4 Thursday, Januarv 29. 1987 / University Daily Kansan Strong feelings on apathy In the past few weeks there have been opportunities for University of Kansas students to let their voices be heard, and some took advantage of it. But student apathy still seems to be at an all-time high. These opportunities presented themselves because certain events were making headlines, and a small group of students held marches and rallies. Some of the marches, like the Impache Reagan Rally, were not taken very seriously. Others, such as the Student Senate's gathering in the Statehouse in Topeka to discuss budget cutbacks for KU, addressed issues that all students should have been concerned about. Rallies and demonstrations are a great way, often the only way, for students to express their ideas. The Impeach Reagan Rally will not force the president out of office, but the students saw a situation they were unhappy with and made their feelings known. Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday was celebrated with a march down Jayhawk Boulevard and a discussion of civil rights. Is this the only time of the year that civil rights are an issue? No. But it is the only time the media and mass public make an issue of it. The same is true of abortion. The anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Roe vs. Wade case, which legalized abortion, brought only a small protest from KU students. This always-controversial issue doesn't disappear the rest of the year, and neither should the discussion. In the fall of 1985, the big issue was apartheid, and students throughout the University joined people in other parts of the country in calling for companies and schools to divest themselves of stock in companies doing business in South Africa. Today, interest in South Africa seems diminished, although apartheid certainly has not. Just because issues don't grab headlines every day doesn't mean that they are not around, and people, including college students, need to continue the fight for causes important to them. Images not enough "In this 200th anniversary year of our Constitution, you and I stand on the shoulders of giants — men whose words and deeds put wind in the sails of freedom." This was how President Reagan began his State of the Union address Tuesday night, but the speech did little more than put hot air in the ears of the U.S. public. The speech was promising at times, but Reagan seemed more concerned with leaving a positive impression than with giving substantive details on such important topics as the Iran-contra scandal, the defense budget and illiteracy. Although Reagan publicly assumed full responsibility for the Iran arms deal, he failed to give any information that could help the public understand just what went on. More of the speech was devoted to recalling stories about the Constitutional convention than to the scandal that will hang like a dark cloud over Reagan's remaining two years in office. It is nice to have a leader, such as Reagan, who can bring powerful, patriotic images to the people. But the time has come when the public must demand more than images. Aquino faces another test In light of the Feb. 2 vote on her proposed constitution, she must work swiftly in restraining opponents who seek to destabilize her government and invalidate the vote. The strength of Philippine President Corazon Aquino's democratic government will be tested in the coming weeks by challenges from both the right and left. The test is twofold — she must demonstrate decisiveness in retaliating against violent extremist opposition groups and direct such decisiveness with control over her military. Past attempts at finding a non-violent way to reconcile the deep divisions that separate the nation have resulted in dashed hopes. Earlier this month, negotiations with Communist rebels eniled in a stalemate amidst a cease-fire set to end in February. Right-wing sympathizers of the former Marcos regime also continue to agitate the government. To Aquino, consensus is a achieved through humanitarian, non-violent means. This does not, however, necessitate passivity. The Philippine Communists and Marcos supporters differ from Aquino's moderates on fundamental principles of governing. Their voices have been elevated by violent tactics. Restraining this violence militarily may now be Aquino's only choice. To do so, she must exhibit firm control over her armed forces. Incidents such as last week's panicked firing upon a group of leftist demonstrators by Philippine Marines must not reoccur. Aquino's military must be subordinate to her and follow her. News staff News staff Frank Hansel Editor Jennifer Benjamin Managing editor Jul Warren News editor Brian Kabertine Editorial editor Sandra Engelland Campus editor Mark Siebert Sports editor Diane Dutmeir Photo editor Bill Skeet Graphics editor Tom Eblen General manager, news adviser Business staff Lisa Weems Business manager Bonnie Hardy Ad director Denise Stephens Retail sales manager Kelly Scharer Campus sales manager Duncan Calhoun Marketing manager Lori Coppel Classified manager Jennifer Lumianski Production manager David Nixon National sales manager Jeanne Hines Sales and marketing adviser Opinions Letters should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 200 words and should include the writer's name, address and telephone number. If the writer is affiliated with the University, include class and hometown, or faculty or staff position. Guest shots should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 700 words. The writer will be photographed The Kansan reserves the right reject or edit letters and guest shots. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Stauffer-Flint Hall The University Daily Kansan (USPS 650-640) is published at the University of Kansas, *Kansas* 118 Staircase/FIH Hall, Lawrence, Kan. 66045, daily during the regular school year, excluding Saturday, Sunday, and finals periods, and on Wednesday during the summer session. Second-class postage paid in Lawrence, Kan. 66045. Subscriptions by mail are $40 per year in Douglass County. Student subscriptions are $2 and are paid through the student activity fee POSTMASTER: Send address changes to the University Daily Kansan, 118 Stauffer-Fint Hall, Lawrence, Kan. 60405 In the middle of profound criticism and serious international observations recently, the new constitution of Nicaragua was signed and promulgated by the Sandinistas. Constitution a shield for Sandinistas The basic objectives of this constitution are to 'legalize' the regime of Carlos Chuquin Columnist one commandants of Managua and to define a political system. Or in this case, to carry the revolutionary process of the Sandinistas to the extreme. their own beliefs. The main goal of the Sandinistas was to consolidate a totalitarian court scheme. A special commission of the Parliament was responsible for the evaluation of criteria and the ideas of the seven political parties involved. All of these parties are in some way involved in the Sandinista cause. The constitution comprises 204 articles, an extension of the fundamental statute of rights and security that has been in effect in Nicaragua since the 1979 revolution. The construction of the Nicaraguan Constitution was begun in August 1985, and the regime had a direct role in it. This meant the Sandinistas rejected any suggestions contrary to The opposition was not allowed to participate in the elaboration of the document because there was no freedom of the press or freedom of speech. The last independent media in Nicaragua, the daily newspaper La Prensa del Nationa, were closed permanently after a period of censorship and hostility. declared enemies of the government. Some simply abstained from participating because of a lack of security. The persecution of prominent leaders and the existence of 10,000 political prisoners were enough reason for the opposition not to participate in the creation of this important document. Also, the political parties that opposed the Frente Sandinista were With these conditions, it was impossible to have a fair and open national debate, as opposed to what has occurred in other countries in the region that recently have created new constitutions, such as Peru in 1979. The ones who acted as moderators in Nicaragua were the "popular masses," which were tightly controlled by the Sandinista army. There seems to be a distinct difference between the democratic principles called for in the new Nicaraguan Constitution and the actual practices of the government. For instance, the Constitution calls for political pluralism, yet there is an excessive privilege of the executive branch of the government. Also, the Constitution lays out a plan for a mixed economy, but this is contrasted by central economy planning which is central to the Cuban and Soviet governments. The separation between the church and state has a definite purpose for the Sandistas — to continue persecuting the religions in the nation, most notably the Catholic Church, which have no political ties. The "respect of human rights" that the Nicaraguan government talks about will not be genuine until it responds to accusations made about systematic human rights violations that have occurred in the past. The new constitution is simply a tool to justify the Sandanista's absolute control of Nicaragua. Constitution or not, the civil rights of the people who oppose the Sandinistas' policy will not be respected. Test deals blow to memories Mike Ryko is on vacation. While he is gone, we are reprinting some of his favorite columns. The following first appeared on Oct. 20, 1975. The questions have multiple-choice answers, and each answer has a I've always been hooked by the self-analysis tests that frequently appear in the features pages of newspapers and magazines. Mike Royko Columnist different point value. You add up the points and determine the kind of shape you are in. For instance, the question in a test on drinking might go: Q. Do you usually drink? a. only at parties? (1 point) b. only a nip after work? (2 points) c. a pint before breakfast (3 points) Or, if it is about your mental state, question might go. The idea is that a bad score should mean you to change some of your bad habits. Q. Do you spend a lot of time: b. thinking you are getting old too fast? (2 points). The various tests tell you if you are likely to have a heart attack, if you have a drab personality, if you are on the verge of a marital breakup, and just anything else that might be of some interest. I've taken them all. And, on the c. sitting in a dark closet by yourself, whimpering and wringing your hands? (3 points) basis of the results, I have discovered I died sometime in 1968, that I'm confined to a padded cell, that everybody I know hates me, or should, and that I'm very happy. But I haven't changed any of my habits. Why push my luck? The trouble was it was designed for teen-agers, to determine whether they were goody-goodies (0 to 21 points), normal (22 to 35 points), or deprived and dissipated (36 points and up). Not long ago, a new test appeared in a column by Ann Landers. It consisted of questions about boozing and drugs and sex, and getting drunk and arrested, and getting girls in trouble, and all sorts of fascinating stuff. Although I am no longer a teenager, at least most of the time, I decided to take the test anyway. My answers were based on the things I had done through my 19th year. Since drugs weren't widely used then, I substituted liquor in questions that dealt with them. Answering the questions was a real nostalgia trip. Several times, I had to sit back and chuckle at memories of what it was like when I was fondly known in no way as "the creep" or "that creep" and "stay away from my sister, you!" Then I added up the total points. And I couldn't believe the results. I had scored 19 Nineteen and scored 5 Hardy. Hardy would have had higher scores than that. I figured something was wrong with the test, so I asked a friend of mine, who is about my age, to take it. He is a rather straight sort, who came from a decent neighborhood and spent much of his youth reading books, playing pingpong and working on a Junior Achievement project. He got 35 points, putting him on the edge of dissipation. He smiled and said, "Someday, I'll tell you about the girl next door." It made no sense and left me feeling depressed. Me, a goody-goody? It was impossible. In every neighborhood, there is a youth who is so dangerous an influence that all the kids in my class suspect that they can't associate with him. Well, I was so dangerous an influence that my own brother wasn't permitted to associate with me. Respectable girls blushed in my presence. In a survey taken by adult reprobates in the neighborhood, I was voted Rookie of the Year. I've had that test in my wallet for days now. Every so often, I take it out, take the test again, and the results are always the same. In brushing away the webs of time, I now realize that I sincerely wanted to do all those things. Me and Slats were among the few people in our planure anticipating slobbering. But nobody would cooperate. Bartenders said, "Take off the false moustache, punk, you ain't no mudget." And girls said, "Try it again, goof, and my brother will maim you." I've since taken the test one more time. And my answers were based on what I would have done if I had been given any cooperation. Boy, oh boy, My score was 92. Even Mr. Hyde couldn't have done any better in a London fog. I feel good again. Maybe I didn't do anything terrible. But at least my intentions were bad. Mailbox News of pay raise a disappointment I was very disappointed after reading the headline in Friday's University Daily Kansan. Despite all of the budget cuts going on at this school, our beloved Student Senate has decided to give themselves a pay raise. Not only is this pay raise a terrible idea, getting paid at all for what they do is ridiculous. These students have volunteered for what they are doing. Sure they work hard, most college students do. What they are doing is extracurricular, like sports. They should have expected to be working long, hard hours, or they shouldn't have even thought about running for office. The members of the Senate try to justify this pay increase by saying they are going broke because they are working so hard. If it is that bad, why would anyone do it? If these positions are such hardships, why doesn't the University give them some sort of scholarship to pay for housing or tuition? I think this would take a lot of financial burden off of them. Also, I think the student body should be the ones to vote on who gets paid what and how, or if they should get paid at all. John Brewer Albuquerque, N.M., freshman BLOOM COUNTY by Berke Breathed SIR I WONDER IF WE MIGHT CONDUCT THIS TRANSACTION WITHOUT ALERTING HALF. THE CIVILIZED WORLD IN THE PROCESS.