Page 2
University Daily Kansan
Monday. May 15, 1961
Enough Is Enough
This year's "I Should've Stood In Bed" award goes to Mr. Bertram Coan of the University of Kansas football team.
Mr. Coan is an individual who likes to play football and does an extraordinary job of doing same. This time last spring, the word was out to watch for Mr. Coan in the fall when, if given the opportunity, he would plod the 100 yard turf of Memorial Stadium in 9.4 seconds on Saturday afternoons.
BUT THE OMINOUS CLOUD OF THE NCAA descended upon Mr. Coan in December and declared that he had matriculated at Oread in rather questionable fashion thereby disqualifying him from competition for that season.
He did not fail the promises of the press releases. With lowered left shoulder, and ball in hand, he skirted many an end, bewildered many a defender, gained many a yard, and scored many a point in helping to carry the Jayhawkers to one of their best seasons.
The same body, possessed with punitive authority over intercollegiate athletics, decided Mr. Coan should not play until one year from the arbitrary date the infraction occurred. Mr. Coan, Mr. Mitchell, his coach, and the entire University felt that the penalty was an injustice but
acquiesced to the absolute power of the NCAA and made the necessary adjustments.
MR. COAN DECIDED TO PARTICIPATE in the University's spring football practice this year in order to keep his hand in and be ready for the call to duty in November when he would again be allowed to demonstrate his natural talents before 40,000 spectators.
Then on Wednesday last, the gods, the mores, Joe Bptiltfx, or whoever is responsible for such deeds visited upon mortals, arranged to have Mr. Coan break both bones in his lower right leg in a scrimmage game.
MR. COAN WILL BE OUT OF ACTION for at least six months and perhaps more. The possibility of his playing next season is out of the question, according to Mr. Mitchell. Mr. Coan now rests in the KU Medical Center in Kansas City after an operation Friday to set the two bones.
This is the basis of Mr. Coan receiving the award this year. The conditions are enough to make Anthony Adverse seem like a sheltered child. We hope Mr. Coan will not be in contention for next year's award. He has suffered enough.
He deserves a change of luck.
— Frank Morgan
Castro 'Right'?
It is difficult for me, as an American, to look at the events of the last few days in Cuba and not feel a strong sense of personal guilt and shame.
We all laughed several weeks ago when Castro claimed that Cuba was about to be invaded by the United States. Now, we have been stunned into the awareness that what he said was primarily, and painfully true. We have attempted, unsuccessfully, to overthrow Castro and to replace him with someone presumably friendly to our interests. I should like to try to show some of the ways in which I think we are guilty in this situation.
RECENT REMARKS by President Kennedy reveal that we have attempted to justify our support for the rebels on two grounds: (1) that Castro is a dictator who does not represent the Cuban people; and (2) that we do not have to tolerate a "communist base" just 90 miles off our southern coastline.
As to the claim that Castro is a dictator, two facts should be made clear. In that time he has not had what we would call a popular election. Washington tries to give the impression that we abhor dictatorships wherever they might be and, naturally, we hoped to see Castro, "a dictator," dethroned. Yet I would suggest that Castro's two years seem minor when we consider the almost perennial dictatorships of Franco in Spain, Chiang
Daily Hansan
University of Kansas student newspaper
Founded 1889, became biweekly 1904,
trilweekly 1908, daily Jan. 16, 1912.
Telephone Vikhk 3-2700
Extension 711, news room
Extension 376, business office
Member Inland Daily Press Association. Associated Collegiate Press. Represented by National Advertising New York, NY. N.Y. News service: United Press international. Mail subscription rates: $3 a semester or $5 a year. Published in Lawrence, Kan., every afternoon during the University year except Saturday and Sunday examinations and examination periods. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas.
NEWS DEPARTMENT
John Peterson ... Managing Editor
Bill Blundell, Carrie Edwards, Lynn Cheatam and Ralph Wilson, Assistant Managing Editors; Tom Turner, City Editor; Bill Sheldon, Sports Editor; Sue Thiem, Society Editor.
EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT
BUSINESS DEPARTMENT
Dan Felger ... Co-Editorial Editors
... Letters ...
John Massa ... Business Manager
F. Mike Harris, Advertising Manager;
Tom L. Brown, Circulation Manager;
Richard Horn, Classified Advertising Manager; William Goodwin, Pro-National Advertising Manager.
Kai-shek in Nationalist China, and the numerous South American dictators that have appeared — and vanished — since World War II.
Why do we tolerate, even encourage, these dictators and then single out Castro for attack? It seems clear that we are concealing behind a facade of "democracy for all" our real motives in opposing him. Secondly, if Castro truly is a harsh dictator oppressing the "wretched masses" of Cuban humanity, how do we explain the fact that no large-scale popular revolt accompanied the landing of the revolutionaries? This seems an almost impossible reconciliation. Thus, even if Castro is a hated dictator — which, in light of the above argument seems unlikely — American policy is inconsistent or, at best, unusual in that we perpetuate certain (friendly) dictators and attempt to destroy others. Our policy seems to be more one of expediency than one of moral commitment to a system of values.
AS TO KENNEDYS second argument, namely, that we do not have to tolerate a communist base less than 90 miles from us, several points must be clarified. For the sake of argument, let us go so far as to accept the proposition that Cuba is becoming or has become pro-Communist.
THE MONROE DOCTRINE notwithstanding, we have no right, in my mind to tell any sovereign nation whether it is in South America or Africa or Asia what must adopt. We certainly would not let any other nation undermine our existing political and economic institutions. When individuals, representing foreign governments, trv to do this, we brand them as "Communists," "traitors," or both. Yet when we pull this very stunt on another nation, namely Cuba, we defend our action as a fight for freedom, justice, and equality. This dual standard which we are prone to use is hypocritical and indefensible.
BUT, AGAIN LET us suppose that somehow we could rationalize our violation of the sovereignty of another nation — a feat I do not believe we can do. Then our support of the rebel's would still be unjustified unless we can explain it by the President's belief that a Communist base so close to our shores would endanger our safety as a nation. If we accept this as a valid excuse for invading or helping to invade Cuba then we must concede that the Communist nations have a similar right to be concerned about their safety, too. Unless, of course, we are going to resort to the double standard again.
Thus the Communists have a right to encourage, and even initiate, revolutions in West Berlin, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and several other pro-western nations which are not 90 miles from, but adjacent to, or even, as Berlin, contained in, Communist territory. Clearly, the implications of Kennedy's "bufferzone" hypothesis are hardly consistent with what we allow the Communists to do. But, nonetheless, we expect them to let us get away with the hoax.
IN LIGHT OF these arguments, it seems to me that only a very credulous person could accept our government's gib, but unreasoned, explanation for providing the Cuban insurrectionists with arms, training, transportation, and — so the rebel leaders bitterly claim — false hope. What it seems we are unwilling to admit is that we acted solely in our own selfish and political interests, completely disregarding many principles we profess to believe in.
Barry L. Leadau Kansas City, Kan. sophomore
Larry L. Laudan
***
Didn't Like Plays
Two of the girls from our house gave us tickets to the University Theatre, as they were the directors. We wanted to go, the plays were well directed and the actors were good, but we were shocked at the plot of the plays. There was no clean thought that we could find any place.
We are not criticising only the one who wrote the play, and the ones who chose them to be put on; surely we have better material that would be unlifting
The names of the plays were "Olympus Farewell" and "Hey You, Light Man."
Just two old fashioned folks.
Mr. and Mrs. T. B. Ford
1230 Oread
Lawrence, Kan.
W. Civ. Notes Suffice
Editor:
---
In reference to your quote of the Western Civilization Department in the UDK, May 11, it was said that the "unauthorized" notes for Western Civ study in circulation now are unreliable. I used the first edition of these notes in the spring of 1959. With absolutely no previous knowledge of the Western Civilization Program, I started studying the notes three weeks before the examination. Result-4 jr.-sr. hours of B on the exam. I seriously doubt if the Western Civilization department can "reliably" prepare the students in its courses this well!
Donald A. Morris
Lawrence graduate student
LITTLE MAN ON CAMPUS
"TOONY WE BEGIN ANOTHER EXCITING & STIMULATING UNIT IN LATE MEDIEVAL HISTORY."
From the Podium
Getting an Education
As an undergraduate, however, I discovered that, if you did not go out for grades and were somewhat independent of mind, you could get yourself an education. So it was that I early formed the habit of never reading a subject in which I was taking a course. I let the instructor, who presumably was master of his subject, lay out the course for me. I simply attended class, listened carefully, took careful notes, and that was all. If ever I was interested in this subject again, I had a solid starting point. Meanwhile, if the course was in—say—organic analysis, I might be reading my way through Shaw or Shakespeare. Of course, just before the examination you pulled out those notes, did some intensive scanning, reflected a bit on what the instructor could possibly ask—the questions could not be too detailed, it would be unfair—so that, with a general view of the subject, you could march into an examination and get a decent gentleman's grade. To get A's of course meant that you subjected yourself to his kind of thinking and sacrificed your independence of mind. And so it went. Afterwards, matching myself against the graduates of the liberal arts colleges, I decided that, though this training may have been a bit hodge-podge and unconventional, I was certainly not uneducated.—I. I. RABI
I would like to add one other comment which seems to me to have bearing on the question. I think the only things that the young are able to learn proficiently are such subjects as mathematics and the exact sciences. These subjects require no maturity. Proof of this may, I think, be indicated by what genius can do in these subjects at a very early age. But all of the difficult subjects, as compared with mathematics and the exact sciences, subjects that involve the speculative and inquiring use of the human mind on the dark and difficult problems of the human race, cannot be dealt with by college students. The notion that you can make young people wise is preposterous. The notion that you can make them learned in the social sciences or in the humanities, that young people can really be made to understand the great novels or the great poems, is in my experience simply unreal. Therefore, the hope that we can turn out of our colleges rounded, balanced, well-educated young people is. I think, the mistake that we make when we try to create a program to that end.
All that we ought to hope for from the liberal arts college are a few very simple things. I'd personally be satisfied if those who won the bachelor of arts degree were able to read, write, speak, listen, observe, measure and calculate—for these are the skills of learning—and to do these things well. But the idea that true learning can be achieved in college, that the bachelor of arts degree signifies a truly educated man or woman, this seems to me the misconception underlying almost all the discussions we've had about the role of the liberal arts college in our society.—Mortimer J. Adler
(Excerpted from a panel discussion as printed in the Graduate faculties Newsletter of Columbia University, February 1961.)