Friday. April 21, 1961
University Daily Kansan
Page 5
Strong Annexes Not to be Razed Yet, Says Nichols
The Strong annex "tenant huts" are on campus for some time to come. KU's money to be received from the state's extensive aid-to-schools program will go for other buildings and dormitories.
NICHOLS SAID the construction of a large building to replace the present annexes is planned under KU's long-range expansion program. This building with extensive classroom facilities is as yet only in the tentative planning stage.
This is what Raymond Nichols, executive secretary of the University has said regarding the converted barrack buildings.
Nearly 15 years have passed since the University decided to utilize former army barracks for "temporary" classroom space. But the Strong Hall Annexes still remain to remind students and faculty members of the swelling college enrollment of the post-war era.
THE BUILDINGS, located north of Strong Hall, were brought to the campus from former army ordinance plants in 1946. Due to the influx of former GI's returning to KU under the GI Bill of Rights at that time classroom space was inadequate. These buildings seemed a good solution to the problem, Nichols said.
The buildings house sociology, anthropology, western civilization, human relations and political science offices in addition to providing class-room space.
THEY WERE to be used for only five years.
They have been criticized by faculty members as being firetraps lacking the necessary safety features and being generally shoddy in appearance.
STUDENTS DISPLAY their displeasure for the "tenant huts" by wearing their coats in classes during the winter months and noisily shoving the windows open in the spring and early fall after they keep falling down.
They may as well tell their high school brothers and sisters headed for KU to prepare to do the same since what Nichols calls a disgrace to the University and the social science department seem destined to remain "for some time." Nichols declined to say specifically what "for some time" stood for in years and months.
New Boilers for Power Plant
The KU power plant which controls all water, heat and light on campus, is going to install two new automatic boilers to replace older hand controlled ones. The 300 horsepower boilers will be ready to use for fall heating.
Moscow Summit Produced Rift
By Phil Newsom
UPI Foreign News Analyst
When Communist satellite leaders returned to their capitals last December from a summit session in Moscow, they were shaken men. They had heard Nikita Khrushchev called a coward to his face by the Red Chinese. They had heard Khrushchev call Mao Tse-tung "another Stalin" and a "revisionist."
For reasons still not understood, Moscow may have wanted the story to "leak."
Despite protests of harmony from both Moscow and Peiping, the story of that violent, name-calling session was too good to keep. First details came from Prague. More from East Berlin.
AT THE OUTSET it should be emphasized that the quarrel represents a split and not a break. The Soviet Union and Red China remain as united as before in their determination for a world-wide victory of Communism over the free nations.
But insofar as the split involves methods and not the final goal, its effect within the Communist world is of far-reaching importance.
Details of the rift have been accumulating over the last year, and only now may be put together for an assessment.
The first open blow-up came at a meeting of Communist leader in Bucharest in June, 1960, and the second at a Moscow "summit" meeting in November-December, 1960.
AN INTERESTING sidelight on the controversy as it has developed in Soviet and Red Chinese propaganda agencies is that both sides call
on Lenin for support and that both have couched their differences in terms of doctrine. These terms are oftentime meaningless in the West. But they are the worst curses that can be placed on a practicing Communist when used as invective.
Thus, in words of the phrases "ultra-leftist, ultra dogmatist, left revisionist" are common and used in deadly earnest.
At the core of the problem is Khrushchev's present emphasis on peaceful co-existence and the "parliamentary road to socialism," as opposed to the Chinese belief that successful revolution can only be accomplished by violent overthrow of the state.
And this, the Chinese emphasize, must come first.
GEN. LIN PIAO, Chinese minister of defense, summed up the Chinese attitude when he wrote:
"We always understood clear-headedly that the achieving of internal peace and victory in the People's Revolution could not rely on peace talks but must rely on revolutionary struggle by the masses of the people."
An important corollary to Khrushchev's co-existence policy is his support of non-Communist middle-class revolutions so long as they also are "anti-imperialist". Cases in point Egypt, Iraq, India and Indonesia.
The Chinese hold that this is a violation of the teachings of Lenin, but holds the "struggle of the masses" in contempt and amounts to the adoption of bourgeois or middle-class views.
This explains Chinese opposition to Soviet economic and technical aid to India. In the first place India is a rival of Red China. In the second
Malin Writes Centennial Essay
An essay to commemorate the Kansas Centennial and to accompany the "Lane-Robinson" display in the Watson Library has been written by James C. Malin, professor emeritus of American History.
The essay entitled "In Commemoration of the Centennial Anniversary of the Admission of Kansas into the Union 1961" is a commentary on the centennial and statehood of Kansas.
place, Soviet policy also is drawing off resources desperately needed by the Chinese themselves.
Robert L. Quinsey, assistant director of the library, said in speaking of Prof. Malin. "There is no other historian who can speak with any more authority about the Kansas centennial than Prof. Malin."
THE LANE-ROBINSON exhibit honors two eminent leaders in the statehood movement: Charles Robinson, who became the first governor of the state, and James H. Lane, one of the two first U. S. senators.
And so, the Sino-Soviet quarrel is even more than a quarrel over Communist doctrine. It is, in fact, a very serious difference of opinion over the conduct of foreign policy.
Get Perutz Deromnia FILM FOR THE WEEKEND B/W Roll Sizes 127-620-120 ASA 100 — DIN 21
It wound up as an all-out Khrushchev attack on Red China in general and Mao Tse-tung in particular.
THE BUCHAREST meeting of world Communist leaders in June came almost immediately after the flasco of the four-power Summit meeting in Paris and Khrushchev's vicious attack on President Eisenhower, and ostensibly it was called to sort out party differences.
But for perhaps the first time in world Communist councils, Khruschev received as good as he gave.
The issue had been joined over these six main issues:
Photon Cameras Inc. 1107 Mass.
3 Rolls - $1.00
PHENG-CHEN, mayor of Peiping and Chinese spokesman, declared that the Chinese did not trust Khrushchev's analysis of world affairs. He accused Khrushchev of underestimating imperialist strength. He added the belief that Khrushchev had called the meeting specifically to undermine Chinese prestige.
You Are WANTED at the Centennial
Inevitable war: The Russians say that times have changed since
Lenin's doctrine of the inevitability of war. That rockets and nuclear weapons make the risk of war too great and that this is an era of disintegration for imperialism and of advance to a world system of socialism.
RELAYS DANCE
9-12 p.m.
Sat. April 22
Support for non-Communist liberation movements: Anything that weakens the imperialist bloc must benefit the socialists, say the Russians. A waste of time, say the Chinese. It merely extends the scope of the anti-Communist nations.
Peaceful Co-existence: Good, say the Russians, and in time it will react to the benefit of socialism. A tactical maneuver only good to deceive the West, say the Chinese.
Can the transition to socialism be achieved without violence: Yes, say the Russians. No, say the Chinese.
Must small wars lead to big wars: The risk is too great, say the Russians. Small wars can and must be pursued, say the Chinese.
at the Union Ballroom JIMMY TUCKER DANCE BAND
How to define the present epoch:
In the Russian view — an epoch of the disintegration of the imperialist powers. In the Chinese view — an epoch of small wars and revolution.
$1.25 per Couple
Tickets on Sale at Information Booth and at the Union
There were other differences, too, ranging from Soviet reluctance to give their Chinese allies the atomic bomb to Soviet failure to agree to a unified Pacific naval command.
Pink and Blue Gayley and Lord
textured tarpoon
Jacket ... $8.95
Jacket ... $8.95
Shirt ... $5.00
Skirt ... $11.95
1424 Crescent Road PRIVATE PARKING
116