November 14, 1984
OPINION
Page 4
The University Daily
KANSAN
The University Daily KANSAN
Published since 1889 by students of the University of Kansas
The University Daily Kanman (USPN 606400) is published at the University of Kansas, 118 Staffer Flint Hall Law. Kanman 606400, daily during the regular school year and Wednesday and Friday during the summer session, excluding Saturday, Sunday, holidays and final periods. Second class postage paid at Kanman 606400. Subscriptions are mail by $15 for six months or money order. Third class postage paid at Kanman 606400. Student subscriptions are $1 and are paid through the student activity fee POSTMASTER. Address changes to the University Daily Kanman 118 Staffer Flint Hall Law. Kanman 606400
DON KNOX
Editor
PAUL SEVART VINCE HESS Managing Editor Editorial Editor
DAVE WANAMAKER Business Manager
DOUG CUNNINGHAM Campus Editor
SUSANNE SHAW
LYNNE STARK MARY BERNICA
Retail Sales National Sales
Manager Manager
JILL GOLDBLATT Campus Sales Manager
SUSANNE SHAW
General Manager and News Adviser
JOHN OBERZAN Sales and Marketing Adviser
Jackson's split
Last week's defeat in the presidential election told many Democrats that their party had lost much of what remained of its identity as the New Deal coalition of workers, ethnic groups and poor people. The election's outcome, many observers said, showed an immediate need for Democrats to draft a new doctrine.
If the Democrats believe that to be true, then the party's leaders need to reconcile philosophical differences within the party. The factions of Gary Hart, Jesse Jackson and Walter Mondale, so divided during the primary campaign, should be brought together in some manner.
However, it appears that a shaky step away from unification has taken place already. Friday, Jackson announced that he would devote most of his time to the Rainbow Coalition, a new political organization based on his bid to join the poor, racial minorities and sympathetic whites in his presidential campaign.
Although Jackson said that the coalition would work toward inspiring members of the Democratic Party to "steer a course of social and economic justice," he also said that the group would function as "an independent political organization."
No one can argue that Jackson's causes are not honorable or that they should not be addressed. But working toward his goals within the Democratic Party is a more positive solution. The apparent splintering of a wing of the Democratic Party into a third party is divisive and can only hurt the party's cause in the long run.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Endorsement reaction
To the editor:
The endorsement Monday by the Editorial Board of this publication for "& Toto, Too" has proven once again the ignorance on the part of the Kansan in regards to the workings of Student Senate. The Board made their endorsement based on the "promise" of the coallition's restructuring plan, as vague it may be.
By ignoring the fact that the proposal will be filled with such inherent flaws as under and over representation, an unworkably large number of senators, an elitist finance committee and the transformation of collective decision making process into the executive council, would not proceed for the wishes of the executive council, the Editorial Board has once again pushed their pen before working their minds.
The voters will ultimately decide today and tomorrow if the Board was right. Let's see if the Kansan's streak continues.
William Easley
Jeff Polack
Frontier Coalition
Reality relieved
To the editor:
Upon the reading of the Kansas Editorial Board's review of the Student Senate's Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates, we were relieved that they did not endorse us, the Reality Coalition
On the same editorial page, we saw the misrepresentation of the real views of the students of this University. Doesn't it seem odd to you that both the editorial editor and a columnist shared negative views of the recent Presidential election, but nationwide, 87 percent of the newly registered voters when he said they would vote affirmative, and through 80 percent of the youth vote. There is no denying it: Mr. Heiss and Mr. Simpson need to get in touch with reality.
John McDermott Reality
tions. If the Kansan had published the news at all in this regard it would have covered the issues of separate reports held in one week.
"Public opinion should be enlightened in proportion as the structure of government gives force to public opinion."
(The above quotes are from George Washington's "Farewell Address to the Union.")
Beautiful Dav
David Spear: The 13,000 women on campus who comprise 52 percent of the student population, bring to the University each year more than $65,000,000 in tuition and grants provided by the state.
In order to keep earning that huge sum and keep people happy it would be very important to practice equal representation in business prepared by the University for government use indicate otherwise.
Would you be happy to live in a country where you were not represented within the government?
Nathan Collins: 'A people who habitually makes friends of one people and enemies of another will find itself a slave of those habits'
To the editor:
The Kansan should not endorse candidates for student body elec.
Nathan Collins
David Spear
Proven fighters
For the past many years student government has been plagued by administrations who are too weak and too passive to get what students want. Student body president and vice president are positions which require aggressive, meaningful leadership. For years students have complained about the inefficacy of student government, and were made more visible progress in recent years toward fighting for the students at KU Momentum offers proven abilities to effectively fight for students. We fought to break up the old club of senators two years ago. We fought a corrupt system last year. This year we fought the administration's plans for the trees north of the Military Science Building. All of these are battles Momentum has effectively fought and won. You will be electing one of the several candidates to perform as deputy regents and to the administration. Don't be betrayed any longer; look for proven effectiveness. Vote for Momentum.
Beautiful Day Commission
To the editor:
Mark "Gilligan" Sump Momentum Coalition
Retiring to bunker not the answer
One thought has stayed with me since I awoke on a living room carpet last Wednesday, the television still running. There is still time for me to pack food and water, stock up on ammunition, and put the bunker for the next four years.
I know that there are a lot of people out there who would welcome my departure and probably suggest that I consider remaining underground indefinitely. But before I go and the next day I should relate to a few final impressions.
Several theories are floating around about what the 1984 election meant in terms of political demographics. I'm not going to talk about that because, although I have some opinions, I really don't know.
Some people don't think the results made any difference. They believe that no matter who is in office, the defense budget will grow, the gap between rich and poor will widen, industries grow larger, and our environmental problems will continue to multiply.
To a certain extent, that's probably true. Many Democrats and Republicans can differ more over methods than over goals. But each election year, two very different world views vie for the contest that underlying contest is important.
Put in its simplest form, the people with World View One look at the
MICHAEL
ROBINSON
Staff Columnists
United States in terms of what we have achieved, and those with World View Two look primarily at what we still need to achieve. Ronald Reagan is definitely a View One person; Mondial was passing View Two.
To illustrate the difference practically, imagine that a View One and
View Two person each has in his family a crazy, distant relative, Uncle Harry.
When Uncle Harry first shows signs that he may be coming apart, the View One person talks to him a few times, but if things get really outrageous, the View One person will even cease to want to talk about Uncle Harry.
This person will tell the others in the family that Harry isn't really that bad and that he only needs to rest and be left alone Uncle Harry will
The View Two person, on the other hand, tries to get Uncle Harry some help. This person will talk to other family members and come up with some money and support for Uncle Harry's treatment.
The View One person justifies his behavior by thinking of all that he has already tried to do for Uncle Harry. He thinks Uncle Harry's wife and children should take care of him. The View Two person feels an obligation to Uncle Harry. He may not be a close relative, but he is a
member of the family and maybe he can be helped.
Many people are deeply committed to View One, and a few subscribe to View Two, but the majority of the American population has a healthy mixture of both.
Those people can be swayed to either view during an election year, depending upon which side throws in more of what the public wants to hear and which view has most recently been embarrassed. Times seem relatively good now, so this year View One was the winner
The problem is that View One is easier to sell because it says that we don't have to do anything and things will be fine. That's the way people like to view. View Two really requires hard work to be sold, and it's up to those of us who still believe in it to sell it.
So I guess I'll stay out of the bunker for now. Far too much needs to be done, and little time is left to do it. It's probably just as well; it would have been too crowded down there anyway.
The dream of a free and united China
Since former president Jimmy Carter withdrew American diplomatic recognition of the Republic of China, there has been confusion regarding the status of the ROC under international law. Here at KU, there has been some discussion of whether or not it is appropriate for the ROC to sponsor the Association (CSA) to sponsor the October 10 celebration of the founding of the Republic of China by Sun Yat-Sen on Oct 10, 1911.
The Oct. 10 festival also referred to as "China Day" or "Independence Day") is a celebration of the successful revolution which liberated China from two centuries of oppressive Manchurian government under the Ching dynasty and established China's first constitutional government, the Republic of China. Like our American Independence Day, the Oct. 10 festival is both a celebration of the ideal of political liberty and a commemoration of the lives which were sacrificed in the struggle to bring democratic institutions to China.
The ideal of political liberty transcends national identifications, and the CSA sponsors the festival as
an opportunity to build unity among all Chinese people who foresee a future of freedom and unification for China. Freedom and constitutional rights of utmost importance to the Chinese people as a whole, whether
DAVID W.
McCLURE
Guest columnist
they are citizens of the ROC, Hong Kong, Malaysia, or part of the overwhelming majority of non-communist Chinese citizens in
At KU it has been traditional for the CSA to sponsor this festival as a cultural event in which Chinese students of diverse national origin can express a fundamental unity A true beauty and sophistication of the traditional Chinese culture which binds them as a people.
1 think the isolation of students
from the ROC as a "faction" which independently celebrates the Oct. 10 festival is an insult to the intelligence and humanity of the Chinese people as a whole. The values symbolized by the Oct. 10 festival have alwa- $ ^{a} $ been characteristic of traditional Chinese culture.
The effort to divide the CSA over this issue is perhaps a symptom of a larger effort to isolate the ROC as a national entity and to deny credibility to its national goal of reuniting China under a constitutional government of democratic institutions. It is not a secret that the political destruction of the ROC and reunification with Taiwan is the primary foreign policy objective of communist China. So far, only six countries have recognized the legitimacy of the communist claim to Taiwan. The United States, in the Taiwan Relations Act, renewed the American commitment to prevent communist aggression toward Taiwan.
Propaganda concerning the destruction of the ROC has followed the familiar communist "carrot and stick" formula. Communist leaders mix threats of force with offers of peaceful reunion."
How attractive is the idea of unification under communism to the citizens of the ROC?
Since 1949 the communists have murdered over 60 million of their own countrymen in their effort to consolidate power. Communism has given mainland China one of the world's most backward economies. In 1951, the communists offered "peaceful reunification" to the people of Tibet, along with the promise "not to alter the existing political system." In 1959 the International Commission of Jurists condemned the communist Chinese for carrying out genocide against the Tibetan people.
Despite threats and diplomatic isolation, the ROC has persisted as a nation and its national goals. The ROC has developed into an economic powerhouse and one of America's largest trading partners. Democratic institutions have been the key to the prosperity and stability of the ROC
October 10 is a day of remembrance for all Chinese people in many nations, and its celebration marks the dream of a free and united China.
David W. McClure is a Lawrence third-year law student.
Election a mandate for issueless politics
Judging from the victory statements I have seen, this year's election was the first one in history in which everybody won. There is hardly a doubt that the amendment bothered the balloting added to mandate. I take the affirmative.
There is, however, room for argument over who got the mandates and for what. After sitting the returns, the manager outlines answer parameters as follows.
Americans want to stand tall with a strong national defense, a smaller federal deficit and all poliobills filled before the following winter's first snowfall. But they don't want to pay for any of this.
That much is clear enough. What is
still a bit cloudy is the party or parties charged with carrying out these policies.
Some analysts believe the mandate belongs to President Reagan. Others say it was aimed at Congress. A small minority claims the mandate
DICK WEST
United Press International
was directed at Geraldine Ferraro and the nearest pothole crew.
Whoever the intended recipient, there is a consensus that the mandate is a bit ambiguous. Of course it is.
It is part of their basic nature that
Ambiguity is what the democratic process is all about. If the voters weren't of at least two minds on any issue, it would have also moved to Russia. Or something.
mandates flowing from elections be subject to conflicting interpretations. Otherwise, they wouldn't be mandates
Come to think of it, maybe that's the kernel of this year's mandate; empowering candidates to conduct issueless campaigns.
The national debt is a good example. As I analyze the returns, voters don't mind the government borrowing money to enable them to stand tall as long as it doesn't drive up interest rates.
This is as it should be. Let somebody else figure out how the government can borrow money to fund projects. That is what we elect them for.
Just don't tell us about it. That is all we ask. Politicians insist on discussing the issues, let them work out how to respond, and voters are confused enough as it is.
If we didn't have a few issues cluttering up campaigns, we could concentrate on the truly important matters as the love lives of the candidates.
The way I read the calendar, the next really big presidential election will be in the year 2000. Forget about 1988, 1992 and 1996. It will take longer than that to complete the political realignment that is now taking place.
The ultimate goal, as I understand it, is for the Democratic Party to force only Republican candidates and not the GOP to contain only Democrats.
This means the more than 200 third party candidates, including at least one robot, registered by the Federal Election Commission this year will have to sort themselves out the best they can.
Meanwhile, let's all work toward issueless politics. It's a mandate