Page 2
University Daily Kansan
Friday, Jan. 22, 1963
例 2
Disciplinary Enigma
The continuing disciplinary controversy has pointed to the need for revising the present disciplinary system on campus.
Dean of Men Donald K. Alderson has said the present system is adequate. While many of the cases are handled completely within the framework of the administration, others are referred to such groups as the All Student Council's disciplinary committee or the Inter-Fraternity Council.
Jim Austin, student body president, criticizes the present system as inadequate because there is no consistency in the procedure of disciplinary cases. He maintains there should be records available to students outlining the procedure a student can expect even for an ordinary violation.
There are several valid criticisms that can be made in regard to the present disciplinary system.
First, a definite uniform policy that has certain specific criteria or judging disciplinary cases should be established. We are not questioning the honesty in which cases are now handled. But any student deserves to know what to expect if he breaks a University regulation. While cases certainly are not all alike, we feel certain general rules could be outlined.
This is exactly what happened last year. Three students were arrested by campus police and charged with painting TNE signs in Lawrence and on the campus. The students were immediately suspended, without a hearing or trial, in accordance with a long-standing University policy which specifies immediate dismissal for vandalism. The accused TNEs did not have the opportunity to answer the charges before they were out of the University on indefinite suspension. Two days later the judiciary process began in the Lawrence Police Court. All of the students were released because of a lack of evidence. But their suspension still remained.
Next, there is the question of how much authority should be given the numerous student groups who, theoretically, have some authority to deal with disciplinary problems: the Student Court, the ASC social and disciplinary committees, the Inter-fraternity Council, the Inter-residence Association and the Associated Women Students.
All these groups can and do deal with disciplinary problems. But major problems, such as a student's suspension from the University, find their way into the offices of the administration. If the problem is of lesser importance, one of the student groups is allowed to exercise its punitive authority.
It is disappointing to see the low regard in which student rights are held by the powers in Strong Hall. Even after three or four years of professional training which is supposed to educate an individual to exercise his own rights in a free society, students are still considered incapable of handling any problems that involve more than traffic tickets.
A uniform code of justice would at least give the student an idea of what to expect when he violates University regulations.
But another check should be available for those who feel their case has been handled unjustly. If not, the administration has authority as judge, jury and prosecutor. The administration, like any judiciary body, inevitably makes some mistakes in judgment. The nation's judiciary system has its system of appeals. Why shouldn't it be present at KU.
While revision is definitely necessary, it is difficult to point to any specific solutions. One possibility is to completely change the present system and allow student groups to judge disciplinary cases. Another is to set clear boundaries of authority, designating certain groups to decide certain cases. Whenever there is doubt as to who should handle the case, the ASC disciplinary committee or the Student Court could determine the proper jurisdiction.
Another alternative to the present system would be to select one group, and the Student Court seems a logical choice, to be made an appellate body available to reconsider cases. If a student feels he has had an unjust trial, there would be a court that can override the administration's decision.
The chief justice and the six associate justices are law students versed in judicial procedure and should be capable of deciding any case.
—Doug Yocom
With John Morrissey
We'd like to give the usual weekly report on last weekend's parties, but we can't remember in the first place, and even if we could, it probably couldn't be printed.
---
After having been approached by a young lady last week and having been asked by the same sweet thing why we devoted so much space to spirited beverages and their effects, we have decided to put this column on the wagon for a period not to exceed two days.
We have two friends who went to Acapulco over the Christmas Holidays. They had their entire trip planned by the AA.
UNIVERSITIES
Dailu Hansan
University of Kansas student newspaper
Founded 1889, became biweekly 1904,
trifweekly 1908, daily Jan. 16, 1912.
Telephone VIkking 3-2700 Extension 711, news room Extension 376, business office
Member Inland Daily Press Association. Associated Collegiate Press. Represented by National Advertising Service, 420 Madison Ave., Chicago, IL 60610. Associated Press International. Mail subscription rates: $3 a semester or $5 a year. Published in Lawrence, Kan., every afternoon during the University year except Saturdays and Sundays. University Press. Entered as second-class matter Sept. 17, 1910 at Lawrence, Kan., post office under act of March 3, 1879.
NEWS DEPARTMENT
Jack Harrison ... Managing Editor
Carol Allen, Dick Crocker, Jack
Morton and Doug Yocom, Assistant
Managing Editors; Rael Amos, City
Editor; Jim Trotter, Sports Editor;
Carolyn Fralley, Society Editor.
EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT
John Husar Co-Editorial Editors
Saundra Hayn, Associate Editorial Ed-
BUSINESS DEPARTMENT
BUSINESS DEPARTMENT
Bill Kane Business Manager
... Letters ...
Editor:
Disillusioned
Undoubtedly Mr. Nixon will appreciate all the tub-thumping anyone will give the cause; however, the editor touched on a few of the reasons why Nixon should not be permitted to hold any type of public office, not even Docking's.
"Communist mobs stoned his car
"Communist mobs stoned his car . . ." The editor, along with Nixon, has assumed that anyone who is anti-US is automatically a communist. Those people were not any more communists than the person writing the editorial. (I am assuming that the editor is not a communist). The fallacy that anti-USism is equated to communism is a major sore spot in our relations with other countries and to elect a person so conservative or prejudiced in his outlook that he will never question this fictional policy is to jeopardize our position more than it is at the present.
In reference to Nixon's meeting with Khrushchev, anyone representing the office of vice-president, nonentity or not, having no more consideration for the dignity required by his position than to squabble over trivia, even if it is with the head of another state, indicates the man is not the mature person required for the office of president. If Nixon is going to visit foreign countries and act like a damned tourist, then let him go as a tourist, but certainly not as head of state.
After that first episode in Latin America, Nixon did not listen to his advisers, but like the bullheaded, short-sighted person he is, he plunged on, getting people spat at, windows broken, and teeth loosened. If the people in the U.S. are so unenlightened as to elect someone of Nixon's caliber, it would be more stimulating, and far safer, to go south to join those "communists" who appear to be better informed on the character of U.S. political leaders than are the people here.
One must agree the office of vice-president has been enlivened, but since the trend was already there, it only took a sick old man and an ambitious McCarthyite to exploit the possibilities, not anyone with exceptional talent. A disillusioned Rockefellerite
* *
Dick Moore, Abilene graduate student
To Cheer or Not
Editor:
A case in point is an article in the Wednesday edition commenting on the Oklahoma State basketball game. The writer seemed to imply that the lack of enthusiasm of the crowd was, in a large measure, responsible for our loss. I attended that game and I would like to point out several facts:
I would like to know why the Daily Kansas consistently feels compelled to criticize the school spirit of our student body?
1. For such a bad night, with finals near, a very good crowd of students turned out, implying that we are interested in our basketball team.
2. It seems inappropriate to me for the audience to cheer when our team plays badly. I feel it is rude to yell when the team throws away passes, misses easy lay-ups and fails to show any defensive ability. When the team showed some talent during their "hot period" we cheered. When they played poorly we could only sit by in frustrating silence, or boo them, which I feel would have been unsportsmanlike.
I think that instead of scapegoating the "student body," the Kansas had better spend its time analyzing the poor coaching and poor playing. If the team will give us something to cheer about we will cheer, but I don't think it is fair to ask us to yell our lungs out for a high school team when we came expecting to see a college ball game.
—William B. Devall Overland Park Senior
By Calder M. Pickett
Associate Professor of Journalism
POLITICAL MAN, by Seymour Martin Lipset. Doubleday. $4.95.
One of the amazing aspects of this excellent sociological study is that, despite an overwhelming number of tables and an almost frightening air of scholarship, the book is an absorbing study of man in the world today, how he votes, why he votes, how he operates as "political man." Some of the findings of the author, professor of sociology at the University of California, may merely confirm existing beliefs, but many of them contain new insights and new implications.
The volume should be especially valuable to the student of public opinion, for herein he may find data that demonstrate why people act as they do, and how and why they can be manipulated by the propagandist.
"Political Man" should serve to remove some of the ideas that motivate those Americans who constitute the bleeding-heart faction of liberalism. Lipset's "common man" is pretty common, though Lipset is quite objective about him. Common man, as a political man, is liberal only on economic issues. On issues of civil liberties he is the man who can be manipulated, who paints swastikas and hates Neuros.
"Political man" also is more likely to be liberal if he is well educated. This is a truism that one almost blushes to repeat. But Lipset injects observations that indicate that the intellectual, who presumably is highest on the scale of the well-educated, is not necessarily liberal because he is an educated man.
For all of us, Lipset says (and the voluminously quoted sources bear him out), operate out of prejudices and wants and needs. Certain under-privileged groups backed McCarthy because the Wisconsin senator represented to them an attack on privileged groups in society (such as Ivy League intellectuals). This is a thesis brought out by Richard Hofstadter in "The Age of Reform," in his contentions that the followers of Populism and Progressivism were forerunners, in a sense, of the followers of McCarthyism.
And the intellectual, says Lipset, favors liberal programs and concepts because he unconsciously (or perhaps consciously) is seeking the kind of status that he feels has been denied him by our business-dominated society. He feels himself shut out, stigmatized by the community, lowly regarded in the class structure.
This feeling of the intellectual, says Lipset, is a false one. Polls have shown, for example, that the college professor rates very high on the scale of social evaluations. Professors also attract into their ranks a great many individuals from managerial categories, a fact which Lipset feels is a tribute to the high regard in which the college professor actually is held.
"Political Man" gives substantial backing, through its carefully reported studies, to the idea that the Democratic party is essentially within the liberal tradition and the Republican the conservative tradition, going back through the Whigs and before that the Federalists. Ever-present, of course, is the anomaly of the one-party South, which has both liberals and conservatives as professed Democrats.
A point of interest is the author's analysis of the election of 1860. Here he does not deal with Republicans, northern Democrats, southern Democrats, and Constitutional Unionists. He deals, instead, with Democrats and Whigs, holding that the Constitutional Union party of John Bell was simply southern Whiggery, as the Republican party of Lincoln was northern Whiggery.
Of special importance is a section on elections: who votes, who doesn't, why they vote and why they don't. He suggests that the complacency of the citizen in not voting is far from being an indictment of democracy, but a tribute to it.
LITTLE MAN ON CAMPUS
4:30
5:00
4:00
6:00
6:15
7:00
7:05
7:50
8:00
8:05
9:00
9:05
10:00
10:05
7:00
9:00
9:55
10:00
10:15
10:45
11:00
10:00
10:05
11:00
3:00
11:55
12:00
12:45
1:00
1:30
2:00
2:15
2:30
11:30
Str To
Au "Rap dance Feb. on Fic Ar
The cedeed facul cital
Au enrol
Inf room the th
"T by I spee the nice and dire stru be I Tau nity.
Iter be br 222 S of pu mater should time
Une Exam Latin with
Inte
7:30
freshh
Und
Exam
Mr. L