in big cities. Or they were part of sociological scholarship—g.e., the analysis of Moynihan analyses of im-
Why, then, draw these separate (and clearly legitimate) academic specialties that academics divide on the American division of an ethnic program? Partly as, I say, to avoid confusion, particularly, to placate opposition to black studies and cash in on the new interest in academics.
But what challenge can the white majority offer to its own prized institution? The answer is their position is simply a way of giving more power to people with power. The arguments about these are academic ones, but those based on simple decency.
If one remembers the distinction between these two kinds of black studies—those contained as specialties within the departments of history, etc., and those meant to inform society—the real point of the new web of courses becomes clear.
But there is a big difference between the insurgency program of an unassimilated country and that of a prospective situation, and an advocacy course for the unassimilating majority. For one thing, the clearly violent history was disproportionately small—the insurgents put on pressure to increase this. For another organization was psychologically difficult—organization was needed to prevent its failure. For another, the assumptions of the normal texts needed challenge from these unrepresented or "disadaphed" students.
COPYRIGHT, 1971
UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE
Bible, Gays
To the Editor:
Bible, Bikes, Billy ...
Mr. Hardy's rigorous rebuttal 10.1 to what the Bible says about homosexuality reflects a general misunderstanding of the law throughout the world today. By saying that one should "follow the Bible path" of loving one's fellow man as a fulfillment of the law, Mr. Hardy is not misunderstanding of the purpose of the commandments. The commandments are not given we are given to point out man's shortcomings and our need for Christ; "... a man is not justified by the works of the Law Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; Therefore the Law has become a moral force." (Galatians 12: 36, 14). It is only by coming to Christ that the commandments can be fulfilled in our lives. It is only by being the Holy Spirit that man can love.
The Bible, as the word of God,
says that homosexuals are paying
the price for rejecting
homosexuality is not the central
issue in this discussion. Man's
rebellion to God is the central
issue. Homosexuality is a con-
sequence (Romans 1: 18-32)
of the rebellion to God.
Christ is the solution (John 1: 12-
Ephesians 2: 8-9). Richard Mamm
Topeka, Junior
I saw Billy Jack. I should have stayed home and watched a soap opera. At least their trips into unreality are well structured and
To the Editor:
Billy Jack
That artistically the film is trash, is obvious. The message, however, is lots more insidious. It is a rite, white "hip" message, not a black one. The message that evades and distorts the question of white responsibility to correct the obvious exploitation, makes it easier to message that justifies a more subtle exploitation by those who want to be the Indian's "brother."
If Billy Jack is an Indian, then Sitting Bull was my grandfather. Actually, Billy is all-American and the middle class kid who made Eagle Scout and graduated to the Green Berets, a hybrid of karate and spouting Parson Weems. His main function is as a one man army protecting a lot of Indians. He dumbo, cowardly or apathetic to protect themselves. However, a lot of white people, who for some reason don't know a "Freedom School" on a reservation, have other interests in mind for Billy. They see him as yes, there are non-whitees at the school too, but they manage to sink around in the shadows and never get into the commonly accepted definition for this phenomenon is tokenism. ) In any event, there's no doubt who's the show, and it ain't the Indians.
One would think that a "Freedom School" on an Indian reservation would in some measure devote itself to the study of indigenous languages, language, art; that it would be attempting to preserve the traditional that's vanishing. Foolish thought. These students have no way to strumming guitars, mastering the great outdoors, role playing and learning how to "feel." In their minds this means becoming like the Indians. We all know that they really dig sensitivity training.
Anyway, by playing Indians, these fist clenching, head band wearing kids are finding them as American tradition, white people finding themselves at the expense of the Indians. The old pioneers land. These new pioneers exploit him for kicks. They need a romantic, mystical background and they may also offer others May dig Zen, psychedelic
lights or hash; these folk dig Indians. And really, they're not different than the Moms and Dads from whom they're fleeing. They have a tradition to take pictures of or have their pictures taken with some honest to goodness "native." These kids hit the reservation to play "motive." Both generations are still on the backdrop to offset their own emotionally impoverished lives. Besides, after you've nearly exterminated a people, senators assuages the collective guilt.
Perhaps I'm being unfair.
Perhaps the film makers simply do not know how to impart a sense of outrage over a brutal assault against a human being, to protect herself from outrage, providing that human being is white. When the nice Freedom Schoolmarm gets raped we see her agony, the agony of a girl who has been punished for revenge, etc., all in great detail, all very human. The film makers, in spite of their protestations of brotherly love, apparently have a double stance; besides, we all know that white must be protected.
But the real clincher is at the end. It's in the last minutes that the filmmakers really give me a runaround duel with the police is interrupted by the nice schoolmarm. She asks for permission to feesses that he balps for her too. (That this great "Indian" myssle should prefer this white woman she sees, but I'm not sure I understand the Indian payer rather than a brown soul sister, is a little confusing. But then again, why not "the only Indian woman trayered by the filmmakers as also preferring a white woman. And why not "the only Indian woman trayered by the filmmakers as also preferring a white woman." So the Great White Mamma persuades Billy, the governor, in bed with the film villain).
Now for the deal negotiated with the "Establishment." Was it a solution to any of the problems indians faced in the film? Was it that whites exposed? Was it that whites be prevented from patrolling horses on Indian land? Was it that Indians be served in the downtown area protected from wanion beatings by town toughs? No, folks, living as insignificant as that. It is right as long as they got religion. The deal provided that the school go unmolested for ten years, an annual public report be made, a class institution schoolmarm, be assured her tenure on the job. So we see the purpose of this long, bloody, fist clenching struggle for human rights. This class institution is guaranteed longevity, employment and free publicity. The reservation Indians get zelch. Was it ever any such friend, much friends, needs enemies?
Since Indians obviously don' want what many of their white"friends" want for them, they what is it that Indians want for education to read the literature of the Indian movement and I'll tell you what they want. The literature will tell you that Indian culture is base, fishin' and mining in it. They want to protect their lands from incursions by utility companies lumber, fishing
police and bigots; freedom to avail themselves of the full jurisdiction of the federal courts; freedom from the federal threat of violence, including the instrument of squeeling dissent; and freedom from peepin to anthropologists, grave robbing archeologists, survey taking students, hungry academicians and ego tripping students. There are a few Indian "Freedom Schools" dedicated to these purposes. The student synthesis of the one shown in the film.
To those who were enamored of the film and hissed the UDK reviewer, if you really believe in Indian self-determination there are programs with which you can access the information technical, legal and research support and above all, advocacy of the Indian cause within the white community. The Prairie Band Polatowati Indians of India have such a program underway. It takes works; lots of work.
Bike Barb
Norman Forer
Ass'TU. Prof.. Social Welfare
To the Editor:
Bicycle riders are undoubtedly the most discourteous people on this campus. I was reassured of their cooperation at the intersection of Spencer and Crescent (a 3-way stop as 17 (that's right—I counted them) 17 consecutive cyclists ran the stop so they did not have to obey traffic laws? It is bad enough that they clutter up the campus with their bikes, but now they drivers have to pay $25 for a parking space a half a mile from their classes, but now they must park in front of ours. Why not have bicycle parking zones? And why do the campus traffic officers remember that the same traffic rules are to the same traffic rules as cars and enforce them?
Jerry Wolfley Onaga, Junior
Dry Reply
To the Editor:
Alcohol is our No. 1 drug problem! Newspapers, TV, and radio are telling us that television TELEVISION REPORT. DRUGS: A TO Z, produced by CBS and presented on TV stations across the nation opened with "One drug causes the other drug causes the other drugs combined. That drug is alcohol." The Hutchinson News ran an editorial on September 24, 1985, in which she wrote Drug Problem; and on went on to say it was alcohol. An AP story carried by papers across the nation described Sumirech, executive director of the federal marijuana commission said, "We do know this, the most severe drug-bussehates in the United States is alcohol." The Encyclopedia Britannica, volume 4, page 167, states. "In the United States, the number of people in the count for approximately 49 percent of the alcohol consumed." Dr. Raymond Schwegeler, a psychiatrist at Hospital, has told me that he treats approximately 15 or more persons with alcohol related problems for every one person or other drug related problems.
There are great efforts in Kansas to discourage the use of marijuana, because of that drug problem, yet we seem to approve and push the use of beverage or other our greater drug problem. Why?
Some have questioned the alcoholic content of beer. DRUGS: "NO ZZ lust that 'i am drunk' with a bottle of wine or a酒杯 of whiskey each has about the same alcoholic content." It also says beer is 4 per cent alcoholic in AMERICAN, distributed nationally by Blue Cross, states "most American beer generally contain about 4% per cent alcoholic content" and ounce bottle of 3.2 beer is 4 per cent alcohol by volume, it contains 48 fluid ounce of beer and 86 proof whiskey is 43 per cent
alcohol by volume, it contains 43,
fluid ounce of alcohol. The above
bottle of beer contains slightly
more alcohol than the shot of
whisky!
Kansas University students have told me that beer on campus just isn't an issue, yet some of them get across that love, a genuine concern for others and good will that they should agree 'The official position of our Methodist Church is just that, "We believe that the Christian community has a neighbor to use as alcohol beverages and to minister to those vicarious neighbors we use in page 57) THE ALCOHOLIC AMERICAN states "one in three people in America way to becoming an alcoholic." Is alcohol worth that risk? Of course the non-user has 100 per cent of the responsibility Will a person filled with Christian love continue to be a social drinker when one out of eight of them gets drunk alcohol dependent--addicted?
Every student on campus should read THE ALCOHOLIC BOOK, and do good job in giving both sides of this issue. I did not like it on first reading because it did not stress alcoholism. I drink beverage alcohol business are unhappy with the booklet, and so it would seem that both sides are equally interested.
Medical science informs us that alcohol addiction is never cured, it is only arrested when a person stops drinking. No matter how hard you try to dry, he can never take another drink without a relapse to his former state of alcohol dependence because his problem is not alcoholism is non-use beverage alcohol, could it be that the best means of prevention is non-use? If you are a non-user, you will not become a non-user while you still have the ability to make such a choice—before the years ahead turn you into one out of eight junkers who becomes addicted?
Richard E. Taylor, Jr.
Executive Director
Kansas United Dry Force
More Jack
To the Editor:
In an earlier issue of the UDR a review of the movie "Billy Jack" was printed. The review was very critical of the plot and the acting, and urged readers not to see the movie. In a subsequent UDR several letters were printed in reaction to the review. The letters generally expressed anger over the review. However, instead of attempting to refute the arguments of the reviewer, personal attacks on the reviewer.
Barbara, Schmidt, the reviewer, was called racist particularly against Indians, anc. against the problems of the American Indian today. Even after a defense of the review was printed in the newspaper, a plain that she was not a racist and was aware of the problems of the American Indians) two more letters were printed by Ms. Schmidt ("American" denounced Ms. Schmidt as a racist again and implied all white people are racists. The last letter is being oversensitive to criticism
By Sokoloff
I would like to make a few comments on this situation. First, in a difference of opinion, you are automatically prevent a solution or understanding been reached. Second, criticism of things associated with or against an ethnic group does not make the critic a racist. Third, critic do not have to sit still and take personal attacks. Fourth, everyone has a right to be respected. We should be wished. Lastly, any one who has attacked Ms. Schmidt for any of the above mentioned reasons is urged to learn the principles of respect before saying anything more.
Griff and the Unicorn
Stanley Willis Overland Park, Freshman
The UDK always has been a newspaper of, and for the Jeschols' faculty. The Student Senate has minimal and ineffectual. Last spring the Student Senate asked the Board to reconstitute itself so that it would be able to at least some influence on the UDK. If not, student activity fee funding of the UDK would be reduced. So I did nothing but deliberately obstruct the Student Senate's attempt to make it more
tually every point save one: the UDK never was a "student newspaper."
Numerous examples of the faculty orientation and induction can be found. Will the Board explain to the students it supposedly represents, why none of them were given the job this past summer? Why did the Board pass over all applicants and select a candidate who bothered to apply? And was the editor elected by a vote of the faculty members or a private agreement by a couple of faculty members of the Board? Why were some student memembers not given a chance to vote?
The first transfer of $70,000 was made to the university printing service to help finance commissions and present facility. Perhaps the Kashan team has a no-strings-attached gift to the printing service reimbursed to our benefit? Or perhaps the UDK would like to show how a student can be successful in the transfer. The UDK can't because the transfer of student funds from the UDK reserve fund to the printing service was done with a simple stroke of an administrative cell with students paying the bill.
And then there's the matter of the $88,000 from the reserve fund used to build the Journalism Building in the basement of Flint Hall. Although the $88,000 was derived from student activity fees, how much did it cost for facility? Has there been any attempt to inform all students of its existence and availability or is it an unrealistic assumption those enrolled in Journalism and Fine Arts Courses? Never mind the student magazines were used to build it.
Consider the facts. Between 1960 and 1970 the UDK accumulated a reserve fund of $250,000 through student activity fees. From this quarter of a reserve two large transfers have been received. Neither were approved by or for the benefit of students.
Rip Off
"Copyright 1971, Davtd Sokoloff."
Perhaps some faculty members would like to explain why the Student Senate's representative school's faculty and half of the UDK staff when he tries to meet with the Kansan Board. Twenty-five-to-oo odds are good for someone determined to埂勋 legitimate efforts by the Student Senate to correct an inequitable situation.
Friday's editorial "answering" Mrs. Evans' letter implies that the Kansan is responsive to student interests than is the Student Senate itself. Indeed, it goes so far as to suggest that the UDK will be controlled by "a small clique of campus politicos". It would seem to me that these organizations are open and since any学生 can run or vote, it cannot help but be more representative of the Kansan self-appointed and unrepresentative Kansan Board. If the Senate is controlled by the Kansan, the Kansan's inuences then it seems to me that the Kansan's responsibility is to name them—not to make rush and unresponsive to student interests.
---
I have read with the greatest interest the debate between Karen Evans and the UK over the he Kasnan's status and role at KU. I found the distortions in the 'rebuttal' to Mrs. Evans. The people she may have made and find myself in agreement with her on vir-
To the Editor:
Since all students must pay for the UDK it seems unjust in the sense that a student is dominated by J-school interests rather than student interests in the larger sense. That there has been no change in this year cannot be denied, but that this in no way affects the overriding issue of whether or not students are paid for it, and those students who pay for it can also not be denied is time for the UDK to make a representation from the students at large. If not, I urge that funding to a faculty-dominated UDK be widrawn by the Student Senate.
Gus deZerega Wichita, Graduate student
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
America's Pacemaking college newspaper
Kansan Telephone Numbers
Newsroom—UN 4-4810
Business Office—UN 4-4358
Published at the University of Kansas during the academic year except holidays and examination periods. License fee $6 a semester; $10 per month. Licensed under Lawrence's Goods, services and services advertised offered to all students without regard to color, reed or national origin may not necessarily be covered by the State Board of Regents.
News Adviser
Editor
Business Adviser
Business Manager
Del Brinkman
David Bartel
Mel Adams
Carol Young
Member Associated Collegiate Press