page 4 daily nebraskan tuesday, September 22, 1981
SDDDDQtfflDteDSlL
Lofty rhetoric launclies Massen
gale
The formal installation Sunday of Martin Mass
engale as the UNL chancellor was a time for
proud rhetoric and lofty goals about the future of
this campus.
But despite the idealism concerning how high
UNL should try to climb on the ladder of
academic success, there is little indication that
any drastic changes are in the making.
Massengale has pledged to be more visible in his
job and we applaud his efforts to make himself
and his office more accessible for all concerned.
As vice chancellor for the Institute for Agri
culture and Natural Resources, Massengale has
thorough knowledge of the structure of the uni
versity. That structure is often the subject of many dis
cussions on who has the most power at UNL.
While it is obvious that the NU Board of
Regents are the university's governing body,
much of regental power is never seen. Too often
groups on campus, be it the ASUN Senate or the
chancellor's office, probably have to formulate
their policy decisions based on how the regents
will react to a proposal.
While it may be practical to take into account
how the regents will react to proposals, it isn't
fair to let the fear of their displeasure influence
the decision-making process.
All organizations should have the freedom to
make policy recommendations based on the great
est benefit for their group. However, the political
jockeying that goes into much of the decision
making process at UNL keeps the university from
growing to its potential.
The rift between the NU Central Administra
tion and faculty members is largely a dispute
about salaries. Many professors think paper
shuffling administrators are overpaid in
comparison to those who teach.
Both groups face budget restraints but faculty
members have long been told to cut back and
lower costs more often than any other sector of
the academic community.
And when faculty members aren't being told to
lower costs, the student body is being told to pay
more for tuition, laboratory fees and other ser
vices.
The
business of higher education is costly.
'' ' SL " " - S
(MD nsbraskan Dte?s to f lie editor
Editorials do not necessarily express the opinions of the Daily
Nebraskan's publishers, the NU Board of Regents, the University
of Nebraska and its employees or the student body.
UPSP 144-080
Editor: Tom Prentiss; Managing editor: Kathy Stokebrand;
News editor: Steve Miller; Associate news editors: Dan Epp, Kim
Hachiya, Alice Hrnicek; Night news editor: Martha Murdock;
Assistant night news editor: Kate Kopischke; Entertainment
editor: Pat Clark; Sports editor: Larry Sparks; Art director: Dave
Luebke; Photography chief: Mark Billingsley.
Copy editors: Linnea Fredrickson, Patti Gallagher, Bill Graf,
Melanie Gray, Deb Horton, Betsy Miller, Janice Pigaga. Phyllis
Schroeder, Reid Warren, Tricia Waters.
Business manager: Anne Shank-Vol k; Production manager:
Kitty Policky; Advertising manager: Art K. Small; Assistant adver
tising manager: Jerry Scott.
Publications Board chairperson: Margy McCleery, 472-2454.
Professional adviser: Don Walton, 473-7301.
The Daily Nebraskan is published by the UNL Publications
Board Monday through Friday during the fall and spring semest
ers, except during vacation.
Address: Daily Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 14th and R
streets, Lincoln, Neb., 68588. Telephone: 472-2588.
All material in the Daily Nebraskan is covered by copyright.
Second class postage paid at Lincoln, Neb, 68510.
" Annual subscription $20, semester subscription: $11.
Suicide headline disliked
I must protest the misleading headline on page 9 of the
Sept. 21 Daily Nebraskan. It would be understandable if
you were trying to sell your papers in supermarkets, but
that is not your job.
It is one thing to say "the typical female suicide is a
housewife" (although that can be misleading as well) but
it is quite another to say that the "typical housewife is
suicidal." The latter is simply false and not even the psy
chologist being reported on asserted it to be true.
T.J. Christlieb, graduate student
philosophy
Massengale is correct in emphasizing efficiency as
a criteria for his leadership.
The more efficient a university is, the better it
will be able to hold down spiraling costs.
Massengale predicted that Nebraskans will con
tinue to support the university provided standards
are not lessened and the impetus is always on
progress.
Most of the speeches at Sunday's ceremonies
were full of the pomp and circumstance that befit
the occasion. But despite the rhetoric, Massen
gale's challenges lie ahead.
Helping to maintain a university the state can
continue to be proud of in spite of cutbacks in
federal and state support is just one of the battles
that faces any university chancellor.
But we wish Massengale luck in his endeavor
because the university and the state have too
much to lose if the skeptical support of higher
education in Nebraska is allowed to continue.
Some Americans
oppose S. Africa
The ethnic diversity of the American people some
times presents problems when it comes to deciding
what stand "Americans" should take on certain world
issues.
' Take, for instance", the recent invasion of Angola by
South African troops. If we are to adopt the stance ta
ken by unbiased (ha!) American reporters, then we
should applaud Prime Minister Botha for his brave at
tempts to halt the spread of the "tumor of Commu
nism." We are told that we should stand behind Botha and
his attacks on the "guerrillas" of the South West Africa
People's Organization, who represent a threat to our
South African "allies.."
o
o
However, those of us who may not be particularly
fond of South Africa's racial segregation policies may
not see the situation in the same light.
Despite careful conditioning by the American news
media to make us all snarl with fury at the thought of
Communist expansion, the idea of South Africa's all
white military using its tactics of murder and suppre
sion to maintain white supremacy in a predominately
black country is a little more frightening. What's even
more frightening is VS. support of such a country, in
spite of its 20 percent black population.
Support of SWAPO by Communist countries repre
sents a threat to not only South African capitalism but
also to the South African apartheid.
However, what SWAPO is really fighting for, libera
tion of black people and control of black wealth, is
hardly mentioned.
It's interesting how those lighting tor American eco
nomic interests abroad are fighting for "freedom"
while those struggling to break the chains of American
supported oppression are "terrorists" or "guerrillas"
who must be destroyed.
It's difficult for some people to figure o-it exactly
who is the villian here, as the South African raid is
heavily criticized by countries across the world. How
ever the United States maintains, according to a Sep
tember issue of Time magazine, that "the South Afri
can action must be understood in its full context of
the struggle against SWAPO."
Those who take sides against the South African
government and its attempts to crush SWAPO are la
bled "Communists." But, how can any thinking per
son possibly justify supporting such a government and
its attempts to not only maintain present racial poli
cies, but to spread its influence to the rest of the con
tinent? J ust who is the "enemy"?
Who maintains the South African apartheid? Not
the communists. Who maintains military control over
black South African people? Not the communists. Who
supports an economic system which is designed to keep
blacks economically poor and powerless? Not the
communists.
South Africa's attack on SWAPO and its bases in
Angola has brought about contradictory reactions as to
where U.S support should lie. Perhaps many claim the
U.S. should stick by its "ally" arfd support its attempts
to crush the SWAPO "guerillas."
Perhaps the difference of opinion lies in just which
Americans benefit from U.S. alliances with the
south Af rican apartheid.
!
i