Liquor as an issue
It has happened. A resolution asking for a vote by Kansas citizens on prohibition has been submitted to the Legislature. The resolution was submitted after another was introduced to bring liquor by the drink to a vote of the people.
Some capital correspondents think the prohibition bill may have a chance for passage. It is under no doubt that the dry forces are much better organized than the wets and their letters to legislators seem to get more results.
A legislator who receives ten letters strongly in favor of prohibition and possibly one against it will more than likely vote for the resolution. Observers seem to feel that legislators, fearful of their constituencies, will vote down the liquor-by-the-drink measure and in return it is feasible they could vote for prohibition as a reaction.
The reasoning behind possible passage of the dry bill is that dry constituents will probably write more letters and generally sound stronger against "demon rum" than wet forces do it favor of it.
In a previous editorial it was stated there seemed little use to give the arguments against prohibition. Maybe they are needed after all. As a direct result of prohibition, the United States experienced one of its most lawless periods. With America crying for drink, organized crime became one of the largest businesses in this country.
The illegal manufacture, transportation and distribution of alcoholic beverages filled the coffers of the Organization and provided the treasury that made it powerful, giving it enough capital to continue in operation long after prohibition ended. That capital allowed organized crime to move into other fields, even legitimate business, and keep it going into the present.
This is not to say organized crime will begin a bootlegging operation in Kansas if the bill is passed, but it is a possibility.
In another area, it will cost the state a great deal of revenue. The state is already looking for money for a highway system. Its teachers are among the lowest-paid in the nation, and its civil servants earn much less than those in other states or the federal government. Some new tax will probably have to be instituted to take up the slack. Kansas money will be flowing into neighboring states where people, those within driving distance, will go to drink and spend their money.
To stretch a point, a great many people will be out of work and possibly end up on unemployment rolls. All the businessmen connected with the liquor business will lose their livelihood and either be forced to move to other states or help to flood the already-full labor market.
The effort to legislate one's morals on another is quite liable to bring much greater problems on the state than those it already faces. (ATJ)
Letters to the Editor Greeks answer
To the Editor:
In reference to the editorial "Token-greeks," I feel that many of the facts presented give a distorted view of the existing situation.
First, Willie McDaniel was not pledged as a token Negro. Neither he was he pledged to have his name spread across the campus newspaper. He was pledged because his ideals and sense of responsibility coincided with that of Alpha Kappa Lambda. Mention of him in this editorial stirs up comments proven false over a year ago.
Secondly, fraternities at KU do not have clauses in their constitutions that would restrict a man from joining such a group because of his race. While some fraternities have limited their membership to a particular religion, such practices are in the process of change.
Thirdly, it is true that many black students hesitate to go through rush. This is mainly because the campus press blows out of proportion their
Kansas Telephone Numbers
Newsroom-UN-4-3646
Business Office-UN-4-4358
A student newspaper serving the University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas.
Kansas.
Published at the University of Kansas
the university's academic year except
holidays and examination periods.
Mail subscription rates: $6 a semester,
$10 a year. Second class postage paid
through August.
goods, services and employment
advertized offered to all students without
regard to color, creed or national
background. Students are necessarily those of the University of Kansas or the State Board of Regents.
participation in such activities. It is also the campus press that does not cooperate in extending an invitation to all men interested in rush, regardless of their race. In September, 1968, and periodically throughout the Fall semester, the IFC requested that the UDK print such an invitation. Monday's editorial was the first mention about any hesitation of Negroes to participate in rush.
Fourth, the editorial cited the Greek system at Iowa State University. At the present time, only three out of 34 fraternities at Iowa State have black members. Furthermore, after a telephone conversation with Dave Speer, an IFC officer at Iowa State, it was learned that the campus press was the last student organization to assist the fraternities in pledging these men. Speer also commented that most black students shied away from Greek living because they did not want their names spread across the front page of the campus newspaper.
Fifth, the fraternity system at KU is attempting to cope with this social problem as well as other problems facing our community. At the present time five fraternities at KU are rushing black students. Adverse editorial comments interfere with these fraternities' efforts to rush men without regard to their race.
to participate in rush. I would like to extend an invitation to all men to register for rush at the Dean of Men's office, the College-within-a-College offices, or the IFC office in the Kansas Union. I would also like to personally offer my help to any man who wishes to participate in rush.
answer
What is needed is a sincere invitation for all male students
M. Mark Retonde
IFC Vice-President for Rush
(Admittedly the statement about discriminating constitutional restrictions was nothing but an educated guess. We will believe your statement when we are allowed to examine the constitutions. As for embarrassing Negro rushees, we are looking to the day when the pledging of a Negro is not such a unique occurrence and join with you in that expressed desire. Ed.)
Paperbacks
THE ARTIST'S JOURNEY INTO THE INTERIOR AND OTHER ESSAYS, by Erich Heller (Vintage, $1.65)—Essays that present the thinking of great philosophers and makes it comprehensible for the reader. The work for many will still be complex, but it is a volume that will be of special value to the student in philosophy.
Evans, Novak report Nixon's power to show in Middle East struggle
By ROWLAND EVANS AND ROBERT NOVAK
(Copyright 1969, Publishers-Hall Syndicate)
WASHINGTON — President Nixon's quick decision to talk to the Russians on the Middle East crisis is only the opening gambit in a fascinating but dangerous game of power politics he is now sketching out with his national security advisers.
Mr. Nixon is well aware that the Soviet Union is becoming compulsive in its desire to negotiate with the U.S.-not on the Arab-Israeli confrontation, but on control of the escalating arms race.
President Nixon, however, puts heavier emphasis on the danger of another Middle Eastern war, which might suck in the two super-powers on opposite sides. To Mr. Nixon, the question of arms control, while important, is not so lethal a time bomb as the possible breakdown of the fragile truce between Israel and the surrounding Arab states.
Accordingly, the Nixon game is to test Soviet willingness to do serious business with the Americans in the imminent United Nations talks on a settlement of the 1967 war. If Moscow displays what top Administration officials now believe is possible—a willingness to agree on a Middle East settlement that both sides could then accept—President Nxion will proceed from there to talks on the control of arms, particularly new defensive and offensive nuclear systems.
Bold and imaginative though it is, this plan is fraught with danger. In particular, a deadlock in the U.S.-Soviet talks at the UN could so sour relations that later negotiations on arms control would be seriously threatened.
But the President is willing to accept that risk in return for the enormous gains that might result from a successful negotiation on the Middle East. Moreover, Mr. Nixon is convinced that an easing of the vicious Arab-Israeli antagonisms is essential. Otherwise, an outbreak of hostilities going far beyond the present cycle of Arab guerrilla attack and Israeli reprisal is a possibility.
Furthermore, Mr. Nixon tells intimates he is getting worried over signs of anti-Israeli feelings in this country. He is not alone. The last major Israeli reprisal against civilian Arab aircraft at the Beirut, Lebanon, airport last month—a retaliation for the loss of an Israeli life in an Arab terrorist attack in Athens—caused an angry response in the U.S.
Neither the government of Israel nor the Jewish community here favors the U.S.-Soviet talks at the UN. What bothers them is the possibility that the super-powers are preparing to "impose" a peace.
To deal with this, Mr. Nixon has held a number of private talks with leading U.S. Jews, including Sen. Jacob K. Javits of New York, and has transmitted a number of messages to the Israeli government in Jerusalem.
He has stressed two things: first, the U.S. will not be party to an "imposed" peace unacceptable to Israel and will underwrite any agreement acceptable to both sides; second, no matter what agreements are made with the Russians on stopping the arms flow to the Middle East, there will be no change in the delivery schedule of 50 F-4 aircraft to Israel (to be started the end of this year).
Javits, it is known, had a lengthy private conversation with both the President and his chief national security adviser, Dr. Henry Kissinger, last Friday in the White House. Javits strongly urged Mr. Nixon to tell the Russians at the outset of the UN talks that the U.S. would never allow the Middle East to be absorbed into the Communist sphere, either by direct Soviet action or by the action of Egypt and her Arab allies. He agreed.
At the same time, the President said he has sent the Israelis an urgent warning on reprisal raids against the Arabs during UN negotiations. Nr. Nixon is fearful that the cycle of raid and counter-raid could get out of hand and foil the talks.
Against that background, the President's decision on U.S.-Soviet Middle East talks is the first move in the scenario of power politics now opening. On the outcome hangs not only peace in the Middle East and eventual agreement on arms control but perhaps the whole direction of Mr. Nixon's bold foreign policy.
Pay-off