Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (April 23, 1938)
Side Show j tTHiif'fKiiUHliiUMUiHiiHimniimHiWP'HMMUWiHi’HftnfUiM'iHiirHinKd to in iiHiiiinii!:iiiiuiii:iHimiHIUrt«ii»iini*IH»»iiiiiiii»»H»n«iiiiHimiiMimi Edited by . . . PAUL I>EUTSCHMANN, There will be no repetition of the 1933 famine ir. Russia, even < if Stalin has to sacrifice pro ' gross in the regimentation, of , farmers. A recent “sharp” order from 1 the Soviet chief, demanding k that purging of collective farm \ workers be cut to a minimum, indicates that grain for 175, 000,000 Russians will be sup J; plied and communistic princi ples sacrificed. ■ A great deal of history stands * behind the announcement which appeared in the papers Wed-.,, nesday. Back in 1905 the usual ly peaceful subjects tot the ‘ “Little Father” came to him with a request for {letter treat | ment. Cossack troops fired upon the gathering and out .of ' the melee a first class revolt ' developed—known in' books as “Bloody Sunday/’ 1 /The uprising was quelled and «* reform measures were initial i ed into the decadent Russian • \ autocracy. Taking a lesson : from France, a liberal minister," V Stolypin. began a program of ■ v creating a large body of land * 1 ed peasantry—the firmest bul ’)■ wquk against revolution a gov » l eminent can construct. -A Unfortunately for the czarist > government, Stolypin was as y Bussinated in 1911 and his pro t. gram was neglected. So, came i the revolution in 1919. Unfor Innately for the Soviet regime, y mtso, the work started by Stoly > pin was considerably advanced. > * * * <* Thus the communist govern ment has been continually ] plagued with the problem of \ the peasantry—a group newly \ net up as property owners, gen ,1 orally conservative, and sus j picious of change or improve l ment. In the early years of * the Red experiment peasants ( were left alone. But in 1928, . < at the beginning of the first * five year plan, an extensive I campaign to expand collectives ' was begun. .7 (For students who do not take Professor Murder's class ‘ in Modern Europe, Russian col j | lecthe farms are formed by the f , pooling of private holdings, in j, eluding land, tools, and live i ■" ntock. The one !argv farm is , then worked oommunallv bv [ i • the entire group, administration ( is taken care of by an elected \ t hoard, the state purchases the [ , output, and the profits are dl l' . vided.) J ! ! ♦ * i Results of the “voluntary" collectivization were disastrous. A.t the outset the “kulaks” (moderately wealthy farmers) were forcibly liquidated after an uprising. Peasants forced into the collectives slaughtered their livestock rather than turn it over to the communal farm. The resulting shortage has not been overcome. ^Production slumped terrifi cally, with many farmers grow ing only enough produce for their own use. In 1931 Stalin was forced to relax the drive for collectivization, but too much harm had been done, and when drought struck in 1932. a famine resulted starving between three and seven mil lion Russians. * * * From 1933 to the present great strides have been made l*> the Soviet regime with the rtgriculture problem. Collecti vization has gene ahead until utmost all farmers now work (rteas* turn tj page s<rztn) t i i i » » t i Associate realtors; xraui w^uisumiaua, Editorial Board: Darrel Ellis. Bill Peace . Margaret Ray, Edwin Robbins, A1 Dickhart. Kenneth Kirtley, Bernardine Bowman, Elbert Hawkins. Sports Editor Bill Pengra, City-Editor Lew Evans, Assistant Managing Editor UPPER NEWS STAFF Martha Stewart, Women’s Editor Don Kennedy, Radio Editor Rita Wright, Society Editor Alyce Rogers, Exchi. ige Editor Betty Jane Thompson, chorch editor John Biggs, Chief Night Editor The Oregon Daily Emerald, official student publication ol the excej t Sundays, Mondays, holidays and final examination periods, Oregon. j__ university or uregon, uoiv '*'***“® -s,; Entered as second-class mail matter at the postffice, Eugene* No Half-Hearted Support Wanted ‘HIS year's strike against war has been set, nationally, for April 27 and on that day pacifists on the campus will demonstrate. Although the ‘'call'’ has been issued just as before, the annual affair is to be on a different basis both nationally and locally. Developments in the attitude of national groups towards the strike justify a strong doubt that there is really much worth in the movement. Some of the staunchest supporters of the previous strikes have this year declined to participate. Last year several of these organizations paraded enthusiastically and denounced any war, emphatically expressed their allegiance to the Oxford pledge, agreed that the strike was merely a rehearsal for the protest which would result from efforts to involve the United States in combat. nrins year many of those groups will not participate because of a newly-formed policy—cooperation for defense. Undoubtedly there has been some pressure brought to bear to influence them in the intervening period but at no time lias America approached actual war conditions. But if groups are turned from their pledged allegiance to “peace at any price” so easily, the value of their pledges must be severely discounted and the strike has lost considerable of its importance, both as a factor in forming public opinion and as a potential source of opposition, to a war involv ing the United States. In other ways, too, this “rehearsal” is to be different from those, of former years. Some organizations have favored the abandonment of the Oxford pledge. The executive commit tee of the American Student Union recently voted to drop the pledge and has circulated letters to members attempting to justify the action. So much resentment was aroused that the committee has asked for a referendum on its action. Other backers of the strike have taken similar stands, some on the Oxford pledge, some on other features of the program for the demonstration which, in former years, was nationally approved and suggested. As a result, this year only the call was issued nationally. Each campus is free to formulate its own program. ■RECENTLY there appeared in the “In the Mail” column a letter from Charles Pad dock, graduate of last year and once active in‘backing the strike. Mr. Paddock appealed for participation of sincere strikers only. In the belief (which he implied) that many stu dents who had little idea of the real purpose of the strike joined in the demonstration, Mr. Paddock is entirely justified. This attitude is a sound one. Organizations abandoning the strike have, in a sense, vio lated a pledge. Judged on the tenuousness of their allegiance, the strike seems hardly worthwhile. Perhaps individual participation can be more sincere, however. It can be only as effective as the participants are firm in their belief in that which it advocates. *= * * rp'IIE national strike against war could be an important factor in determining the policy of the United States. No democratic government would declare war if a large por tion of its population had sincerely demon strated that it would not support that war— not, at least, without thinking twice. Potentially, then, the strike has possi bilities. They have not been increased by half-hearted and false participation, however. The movement has been weakened, rather, by this lack of understanding on the part of demonstrators. Many people join the parade because they believe they firmly want peace. But all want peace or at least profess to. Those who conceived the strike did so to make it possible for persons willing to passively resist any effort to breach world peace to express their intention of doing so. April 27 is dedicated to those people. It is not planned for clowns, fools, ridiculers, or vague-minded pacifists. Mr. Paddock’s ap peal for sincere strikers only is entirely justi fied. This demonstration is being advertised on its true basis—as a strike against war. Whether one agrees with the manner in which the backers of the strike would achieve their ends, the ends desired are more than ever clearly defined and are worthy. The right of those who truly believe in the strike’s ends and methods should be observed. There should be no doubters among the demonstrators. In the Mail SOC AGAIN To the EditQr: The person who took a crack at the newly formed socol ogy honorary seemed to know how to insult a lot of people in a hurry, but his purpose in do ing this seems to be obscure because the evident result was destructive rather than con structive. If the people who started the organization are sensitive they will give up the ghost and let the group disin tegrate, if they are sensible they will take note of the aims and objectives of the organiza tions as well as the needs that might be fulfilled by such a group and proceed as they seem to have already done. I believe that the aims and objectives of the organization justify such a group. There should be an honorary to pro vide social contact among those who are interested in sociology. The contact among individuals or "social interaction” is of in .1 i . > J . 4 ' * 1 . ) l : finitely greater benefit than the formation of a group of the "se lect few, who gather together to hear a paper read.’’ I would not care to belong to this “se lect few” but would rather be long to a group in which I could attain status and pres tige by doing things or engag ing in activities. - The major objective seems to be “to bring students interest ed in the field together by means of social activities.” What is wrong with that? Another point that should be considered by the organization is the student-faculty contact. Few students have an oppor tunity to avail themselves of the contact with the brilliant minds in the sociology depart ment. It seems that Sam Jame son would get behind such a movement. So far I have not yet seen any practical applica tion of sociology except from either Parsons or Karl On thank. The rest of the sociol t JO ! 1 1 1 I > i C i J : ( ogists talk about it. The first step to be taken in criticizing the organization, is not by unintelligent, destruc tive, fault-finding methods, but by a consideration: first of the value of an organization and second of the probable success of such an organization in ful filling these needs. The first consideration “is there a fundamental need?” I feel that there is a real need. I have yet to find anyone with whom I could discuss the prac tical application of sociological principles to everyday life. The society might provide that contact that would enable me to discuss and crystalize my own ideas, as well as to enrich the understanding of others, during the remaining month I will be in school. The second consideration, so bitterly attacked by the per son with the initials is that of personnel. In the names men tioned in the Emerald stories I 1 ' r J '. ( ? i MYSTERY HISTORY iniiiiiiuiiiniiiimiimiiiiiimmiiiiiiiiummmiiiimimiiiuimmiinnnminiin By GLENN HASSELROOTH “Dawn in Lyonesse” by Mary Ellen Chase. If you have ever gone to sleep and had a beautiful dream, only to find yourself sudden ly awakened, you know how hard it rs to come back to real ity. You are hurt to find youi' new world blotted out so quick ly. But after your eyes have become accustomed to the brightness, and your nerves are •no longer on edge, you remem ber your dream and cherish it. Because of that memory, your life is more complete. So It was with Ellen Pascoe, the hotel waitress of Cornwall, who almost lost her dream when the world of reality came crashing down on her. Ellen, at 33, had built her life around Derek Tregonny, a hardy, middle-aged seaman who fished off the bleak and rocky coast of Cornwall, the land which centuries before was called Lyonesse. It was there that Tristram loved and lost the fair Iseult. From a book (that Ellen had been forbidden to touch) in the lobby of i the hotel, and a kind guest whose table she served,' Ellen learned about the legend, and was touched by its beauty. Alone she sought out the wa terfall which concealed the cav ern where Iseult once met her lover. Finding a new contentment in the silence of the forest, El len was happier than she had ever been before. To tell Der ek, the unknowing, would give her the peace which she had never expected to find. * * * In the harsh awakening that comes, and the hours after ward, Miss Chase handles the characters of Ellen and her friend Susan with delicacy and human understanding. By the pen of some of the more exple tive writers the ending might have been drawn out and word ily explained. Miss Chase tells just enough. The length of a novelette, “Dawn in Lyonesse” will pro vide those with imagination with a pleasant hour; those who do not dream may find some thing they have never before experienced. W. L. White’s “What People Said,” has been called every thing from a “social docu ment” to “‘Middletowit in Transition’ in the form of a novel” since its publication last week. Some say that it strikes so close to home in the exposi tion of the many everyday real ities which have never been told quite so clearly before that it is embarrassing to read. Perhaps it will serve a part in removing a little of the hy pocrisy from the lives of us Americans. see some proven leadership. The organization will need leader ship, and it may have to find that leadership outside the so ciology school since the sociol ogists do not seem to be con cerned with the practical ap plication. In ending let me say that al though I will get my degree in sociology this term, I know very few sociology students, al though I know hundreds out side, so the sociology depart - (Please turn to page sewn) f ' 1 ' t I 1 * ' i 1 V »! i 1