4
Monday, October 13, 1975
University Daily Kansan
KU 'Aggieville' needed
The various problems associated with the 14th Street bars periodically come to our attention. I inevitably, nothing is done to resolve these bars' problems of overcrowding, noise, property damage and general rowdiness.
However, the problems of the 14th Street bars are more bothersome now than in the past for several reasons.
KU's enrollment of more than 20,000 is the highest ever and is no doubt accompanied by an increase in the number of beer drinkers. A high enrollment exacerbates the problems of nearby campus bars.
Bars and restaurants aren't the only establishments that have disappeared from the immediate campus area. The company has been branded of barbershop, two bookshops, a discount record store and an offbeat grocery store.
Although the University's enrollment has increased, the number of bars and restaurants convenient to campus has decreased. The Gaslight, on Oread Ave., is gone; the old Rock Chalk has undergone several metamorphoses, none of which has been particularly successful; and the Captain's Table, at Crescent and Naismith, once the Call Cafe, is now the site of a clothing store.
Such services are no longer available adjacent to campus. Although many apartment complexes far from campus have been built in the past 10 years, the need for more shops and bars near campus hasn't diminished.
Since 1966, the two 14th Street bars have not been able to expand their facilities because of city zoning
regulations. The bars are considered non-conforming uses of land in their neighborhood and only are allowed to exist because they were not 1986 oning change. If those bars burn or are otherwise destroyed, they can't be rebuilt.
There have been infrequent discussions by city officials on the lack of a shopping district near campus. Kansas State has Aggieville; KU has nothing even close to an adjacent shopping area.
The problems of the 14th Street bars are merely symptoms of the greater problem of a general lack of services near campus. The idea of a small, specially zoned and tasteful bar top of one our beautiful gravel and mud parking lots is a good one. Perhaps one could be built directly northeast of campus.
It's an idea that should be seriously considered by the Lawrence City Commission and the University administration. They're the people who could provide the impetus for such a project.
The need for a campus shopping district may not be overwhelming, but such a collection of restaurants, bars and cafes would be convenient for KU students.
The creation of a campus shopping district might cause more problems than it would solve. But the idea should be given weight by the University officials, as well as by the residents who would be directly affected by it. Ward Harkavy
Contributing Writer
James J. Kilpatrick
Vote for ol' Whatisname
You would have to mine a million tons of political are to find a situation more ironical than the situation one finds in
the nation this fall. It makes you wonder how we muddle through.
Here is the greatest Republic
Attempts at obscenity definition useless
By JOHN JOHNSTON Assistant Campus Editor
Under a new system set up by the Missouri Supreme Court several weeks ago local juries will be used to help determine whether a publication should be banned because it is obese. If three-fourths of the jury members agree that the material is obscene, the jury will submit an advisory opinion stating such.
This is nonsense. The opinion and the system of evaluation it established are characteristic of the muddled, needless control to control obedience in this country.
Writing for the majority, Judge Robert T. Donnelly said he favored the use of local juries over application of one statewide standard because of the diverse range of attitudes among Missouri communities. He expressed concern that the state would view obscenity the same as people in the southern part of the state would.
In 1867 the U.S. Supreme Court held in Roth V. United States that obscurity wasn't constitutionally protected expression and under the "Roth test" for judging obscenity. Under this test it is impossible to judge obscenity could be assumed that it might induce obscene thoughts in an average person.
The new system Missouri has
been set up to reduce the
contested state of obscenity rulings.
From this decision the court advanced and retreated and did quite a bit of sidelesting until it got the case of Miller California in which he argued the Roth holding that the First Amendment didn't cover obscene material. It also held that the material could be regulated by the states without showing that it was "utterly without redeeming social value" and held that it was protected by contemporary community standards.
The court seemed to be strengthening its position but then in 1974 it once again clouched the issue with Jenkins v. Georgia. In this case it was ruled that the movie, "Carnal Knowledge," wasn't obscene and that "local community standards" could be interpreted to include a whole state.
Under the Missouri plan, after the circuit court receives the jury's advisory opinion it will determine whether the material depicts "patently offensive hard-core sexual conduct." The court can then issue an injunction banning the sale or showing of the material. In setting up this system the court was explicit in requiring that any person accused be but the primary issue now will be whether the material is patently offensive. What does "patently offensive" mean?
In his majority opinion Donnelly said the court thought that in obscenity cases "we should rely on the jury system." We are not confident they established, because the juries have no legal authority anyway. They merely are serving in an advisory role.
This case is just one more example of the inane attempts to control an area that can't be controlled. The subject of obscurity has plagued the Supreme Court for years. There is very little hope that it ever will be resolved. The justices keep dodging the question. The state of the law keeps getting more and more confused.
How can anyone establish the point when a work of art turns obscene? What are the rights of the people in southern Africa who want to read "obscene" books?
The only acceptable answer is to take an absolutist stand against any curbs on other immigrants.
Justice William O. Douglas expressed this opinion very well in his dissent in the Miller case. He said, "There are no reasons why a judge should not what is and what is not obscene. The court is at large because we deal with taste and standards of literature. What shocks me may be sustenance for my neighbor. What causes one person to boil water may reflect only his neurosis, not shared by others."
Unwieldy censorship is a threat to the freedoms we enjoy in this country. Freedom of expression shouldn't be a qualified right unless it infringes on the rights of others. As long as "obscene" works aren't forced upon those who reject them, there should be no restrictions.
in the free world. And here are the two greatest parties in the greatest Republic in the free world. And here are the prospective presidential candidates in the greatest parties in the greatest Republic in the free world. What a picture!
Take the Republicans first. Almost nobody else will take the Republicans, but for purposes of this exercise, hold a poll on GOP. Depending on your vote believe, only 13 to 21 percent of the voters still identify themselves as Republicans. So many statehouses have been Republican governors they can barely get up three tables of bridge. The party just managed to lose a Senate seat in 2014, and recently was one of the most Republican states in the land.
Bebold this poor old elephant! It is saddled with blame for the worst recession in years. In the past seven years, the double-digit inflation. That inflation was fueled by cumulative federal deficits, over the past seven years, and since then, we have been seven years of Republican presidents. Unemployment still is running
at 8.3 per cent in the nation. In certain areas, it's twice that bad.
The Republican party is a party of distinction. This is its distinction: It is tainted by Watergate with the worst political corruption in American history—worse than the Nixon campaign, worse than the corruption of Harding. They were Republicans, too. No fewer than 40 men associated with the Nixon campaign of 1972 have pleaded guilty, or been found guilty, on criminal charges. The number may be higher. One loss count. Some of Republicans' landslide winner of 1972 had to resign before he can be impeached. No other party can make that claim.
Gerald Ford is the Republican's putative nominee for 1978. Only 46 per cent of the people approve of his presidential record. Until this moment, Mr. Ford has never campaigned for national office. But he has made a strong choice is Nelson Rockefeller, three times repudiated by his own national party. The three leading conservative journals, closely identified with the GOP, treat Mr. Ford as if he had smallpox. They think
Readers Respond/ Bar crowds, Shockley debated
To the Editor:
I live near the Jayhawk Cafe. I won't say exactly how close since the "students" might own hands, as they have been doing all semester long and many others before this. To my knowledge, the police and or-city commission has made no progress in daily mass p rubber rites. The crowd obviously won't control itself. (There's no difference between the two crowds. It just a slight difference in how closely to the closest as to which bar one deserves most.)
The "solution" of putting a fence around the wheel is absolutely ridiculous. It's like putting papier-mache handcuffs on a 500-pound gorilla. The fence is also from the bars. They will still find it necessary to park their cars in private parking lots, to urinate in the street when the urge strikes, to rape women, mutilate other kinds of property and to screen children as possible as soon as they step outside the bars.
All of this the commission allows in the name of money. Yes, the students bring money to school and do their student who spends money at the 'Hawk or the Wheel, there are many more who don't. (Think of faculty and others connected with the University.) Student interests and those of students are synonymous. Nor are the interests of the Lawrence economy and the owners of the
bars the same. The commission, however, sees fit to use the term "residents" of the lives of residents in that area, not only on football weekends, but every beer weekend. (Weak God for Sunday.)
Since there will always be yahoo's in this world, external controls will be necessary. No doubt, the management of the 'Hawk and the Wheel cannot be done without once the students" leave the bar. That is where the commission and police come in. Since the amount of manpower and time necessary for policing is prohibitive, I recommend relocating them to a non-residential area preferably in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.
William Shockley isn't an individualist espousing free expression; rather, he represents part of a total malignancy known as racism which espouses its sickness among the American people. In a form of expression; racism is the notion that one race is superior to another for no other reason than the fact that they are from a specific group.
Name Withheld by Request
Racism intolerable To the Editor:
The point of view that the recent cancellation of the Shockley-Goldsbay debate is a demonstration of speech was raised by two students in the Kansan. According to one student the
Even allowing Shockley to appear on the stage testifies to the possibility that racism has some legitimacy that Shockley could have expounded upon. On the contrary, the concept of race inferiority was developed by the author as a tool for better white ruling class (formerly slave owners, now the evolved multi-capitalist class) in order to divide the working class in racial disputes.
Permitting Shockley to address students would then permit racism to breed among them and action. KU would then become a supporter of part of the malignancy which is represented in the KKK, the Birch Society and other institutional groups question that should be asked is whether the SUA student and administrative board hadn't already reflected inclinations towards diversity; it has devoted $2,000 of students' funds to Shockley's fund.
"best" way to fight racism "is what it get out in the open." Similarly, the other student said that Shockley should have been educated on race relations and peacrance "hopefully being revealed as a charlatan."
Would Shockley's appearance have helped to fight racism? Would publicly revealing him or having help to fight racism?
Finally, examine the present social conditions into which we bring these racialist view out to air. Racism and racial conflict does not serve the interest of students or American people in
general. However, it does help maintain a more secure position for the elite class of society represented in the multi-capitalists and the continued manipulation and exploitation of the mass of society represented by working people. For example, today's recessionary ills of unemployment and inflation have been most suffered by poor, working class people. During this period, capitalism, to maintain its state of thriving, must be balanced back of workers from jobs, social services benefits from the poor and financial educational assistance from the needy. And because there aren't enough social services benefits and jobs to go around, the need to provide other forms of racism by the elite owners and controllers of the U.S. effectively divides the society and makes the demands made upon the elite.
One of the student editorialists said that racism "must be expunged from our system before it irreparably damages any chance we may have for peace, harmony and equality of opportunity." This being true, we must as soon as possible take the very roots of racism that is based on material basis and purpose within the American capitalist system. The cancellation of the Shockley-Goldsbury debate is a students' victory in the continuing battle to combat the malignancy of racism.
Grace M. Jackson
Grace M. Jackson
Lawrence Freshman
No way to truth
To the Editor:
The SUA Board recently cancelled the proposed debate between William Shockley and Richard Goldsmith. The case made is advised to be a member of this "academic" community.
First, I think it’s appalling that SUA originally considered squandering $2,000 on a speaker the caliber of Shockley. I can think of scores of other speakers more interesting to the Lawrence community. It’s pricey second, I think it’s pricing that Shockley still has his $2,000. If he came, some would claim that we’d be paying something for nothing. Now that he isn’t coming, we know for a fact we’re paying $2,000 for nothing.
Rockefeller is Typhoid Mary.
Let me emphasize at this point that I am totally and uniquely opposed to Shockley's theory that blacks are genetically inferior to whites in intelligence. I'm no genetician, but that's what I'm asking me from concluding that Shockley's proposition is outrageously repugnant to every principle we Americans supposed hold dear. Of course, if Shockley's proposition wasn't clad in an apparently sinister blond blanked-in inquiry, I am questionlessly deserve being labeled an ivy tower demagogue, an ivy ley white collar red-neck.
But because of this self-
proclaimed cloak of academic
inquiry, we, as members of a
university community, should give a presumption to the existence of this cloak, Shockley should therefore be protected by the inviolable cloak of his views. In his view of his views, our views or his academic credentials in the field of genetics.
The University has been denied some healthy debate and controversy because, to quote Bengtson in the Oct. 4 Kansas, "I am not a society divisive issue and that the debate itself would be of no consequence." Apparently, the SUA Board embraced Bengtson's view and decided that the university should mature enough to consider a "socially divisive issue." But Bengtson, president of SUA, and his fellow SUA board members didn't stop there. He said he would cancel the debate because they decided that the "debate itself would be of no consequence." What arrogance! Their is not to speculate what Bengtson might say on public forum. That is the duty and privilege of the public, not self-annoted censors.
But, the SUA Board has violated this code of academic freedom. The reasons they gave for the cancellation decision are permeated by a cowardly and tyrannical view of what is apparent contempt for the University's intellectual maturity.
The public interest is always served by responsible debate and controversy. Supposedly, we here at KU are interested in
The SUA Board has not only denied us the experience of hearing the clash of Shockley's and Goldsby's ideas in the University's marketplace of ideas. They have denied us the means to the truth. People have been afraid of ideas and controversy before. But, it is true that we still see controversy supercilious and surreptitiously smothered in an academic environment professing to hold dear both academic freedom and truth.
truth. But how are we to determine the validity of werd viewpoints like Shockley's if we are denied the right to hear all an issue, and then charged $2,000 for the privilege?
Steve Polard Prairie Village Senior
C
Rockefeller is Typhoid Mary. This is the irony: Given such a time against such a time against such a weeobone party, whom do the Democrats have to put up? You have to pause to think. You know that when you see the paper, some other Democrat is responding to popular clamor that he run for the White House. Fifty-two of them are moderately indicated, their availability, but when it comes to presidential timber, this is second-growth staff. What you have to do is vice-presidential prospects. These are mostly bully painters.
The Democrats' best prospects for 76 are Senators Henry "Scoop" Jackson of Jacksonville and Anthony Humphrey of Minnesota. They aren't what you would call fresh faces. Scoop appears to have peaked too soon: He peaked in the spring of 1972 The Happy Man, who he would be the oldest inauguree since Buchanan in 1857.
Governor George Wallace of Alabama is said to be still a Democrat. So far as the debate is going, he is still. The last time the governor wholeheartedly supported a Democratic nominee was in 1924, when he went all out for the late John W. Davis. Mr. Wallace was five at the age of six and stick with the party in 1978. If he somehow got the nomination, he would split the party assunder.
For the rest, you have a gaggle of agreeable gentlemen who are variously named Bayh, Carter, Dudley, Ulrich, Dahill, Shapp and Shriver. Their names turn up in the polls about six points behind of the above.
Senator George McGovern of South Dakota toyed with the notion of trying again, but gave up if he would might lose Massachusetts also if he ran again. Bella Abzug may announce. In this field, don't write her off.
We are four and a half months from the first primary in New Hampshire, but we will be heard in the land, rolling up votes for Whaddyacallin and Whatsaisname. We will survive, but by the bones of the Founding Fathers, you sometimes wonder how I can stand with them.
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Published at the University of Kansas weekdays
nationals. Second-day postage paid at Law-
dition period. Second-class postage paid at Law-
dition semester of $4 a year in Douglas County and $10 a
year in Hamilton County. Subscription price of $35 a semester, paid through the
University of Kansas.
Editor
Dennis Ellsworth
Associate Editor
Debbie Gump
Campus Editor
Carl Young
Business Manager
HINARY LOOK
Assistant Business Manager Advertising Manager
Jerel Kadak Roarr Parts
Publisher David Dary
Business Adviser Mel Adams