1
4
V-
3
I
s
'.4
5
Mariyn Hoegemeyer, editor
t, . Alfee Jeffrey, business manager
Page 2
Guest Editorial
eed To
By Ed Schwartz
! Students are often urged to "adjust."
,.. . WITH THE COLLAPSE last year of the educational
philosophy of an entire decade at Berkeley and elsewhere,
-college administrators are going to have a few adiustment
problems of their own. Higher education has changed. It
is no longer a savored luxury of the elite, as it may have
been 25 years ago. Nor is it the protracted guidebook for
technocrats encouraged in the 50's.
v. The numerous popular attacks on specialization have
succeeded sufficiently that even students are beginning to
value liberal arts in the classroom and open discussion
'outside of it. This has come as a shock to those accustomed
-to the complacence of the "ivory tower intellectual" for
whom a university was little more than a lab, a library,
a classroom, and a bunk. It's time they recovered.
-.. IN THE DAYS of elite education, there would have been
some merit to the administrative contention that powerful
student governments or vocal undergraduate political or
ganizations were not an essential part of a campus. Learn
ing was pursued either "for its own sake" or for a job.
Even today, Dean Griswold of Harvard Law School could
fcoast to a group of Oberlin alumni that "our students are
loo busy worrying about torts to get concerned about 'their
role in the decision-making process."
GRISWOLD, however, presides over one of the last
strongholds of the elite. The relationship between the law
student and the university is vertical. He has no social
rules. He is not expected to "develop as a whole man,"
although he might. Chances are that he has his own apart
ment and lives independent of university facilities, except
those which relate to his study of law. His concern with
university decision-making merely reflects the university's
unwillingness to make any decisions for him.
UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS do not benefit from such
laissez-faire policies. They boast large programs of extra
curricular activities to develop qualities of citizenship. They
strive to uphold the moral standards of those enrolled.
They may require that a student live in a college dorm,
eat in a college dining hall, and obey a long list of college
rules reprinted in a college handbook or tacked on a col
lege wall. They may hire psychologists, special counselors,
administrators of extra-curricular activities, even social
directors. By their own admission, classrrom education is
only one part of their relationship to the student.
WHEN AN UNDERGRADUATE accept this premise,
however, that student's involvement in policy is equally
Jiecessary to develop "qualities of citizenship" and that
-student action in local communities is a desirable adjunct
to courses in the social sciences, the same administrators
will revert to the elitist argument that "education should
be confined to the classroom you have no business doing
any of these things."
IF I WERE a rabid leftist, I would brand such sophis
try as a glaring example of Establishment hypocrisy. So
as not to impugn motives, I would suggest that it repre
sents an unwitting contradiction.
I DO NOT OBJECT to a university which seeks to
provide extra-curricular as well as classroom programs
jfor its students. Indeed, as higher education is made avail
able to large numbers and as course material replaces
vocational training with "broad development," opportun
ities for action will be necessary lor students to test con
flicting theories through participation.
; But a university cannot confuse development with in
doctrination, participation with manipulation, and expect
a person trained in critical thought to accept. The student
need only examine Napoleon's system of non-represented
governments to evaluate the political position of his stu
dent government. A quick intake of Socrates' "Apology"
should provide him an incentive for honest expression.
And then there's that messy business of civil rights.
THEREFORE, the administrator must adjust. If he
wants the American campus to become a laboratory for
the "leaders of tomorrow," he must create a campus com
munity in which qualities of leadership can be developed
one which guarantees that a student opinion has some
chance of implementation and which enables a student pol
itico to work in the "real world" with the university's
blessings. Otherwise, the administrator will discover that
the student has learned his lessons too well.
(Schwartz, a graduate of Oberlin College, is a grad
uate student in communications at New York University.)
. The Collegiate Press Service
Daily Nebraskan
TELEPHONE: 477-8711, Extensions 2588, 2589 and 2500.
Member Associated Collegiate Press, National Ad
vertising Service, Incorporated. Published at Room 51,
Nebraska Union, Lincoln, Nebraska.
Entrrrd ai aeonm) cla matter at the pout afflre In Llnoolm Nebraska,
ndrr the an nf AuKu.t 4, 1U
The ftafl? NphrttNknn I DUhllhftd Monday. Wi'dnradav. rnunidiiy and
Friday during the ar-honl year, evernt during varatlnna and exam period,
by atudentfl fll the llnrveralty of Nebrafika under Ihe JurMifHIfln nt (be
Faculty i4nbenmmltte nn Ktudent Puhlleatlnni. PublU'tHinm Khali he free
from eenenmhlo by (he Mnbeommlttea or any Demon ouutde the Dnlvemlty.
Membera nt (ha Nebra.aan art) ranpunelbla for what they ratine to be printed.
ship
shApE
shiRT...
THE
cpo
It's the ranking fashion
Idea for fall , . . a hale
and hearty shirt of
full-bodied wool melton
Woolrlch-tallored with
twin pockets, authentic
anchor buttons, neatly
finished long tail to
wear tucked In or out,
Solid Navy, Burgundy
or colorful plaids.
Sizes XS,S,M,L,XL,
About $9.95.
Wednesday, Nov. 10, 1965
Adjust
fp
rf ' ' N
I 1 I J j
Campus Opinion
Student Qc-Explairas Theory
Of Communist China Expansion
Dear Editor:
It is my pleasure to re
ceive Mr. F. S. La Croix's
response concerning my
last letter in the Daily Ne
braskan. Answers provided
here are designed only to
serve the purpose of clar
ifying the truth.
First, Mr. La Croix
seemingly agrees that there
was no implication in
Article, Author Said
Not Representative
Dear Editor:
Since I feel that you have
expressed some very intel
ligent and reasonable
opinions on a variety of
issues. I will assume that
your "Editor's Note" before
the quote from the Nov
ember issue of RAMPARTS
simply stems from a lack of
knowledge of the nature of
that publication. Anything
written in this magazine
should be given about the
same weight as an article
published by the K.K.K.,
the John Birch Society, or
any other extremist group
along these lines.
Ignoring the nature of the
publication, the author
sounds like a typical mem
ber of the S.D.S., whose
thinking is based only on
emotion and is totally obliv
ious to the political exigen
cies of the situation. There
School Spirit
Same As '63?
Dear Editor:
Jim Swartz's comments
last week about Missouri
students and their school
spirit may be true, but they
also hit home in reference
to Nebraska students and
their spirit during the Nebraska-Oklahoma
game of,
1963.
That game also left a bad
taste in the mouth; Nebras
ka hosts, too, were savages ;
and the dignity and respect
of our school was lowered
on that day.
President Kennedy had
died the day before, but
the game was not post
poned, fans quietly filed into
the stadium, and stood in a
moment of silent tribute.
Nebraska dominated t h e
game from the start, a
thrilling, high-scoring af
fair, and evervene was jus
tifiably excited.
There was no excuse, how
ever, for the savage exhibi
tion that began even before
the end of the game. From
high in the stands fanatics
showed their Orange Bowl
enthusiasm bv neltin? play
ers on the field with or
anges. Even with pads and
helmets. Oklahoma players
must have been a little
shocked when someone's
aim was true. Of course,
anyone throwing from the
top rows only hit other, less
fortunate fans.
Will there be a repeat per
formance of savagery this
year against Oklahoma, on
Thanksgiving Day, before a
national television audi
ence? Will someone show
their school spirit by selling
oranges, cotton balls, or
sugar cubes before t h e
game? I hope not!
Milton Gustafson
Messrs. Trask and Sakai's
speech that there is a "con
tinuity of culture and relig
ion from olden times into
the Chinese communist re
gime." Then it seems that
Mr. La Croix is suggesting
that the "imperialistic com
parison" made by Dr.
Trask and Dr. Sakai be
tween historical China and
Communist China, as they
are entirely too many people
in our own State Department
who do not know what decis
ions to make without every
Tom, Dick, and Harry from
other government agencies
trying to tell them what to
do.
Your error was to blindly
accept the report of a man
who happened to visit South
Viet Nam this past summer
as the opinion of the Viet
namese people. You said
that this article should be
read by all who are con
cerned with the "realities of
our foreign policy." I should
like to submit the enclosed
open letter from the General
Associat'on of Saigon Stu
dents as published in the
November 8. 1965, issue of
U.S. News & World Report
as being much more rational
reasonable, and above all,
more representative of the
feelings of intelligent, in
fofmed Vietnamese.
Sincerely.
David E. Neal
P.S. I think your views as
expressed on the IFC's con
cern with drinking are 100
right. It is about time that
poeple in Nebraska grow up
and learn to live in 1965.
,But it looks as though the
prohibition views still pre
vail, even in some corners
of our campus.
Editor's Note: The letter
from the Saigon students
published in the U.S .News
and World Report was re
printed in the Daily Nebras
kan on Monday the day Mr.
Neal's letter arrived in our
office. The two articles con
cerning differing opinions
were printed in an effort to
confront our readers with
they many sides of the Vict
Nam situation, so that they
could judge intelligently for
themselves the most real
istic, representative view.
Dine in the Relaxing Atmosphere
of the
cpLoniL Dininc) boom
Luncheon
Monday thru Friday
11:30 to 1:00
$.75 to $1.23
Dinner
Monday thru Friday
5:30 to 7:30
$1.75 and up
Steaks, Roast and
oilier Charcoal Broiled Items
Sunday . .
Noon to 2 p.m.
5:00 to 7:30
Reservations
at Ext. 2181 for
parties up to 12
SauMaf
LULUDltiL
I First Floor
are different cultural enti
ties, is superficial.
A better exemplification
of the Communist Chinese
expansionism would have
been the occupation of the
three Baltic nations by Rus
sia in 1940; since these two
countries are both commu
nistic. It is due to commu
nism that Communist China
is expansionistic, not due to
Chinese history. China was
not a nation until this idea
was imported from the
West. China was a Culture.
Documentations of this ar
gument can be found every
where in Chinese history, or
especially in Professor Li
ang Shu-Ming's "The Es
sentials of Chinese Culture"
1949. That is the reason why
the great empire of Rome
is gone, but the vast land of
China still exists. Just be
cause China was not a na
tion, she did not undergo
the "Decline and Fall of
the Roman Empire."
Secondly, Mr. La Croix
asserts that the Mongolian
and Manchurian histories
merged into Chinese history.
But Chinese history did not
merge into Mongolian and
Manchurian histories. What
the Mongols and Manchur
ians did is not representa
tive of the main stream of
Chinese history. Under the
Mongol reign from 1279 to
1368, in China, the long-respected
intellectuals in Chi
nese society were placed
to the ninth class in Mon
gol rules, just below the
eighth class, prostitutes, and
barely above the tenth, beg
gars. Nothing could be more
un-Chinese than this. In 1937
the Mongols prohibited the
Chinese from possessing
arms; even the knife for
kitchen use was under su
pervision of the Tartars.
And Mr. La Croix says that
"those invaders made a
great contribution to t h e
growth of China as a na
tion." Thirdly, I do not d e n y
that there are some com
munist compassionates
among overseas Chinese.
But I deny that all over
seas Chinese are commu
nistic. This is a logical dis
tinction between the univer
sal statement and the par
ticular statement. With the
aid of this distinction, we
are able to recognize that
not all Chinese are Red.
Thank you.
Lloyd L. Lee
.v.
Viet Nam Article
Demands Rebuttal
Dear Editor:
The article by Richard
Browne concerning the
"true feeling" of the people
of Viet Nam in last Wednes
day's paper demands re
buttal because of its dis
crepancies, poor logic and
disregard of facts.
Mr. Browne states that he
has just returned from a
brief revisit of South Viet
Nam, and that he was com
missioned by the people of
Viet Nam to convey a mess
age ... a message which
contradicts the official view
on Viet Nam that Washing
ton "propagates." Quite ob
viously then, these views
are also "propagated" by
the governments of Eng
land, Canada, West Ger
many, Australia, New Zea
land, Korea, Thailand, Ja
pan, the Phillippines, For
mosa, etc., etc., and South
Viet Nam herself.
He further indicates that
he found the popular spokes
men for virtually all ele
ments of the population,
except for the military and
the refugees, voicing vigor
ous opposition to American
policy in Viet Nam. And
yet who but the military
and the refugees have been
the most directly affected
by the war which in turn is
influenced by our policy?
But do they protest? No.
It appears Mr. Browne
has not bothered to obtain
the opinions of the essential
elements. Furthermore he
states that his knowledge of
the peasant's opinion was
gathered from secondary
sources. ARE WE TO BE
LIEVE THAT THIS MAN
IS TRUTHFULLY SPEAK
ING FOR THE VIETNA
MESE PEOPLE? If the
Vietnamese are so vigor
ously opposed to our policy
why are they not demon
strating against it? The
fact is there have been and
are demonstrations for U.S.
policy.
His message continues
further by stating that the
U.S. should permit the Viet
namese to work out their
own "internal" disputes
free from the unsettling ef
fects of foreign interfer
ence. Mr. Browne seems de
gonial iom
I :
1 1 v J 4 """""" i
"'1, , '
1 1
BWaWaa1aaa(fUa1 M aMMMUNMUMalMtallMMa -.&cNk
LH1H1 K4 lOOtM
Nebraska Union
termined to avoid the facts.
it is rather puzzling to
think that he does not con
sider the 101st, 308th, and
324th regiments of the regu
lar North Vietnamese army
now in the South to consti
tute outside interference;
or that he considers t h e
45.000 North Vietnamese in
filtrated into the South since
1959 an internal problem.
And this infiltration contin
ues at the rate of 1000 men
a month. As for our pres
ence there, we were invited
by a sovereign and indepen
dent nation to help in sup
porting, supplying and
advising its forces to re
sist armed aggression from
without.
Mr. Browne states that
most Vietnamese do not
share the view that stopping
China is an objective which
justifies unlimited sacrifice.
But then he says it is more
alarming to see themselves
pushed towards China than
it is to see us pushing them
towards communism. First
he indicates that the Viet
namese do not think it is
vital to stop China, and
THEN he says that they
are afraid of falling into
the clutches of China. Now
we ask you, what kind of
sense does this make? The
whole thing reeks of incon
sistency. He concludes by saying
that the Vietnamese wish
we would go and fight "our"
quarrels elsewhere. He has
previously stated that the
war is an internal conflict
and now he is saying that
it is our quarrel. We fail to
comprehend this man's Uni
que mode of reasoning and
representation of nations. x
Anybody for a freshman
course in logic?
Our summary might best
be presented by what Mr.
Sisouk, the Laotian Minis
ter of Finance has said:
"For the Americans to pull
out of Southeast Asia would
not only be a tragedy but a
disaster." We cannot de
sert the people of Viet Nam
now. TO SETTLE FOR
ANYTHING LESS IS TO
MAKE A MOCKERY OF
WHAT THIS NATION BE
LIEVES IN. AND STANDS
FOR.
Respectfully,
Brett Ratcliffe
Dave Meyer
Bob Gleisberg
Charles Lofton
H i v
1
T
