i
THE DAILY NEBRASKAN
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 23, 19S
: The sisters another side of the Greeks
QanmirsniHi
, .mi - i
' i
i ;
!
i ?
t "i ,
: t
Throughout the semester the Greek system has
been urged to dispense with worthless and cruel
. tradition and to modernize itself. This moderniza
: tion must occur or the demise of the system is
- Inevitable.
Before, the issues have centered mainly on
the fraternity system and its problems with out
dated pledge training. And the cry was "change
yourself or be changed by others." Under this
threat, and perhaps because of a new awareness
on the part of fraternity members, IFC has taken
the first steps toward revision.
BUT BEFORE ANYONE starts patting
themselves on the back, or starts throwing around
words like "modern" or "mature," take a look
at the sisters.
Ah, yes, the sistera. No physical hazing here,
do shoe-shining, no all-night work sessions, and
no Heil Weeks. But no progress either.
If pledge training is the Achilles Heel of
fraternities then Rush Week is the sororities' sort
ipt, . ...
The system under which girls obtain members
bas not basically changed in 30 years, except for
changes made by administration. It is an outmoded,
cruel rad silly system. The number of girls deceiv
ed, the degrading activities and the complaints
to the Regents increase each year. The songs,
crocodile teara, lies, secrecy, jealously and avarice
(which are carefully rehearsed and played out each
Rush Week) defy description.
THERE IS NOW BEFORE the sororities on
eampua a proposal for a change in Rush Week.
This Is sot a conspiracy by administration, nor
3 1
1
S
g()8
. an attempt by a few to rule, but an example
of meaningful change brought about within the
system.
The points are valid and supported by years
of experience. Yet no change is forthcoming.
Panhellenic has of yet been unable to obtain full
support for this change. And full support is
necessary for a change of this nature.
All objections are based on fear. Personal fear.
"What will my house lose, how will it hurt me?"
The problem here is one of too narrow vision.
EVERY HOUSE WILL lose if the Regents defer
rush. And the possibility is imminent. Every house
will lose if small and petty greed overrules progress
and change.
Some have suggested that change is needed,
but not this change; or that change is not
necessarily progress. Perhaps not. Perhaps this
new system is not perfect. But what is? Status
quo is never change. Status quo will never be
progress.
The strength of this proposal, like the strength
of the new pledge contract, is not that it is a
cure-all or a final answer, but that it is an attempt
from within the system. A workable sttempt that
can start needed change now.
If a system can not change itself, if it is
that helpless and static, then perhaps it deserves
to be left behind in the glory of its traditions.
Houses that have rejected this proposal would
do well to reconsider their stands and evaluate
their motives. And then to re-think their decision
in the light of the system's place in a changing
society.
Jane Wagoner
The students are ignored in dorm rent hike
Editor's Note: Following Is an open letter con
cern hi the recent announcement by the Regents
of a dorm rate increase. The authors are Bill
Gilpin, Housing Policy committee member, and
Mickey Brazeal, Schramm Hall student assis.
tout.
According to the SAC document the Regents
passed last June, "students should have a clearly
defined means to participate equitably in the
formation of institutional policies and procedures
which affect student life."
We should. We don't. And because of this,
we sometimes get screwed around. Witness the
recent action on dormitory rent.
It's going to go up, from $800 per year to
$800 per year, and that increase will include the
linen service that used to cost $14, and $2 more
per student for dorm government.
NOW EQUITABLE participation ought to
mean at least some discussion of the rates by
students. But It's a little bit hard for students
to discuss the new rates because no financial in
formation has been released yet hopefully it
will be released shortly.
Students havent been told yet so that tha
Regents could decide on the increase without being
subject to outside pressures. We can understand
how this makes their job an easier one. But it
also evades their responsibility to alow for student
participation.
About two months ago, the Housing Policy
committee was informed by M. Edward Bryan,
the Director of Housing, that dormitory rates were
being reevaluated. At that time, he said, an in
crease did not appear necessary. IDA was also
Informed that the rates were being re-evaluated.
It happens every year.
But the housing contracts, which usually come
out the week before spring vacation, were never
distributed, and rumors began to circulate about
a rent increase. It's been hard for students to
make plans for next year, or even for the summer,
without knowing how much the dorms will cost.
STUDENTS RECOGNIZE he complexity of
budgeting roughly four million dollars for housing,
but that complexity does not justify the lack of
communication about the process of deciding on
room and board rates. Especially when the effects
on students are so great that even a minimal
amount of communication coulld have prevented
a lot of dissatisfaction.
And why did it take so long to decide? Bryan
told the Housing Policy committee Friday that
there are two main reasons for a rate increase:
a 7Vi per cent increase in labor costs to meet
new minimum wage requirements, and a 4 per
cent increase due to inflation. But the University
has known since 1966 that it was subject to
minimum wage laws, and the rates they had to
meet for next year.
Also, any well informed student knows that
costs are increasing 3 or 4 per cent each year
due to Inflationary effects. Yet the University found
it impossible to anticipate these Increasing costs
until the last minute. Why?
Now, at $100 a month, a dormitory has little
financial advantage over an apartment. All this
delay and uncertainty has created a lot of bad
feeling about the new dorm rate maybe enough
bad feeling to make a lot of people move out.
If this happens lower occupancy could offset the
rate increase. And it could have been avoided.
IF OCCUPANCY goes down a lot of people
who want to move out of the dorm during the
year could be screwed. We could lose all freedom
of choice in housing. And it could have been avoid
ed. The need for student participation is clear.
The problems we have now could have been
prevented had the University Administration
fulfilled its commitment to the SAC document. The
means for discussion of the rate increase are
available in the Housing Policy Committee. If only
the channel had been utilized.
The dangers of military in academia
Last week tS college newspapers co-signed a
actional editorial on ROTC The Dally Nebraskaa
would like to make it 30:
One of the unintended domestic consequences
ef the war la Vietnam has been the growing
awareness of the dangers of Intimate connections
between the military and academia.
Perhaps the most blatant example of colleges
and universities willingly performing functions that
are rightly the exclusive concern of the military
il the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC).
After many years of relatively tranquil ex
Istenee on the nation's campuses, ROTC has come
under fire of Ute from those who believe that
phllsopMcally and pedagogically, military training
lull no place in an academic institution.
la recent months such leading Institutions as
Yale, Princeton, Dartmouth, Harvard and Stanford
save all taken steps toward revoking academia
credit from their ROTC programs. Currently, many
Other colleges and universities are also re
evaluating the status of their own ROTC pro
grams. ' - Tha Stanford decision is especially significant
because It was premised on philosophic rather than
21 U
" ' ? ? ? H t i i
pragmatic grounds. As a member of the committee
which prepared the report explained, "We began
with a definition of the university and found an
essential conflict between this and the concept of
ROTC."
ACADEMIA'S TRADITIONAL function Is to la-
3 Jre critical thinking about man and his society
oof from partisan or superficial considerations.
But It Is impossible for colleges and universities
even to pretend to perform this unique role if
they are also subsidizing the brutal militarism of
the outside world.
Some have argued that academic institutions,
especially those which are publicly sponsored, have
an obligation to be politically neutral and that
this neutrality requires the continued support of
ROTC programs on campus.
At a time when the military is an integral
element In an expansionist foreign policy opposed
by a sizeable segment of the population both inside
and outside academia, it is clear that the ROTC
urogram la as partisan in its own way as Students
for a Democratic Society.
4
Clearly, continued academic support for ROTC
would be political partisanship.
Hans Morganthau wrote recently that one of
the key lessons of the Vietnam War was the danger
of too intimate a relationship between the campus
and the government. For already, he noted, large
segments of the academic community have been
transformed "into a mere extension of the govern
ment bureaucracy, defending the implementing
policies regardless of their objective merits."
ROTC Is not only antithetical to the ultimate
purposes of higher education, but contrary to basic
pedagogical principles as well
While the development of critical thinking is
an integral part of a liberal education, the teaching
methods employed la ROTC programs tend to
emphasize rote learning and deference to authority.
This is far from surprising as critical thinking
has never been a highly prized military virtue.
Consequently, the ROTC program is geared to pro
duce intellectually stunted martinets.
An example of the type of educational thinking
behind the ROTC program at many universities
is provided by a solumn pronouncement made last
year by an ROTC officer at the University of
Minnesota. In a frlghtenlngly serious echo of Catch
22 he declared, " Marching la the basic leadership
program for every officer."
EQUALLY ALIEN TO the ends of a liberal
education is th unquestioning submlssiveness
endemic in the rigidly hierarchical structure of
military education. It is hard to develop any spon
taneity much less dialogue within the
classroom when the professor is not just a teacher,
but a superior officer as well.
For those congenitaHy unimpressed by
philosophical arguments predicated on the goals
of higher education, there are some equally potent
pragmatic reasons why ROTC is in no way a
valid academic offering.
A faculty curriculum committee at the
University of Michigan stated the case clearly when
it charged that ROTC course materials used in
Ann Arbor were "conjectural , non-analytical,
cheaply moralistic and often blatantly propagan
dise THE BULK OF THE ROTC program consists
of technical courses often less rigorous than similar
courses offered In the math, science and engineer
leg programs of most colleges and universities.
Typical of those ROTC programs not duplicated
elsewhere is an Air Force ROTC course entitled,
"The history of the role of the Air Force in U.S.
military history." Designed primarily to inculcate
Institutional loyalty, rather than to develop critical
thinking, courses Uk this are clearly not history.
They are not even valid military history slnca
inter-service rivalry results in an Inflation of the
role of the Air Force.
The intellectual vacuity of many ROTC courses
is directly related to the rather limited educational
backgrounds of the preponderance of ROTC
faculty.
Despite education which normally does not ex
ceed a bachelor's degree, ROTC instructors ara
RsasaaBaEsnBnsssasBsassaattssBsnnBSSBaRnmaw
Editorial Signatories
The Colorado Dally. Dally Calif or alan
(Berkley). The Dally Bruin (UCLA), E3 Gancha
(Santo Barbara), Dully Mini, The Purdue Ex-
Knent, Kentucky Kernel, Tntan Hullabaloo. Th
aniondbark (University of Maryland). Boston
University News, Amherst Dally. The Michigan
Dally, The State News (Michigan State), The Min
nesota Dally, The Rertcctor (Mississippi State),
Student Life (Washing University, St. Louts),
Gateway (University of Nebraska, Omaha), The
Duke Chronicle. The Targum (Rutgers), The New
Mexico Lobo, The Colonial Newt (Uarpnr College,
N.Y.), The Spectrum (State University of New
York), The Statesman (Stony Brook), The Antioca
Record. The Post (Ohio), The Daily Pennsylvania:!,
Cavalier Dully (Virginia), University ef Washington
Dally, The Dally Cardinal (Wisconsin).
accorded a status comparable to professors In mora
rigorous disciplines. And due to the high degrea
of autonomy of the ROTC program, colleges and
universities have little direct control over the hir
ing, firing or promotion of these ROTC Instruc
tors. But objections such as these spring primarily
from the form rather than the underlying substance
of ROTC. On a substantive level. It is difficult
to avoid the blunt assertion that training soldiers
whose ultimate aim Is to kill Is totally hostile
to the principles of academia.
It was the simplistic "my country right or
wrong" patriotism of the First World War which
spawned the original ROTC program. But one of
the clearest lessons of the Vietnam tragedy is
that such unquestioning support of government
policy is not only morally bankrupt, but counter
to the long-rannge Interests of the nation as well
as the campus.
In order to reassert the sanctity of academia
ai a n orally and educationally autonomous institu
tion, it is necessary to end the universities' rola
as the unquestioning servant of government and
military. The abolition of ROTC a a sanctioned
course offering would be a major step in this
direction.
V i"
. .i .