4
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Tuesday, October 8,1968
Can wrong be right?
"We can go wrong so long, it seems right," said Rev. Junius Hambrick of the Ninth Baptist Church last night.
Indifference to the demands of the black students of Lawrence High School is no more.
But some of the attitudes that will replace the indifference are even more frightening—and potentially more dangerous.
About 1,500 people filled the Lawrence High School auditorium last night for an open meeting of the school board on the demands of LHS black students.
The atmosphere was tense.
Taxpayers of Lawrence, Negro high school students, University students and faculty all spoke while the audience waited to clap or boo.
Some of the black speakers eloquently told of a need for black history and for action on all the demands. Many of the white speakers re-emphasized the black history idea and said they supported the black students who had walked out.
But the distinct impression most of the Lawrence townspeople are surely mulling over today is that extremists presented ideas of revolution to ruin the white community.
The general reaction will be that the school board has been right all along. No one in Lawrence has been guilty of racism, not even of slowness in acting. The demands were just out of line and no minority should pressure us, will be the conclusion.
As long as the people of Lawrence and the United States think of the Negro as an unreasonable minority and deny his right to ask more from the American systems, they will have no trouble silencing any conscience qualms for not giving the Negro more.
There are fewer Negroes than white students in Lawrence. LHS must educate all the students so the minority must not demand extras from the system will be the basis of the reasoning.
If the Lawrence citizens are successful in considering the black student as a minority group, they are shutting out history. Last night when slavery was mentioned, a white person answered angrily that he wasn't guilty for the sins of his great-grandfather.
The tragedy of slavery was not the chains shackling the black man but the chains wrapped tightly around his humanity, chains which still haven't dissolved.
Many of the Lawrence citizens are now going to react to the LHS blacks' demands. They are going to assert that they have not sinned and that the Negro is being unrealistic, unkind, threatening.
Some of the demands will probably be met; some of them will be delayed because public opinion against them will be strong.
And the citizens of Lawrence will decide that the Negro community should not have overcompensation because its members are only a minority.
Lawrence denies history. Someday it may be part of the history that will pit black against white, part of the history that will ruin America.
Letters to editor
Alison Steimel Editorial Editor
Indiana, CYD, dissention
To Dissent or not to—
I am an American first, a Negro second, and third and most important, I am an individual.
The milieu of contemporary American politics, it seems, stems from a critical horns of a dilemma. Since any democratic government depends upon the ballot box for authorization to change, vocal response as the catalyst for the former, and dissent as text for practicable, compromised solutions, no wonder democratic government becomes upset when deciding the extent to which vocal responses and dissent may be allowed flourish.
Dissent within a democratic government, however, is indispensable to perpetuate free flow of ideas. But such expression can never be more important than the model of the ballot box being the supreme determinant of policy.
In the capacity of an American I must support this government institution for which my forefathers and peers sacrificed. But to support a minority view of government policy is almost a sacred responsibility if the objective is just and true to a better functioning representative government.
In a nation which rapidly approaches the equity between young unexperienced to the senior more experienced determinants of policies, a nation plagued by our dilemma, it must be apparent the need for compassionate concern by the powerful in behalf of those who are called to defend, but cannot vote; who want to be more responsible for decision-making but who are seemingly ignored by those who represent the ballot box.
May God bless America; may He permit compassionate interest by representatives of the ballot box to the many who are voiceless and therefore deeply frustrated. And, may God keep the spirit of intellectualism and
humane responsibility alive for from the one is derived truth and from the latter, direction.
Jay L. Peters Kansas City senior
To the Editor:
I am writing in regards to a letter in your Friday (Sept. 27) paper about the first CYD meeting. As a newly-joined freshman, I attended this meeting also.
Granted, I was not overly impressed with the excitment expressed about the political campaign, and I certainly hope that this lack of enthusiasm can be remedied.
The part about the difference between CYD and Young Citizens for Humphrey bothered me also, but I can see a possible reason for this separation. Most likely CYD could not generate enough enthusiasm and "vigor" for Hubert Humphrey to be the primary HHH organization on campus. Thus, it was left to the people who really wanted to support Humphrey to manage a campus campaign.
As far as the nominating and voting for officers. I only knew one person at that meeting, and I think that there were others present in the same predicament that I was in. This could make it rather difficult for a good group of nominations.
Possibly, it was felt that a CYD concentration on the state campaign would help keep the right in the Democratic party from widening.
I can see little ground for Miss Howard's charge of not discussing the issues. Peoples Voice and SDS which are relatively young organizations, have to discuss issues, determine their aims on campus, and work to accomplish them. On the other hand, the well-established Democratic party and CYD have a campaign to run and candidates to elect. This is their primary aim.
Maybe after the elections are over, CYD will be able to discuss the issues of our time with some purpose, and, I hope, with some
accomplishment. But, at the moment, there is no reason to do this.
Peoples Voice and SDS simply cannot be compared with CYD. Larry Tenopir
Marvsville freshman
To the Editor:
As a visitor to KU for the first time this past weekend, I would like to compliment you on both your beautiful campus and your fine football team. Although I pulled for Indiana all the way, it was obvious that, on Saturday, Kansas was the better team and deserved to win.
At the risk of sounding like "sour grapes" I feel obligated to comment on the "hospitality" we received while in Lawrence. One learns to expect comments ("Did you come to see your quarterback carried home?") from individuals as he crosses an opponent's campus on the way to the game but hostility in this case was almost overwhelming. Although it permeated the whole campus, it was best exemplified by the organized yells led by your cheerleaders. With few exceptions, every yell reeked with morbidity calling for everything from blood to fumbles. Never before have I heard an individual player on the opposition singled out for special "treatment" ("Go get Gonzo!") by the yell leaders.
My point is that you have a fine school with a super fine football team. You don't need to resort to these kinds of tactics when you have all that going for you. It only sends people away with a very bitter taste in their mouths. Many on our plane were Kansas Alumni who, although proud on the trip west, were most embarrassed and felt the need to apologize to us on the way back home.
I hope you will accept this letter in the spirit in which it is intended. You have a "big League" football team and you
(Continued on page 5)
John Marshall Non-experts' movie
Movie reviews, or talks about movies, or whatever you want to call them, should be left to the experts. But then, how many experts are out there, in the dark chairs watching the show. There are more blue collars and white collars and madras collars than there are "experts."
And so when you say there finally was a good movie in Lawrence, you are speaking as a non-expert. You try to speak for the blue collars, the white collars, and the madras collars.
It was a movie that was easy to understand. Entertaining. Relaxing. And a bit humorous. There even was a message. Not a strong societal or political or religious message. But a comment—sly and subtle, about how one man should treat another.
And it was a fun movie. It was fun because Sammy Davis (I am still not sure whether he prefers the "Jr." or not.) was in the movie. He is talented. Moving, always exhuberant. Small, and yet so damned big up there on the screen.
Peter Lawford was there too. The other half of an exciting pair who run into some of the old international intrigue while swinging out and managing a night club (The Salt and Pepper) in London. The good old humor was there. It was good and old humor because when you laughed it wasn't because someone said a very dirty joke or winked at the camera while making love or smiled when he shot someone else in the stomach.
It was the kind of show where you could sit there and try to pick a popcorn kernel out of that new molar in the back of your mouth with a sense of freedom. You could reach for that damned kernel or crunch on your ice because you didn't have to worry about missing some moving line which would tie together the deep underlying significance of the third sub-sub-plot.
You could just sit there, and for once not have to think about what that last line "REALLY" meant while trying to understand the relevance of the words coming through the speakers right now.
And when you left, listening to Sammy Davis' voice sing the title song, you could think about how great those impersonations of his were when he was fooling those crafty slobs who tried to bug his room. Or how talented he was in the night club acts when he played all those instruments. Or how the short fight scenes were so well staged that they gave you gooose bumps.
You didn't have to think about the deep underlying message, or who the Christ figure was, or what the significance of the wilted flower in the bottom of the bird cage was.
The message was always there. It was part of the entertainment, the plot, the humor, and the title. Two men. Salt and Pepper. One black and one white. Together. That's all—and what a swinging, great time they had and how much they liked each other. But if you wanted to, you could think a little more, and remember some of the lines and scenes which contributed to this message. But it wasn't hard.
This is a movie, oddly enough, that the non-experts can enjoy.
A student newspaper serving the University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas
Published at the University of Kansas daily during the academic year except
holidays and examination periods. Mail subscription费: $6 a semester, $10 a
year. Second class postage paid. Advertiser rates: accommodated goods,
food, lodging, travel, entertainment offered to all students without regard
to color, creed or national origin. Opinions expressed are not necessarily
those of the University of Kansas or the State Board of Regents.
Executive Staff
Executive Staff
George Richardson News Adviser
Mel Adams Advertising Adviser
Managing Editor Monte Mace
Business Manager Jack Haney
Assistant Managing Editors, Pat Crawford, Charla Jenkins, Alan J. Jones
Steve Morgan, Allen Winchester
City Editor Bob Butler
Assistant City Editor Kathy Hall
Editorial Editor Alison Schmidt
Editorial Editor Richard Laundquist
Sports Editor Ron Yates
Feature and Society Editor Rea Wilson
Associate Feature Editor Shawn Woods
Copy Chiefs Judy Dague, Linda McCrenegy, Don Westerhaus, Sandy
Zahradnik, Marlin Zook
Advertising Manager Mike Willman
National Advertising Manager Kathy Sanders
Promotion Paan Flaton
Circulation Manager Jerry Bottenfield
Classified Manager Barry Arthur
'What a nice surprise. You just overwhelmingly approved our new constitution.'