New Left has problems with ISU spokesman
The New Left suffered a major setback recently at Iowa State University when Donald R. Smith, newly elected student government president, left the campus under the stigma of an impeachment hearing.
Smith, whose election caused a furor at the usually staid and stable ISU, had promised to drag the university "kicking and screaming into the 20th Century."
LEGISLATORS, PARENTS, and the administration had expressed concern for the state of the university and the future of student government after Smith's election.
The most recent uproar came after the announcement of a Smith and Co. marijuana party, to which he invited a Life magazine reporter and photographer.
Smith had earlier admitted that he was a frequent user of pot, and had invited reporters from other papers to attend a pot party.
OTHER MEMBERS of the New Left on the ISU campus feel they have been betrayed and rightly so. One professor expressed his views by saying, "Don Smith has sold the whole liberal movement off to the outside (Life Magazine). What I thought was a fresh breeze on campus has more of the odor of a dead carcass. Smith is not an activist. An activist stays clean. Pot and politics just don't mix. If you're really trying to bring about reform you don't do it by inviting
Life to a pot party. I think the real liberals on campus feel they've been sold down the river. I'm deeply disturbed about this obvious attempt to embarrass the University."
SMITH LEFT the university one day before he was scheduled to appear before the student senate for an impeachment hearing after he admitted attending the marijuana party.
University President W. Robert Parks, immediately announced an intensified probe of illegal use of drugs among students. He had previously refused to comment on Smith's actions.
It is indeed sad that such a fiasco can happen at a state university. A student body president whose only aim is to further himself and to embarrass those students who voted for him, is a sad commentary on the state of student government at the university level.
WHY THE STUDENTS voted for such a person is somewhat inconceivable. Perhaps they were attracted by the social reform platform he presented, perhaps they merely wanted something different in the way of government.
The worst aspect of the situation lies in the realization that this incident will be blown out of proportion. The students at Iowa State have already felt something of the problems associated with irresponsible decisions and government.
Maybe they will learn—maybe we all will.
Barbara Phillips
The people say...
To the Editor:
I would like to review briefly some of the accomplishments and activities of this year's Sophomore Class Congress. Anyone who has been involved in the congress should be proud of that involvement; in less than seven months, the congress has evolved into such an effective, worthwhile type of government that it is being carefully copied by the Freshman and Sophomore classes at Pittsburg State College, and by all four of next year's classes at Emporia State Teachers' College. Through one of its service projects, namely its sponsorship of Collegiates for Concern, our congress will receive international publicity in the May issue of Pace magazine.
REPRESENTATIVE government on any level is not new in America. Our congress has been successful because of the calibre of its representatives. When the congress was first proposed, enough people were so tired of the lack of leadership on the class level that they literally jumped at the chance to provide their own leadership, which is essentially what the congress is all about.
I am writing because it appears that Ken North is running for the student body presidency on the laurels of the Sophomore Congress and its representatives. Although Mr. North certainly had a hand in its conception, he has been directly involved in virtually no congress activities through the year. Perhaps this noninvolvement has been desirable, especially since Mr. North has simultaneously been chairman of Vox Populi party, as well as Sophomore Class President. Since he has not concerned himself with congress affairs, the congress has managed to steer clear of the dogma of any particular political party. Such association would almost certainly have bogged down the congress to something worse than uselessness.
AS CLASS PRESIDENT, however, Mr. North has inadvertently received much publicity during the past year that might more properly have been directed to the congress and its representatives. It would be a shame if this free publicity should help win the election for him. Let's give credit where credit is due.
Pandora Project
The congress has been successful because of nine parts hard work and one part idealism. The Vox platform's proposal of a Kansas federation of student leaders to lobby in Topeka is more than idealistic; it is dangerous. The kind of publicity that such an autonomous organization could bring the state would completely overwhelm any large scale recognition of the accomplishments of the congress-type of class government.
The federation would invite the Kansas Legislature and Governor to become involved in affairs which rightly should be left to the school administration. If school administrations did not appease the whims of student groups, the legislature would be invited to intervene over the Kansas Regents. There are examples (Berkley, for instance) of what can happen when pressure politics become an integral part of higher education. It is not a pretty sight.
Sincerely.
Sincerely,
David Keesling
Vice President,
Class of 1869
Chairman,
Congress for Class of 1953
2
Daily Kansan
editorial page Wednesday, April 19, 1957
UDK Book Review: Neither Libert
Twining gives hawk' viewpoint
By SCOTT NUNLEY
Nathan F. Twining has been one of America's leading military professionals, serving as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (1957-1960). His new book, "Neither Liberty Nor Safety," disagrees sharply with current U.S. military action and planning.
For the reader who likes to orient his authors quickly, Twining is certainly a "hawk." It is interesting to note how opposed his view is to that of a "dove" live William Fulbright. Both of these men have served years in positions of high trust and leadership in this country, neither belongs to the "lunatic fringe." Yet Twining and Fulbright completely disagree on U.S. policy.
This is a book that should be read. Just as it is necessary to urge hawks to read "Arrogance of Power," so it is vital that doves read "Neither Liberty Nor Safety." No community can suppose itself to be intellectual that is not eager to hear both sides of a major issue.
Since 1958, Twining points out, the "political appointee" heading the Department of Defense has had wide authority over U.S. military posture. Secretaries and their experts have been wrong in the past, misjudging Russia's atom bomb and missile development for instance. Twining particularly mistrusts Robert McNamara and the recent emphasis on limited warfare.
Basic to Twining's view is the presence of the Communist threat today: "What sense does it make to try to avoid world tensions when our government faces a tyranny which openly boasts that its prime objective in life is to destroy us?"
In addition, McNamara argued for the need of "flexibility" in American military power, to deal with limited wars with conventional weapons. Yet, Twining says, it was Eisenhower who created this flexibility by urging the development of a broadly-based nuclea- arsenal with the flexibility to level cities or pinpoint battlefield targets.
Limited war "telegraphs a sense of weakness of purpose, of indecision, to the enemy." Conscience-ridden scientists, status quo officials, pacifists, defeatists, and disarmers advocate such policy.
McNamara, argues Twining, is in fact moving American military power into inflexible Maginet lines of ICBMs. Neither the Kennedy nor Johnson administrations have begun the new weapons systems necessary to replace aging bomber, missile, and naval forces.
In sketching the military history of the Truman, Eisenhower, and Kennedy administrations, Twining sympathizes with General Anderson who in 1949 supported "preventive war." It has always been considered immoral for the U.S. to strike first, Twining agrees. But "a much greater immorality would result if we were to allow our enemies to destroy our values and inherit the world."
But military professionals have been gagged in recent years by a dominant civilian Secretary of Defense. When the military disagreed, they were overruled and not permitted to speak out publicly. The public, and Congress, often heard only one-sided arguments.
In the 1950's, America could have maintained her nuclear superiority by force, before a Soviet atomic threat developed. If a nuclear catastrophe does come, how moral will history consider the American decision not to take preventive action?
Certainly Nathan Twining's book is controversial, if crudely written. If it were being turned out by a right-wing speechwriter for distribution to southern California, it might be lightly discounted. Twining, however, is a sincere, mature, and responsible American speaking from a lifetime of experience. At the least, he provides a history of American military planning since World War II.
As more and more Administration policy comes under public questioning, right as well as left wing alternatives deserve to be examined. Where is the truth? Who really has the answers to America's military future? Only the informed will judge fairly.
Tomorrow: "The Arrogance of Power" by William Fulbright.
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
kansan
Sentinel VII for 77 of the 101 Years
Serving KU for 77 of its 101 Years
KANSAN TLEFPHONE NUMBERS
Newsroom—UN 4-3646 — Business Office—UN 4-3198
The Daily Kansan, student newspaper at The University of Kansas, is represented by National Advertising Service, 18 East St. New York, N.Y. 16022. Students pay $45 to register and postage paid at Lawrence, Kan., every afternoon during the University year except Saturdays and Sundays. University holidays and examination periods. Accommodations, goods, services and employment advertised in the University are offered to all students without regard to color, creed or national origin.
The opinions expressed in the editorial column are those of the students whose names are signed to them. Guest editorial views are not necessarily the editors'. Any opinions expressed in the Daily Kansas are not necessarily those of The University of Kansas Administration or the State Board of Regents.
EXECUTIVE STAFF
EXECUTIVE STAFF
Managing Editor John McCabe
Manager Imagery Barry Collins
Editorial Editors Dan Austin Bapg Philips