No Double Talk
TNE has been caught. Its existence at Oregon has been
proved. The evidence, with a list of members, is in the hands
of the director of student affairs.
Now, what action should be taken?
TNE must be killed; it must be exterminated. The adminis
tration must show that it will not tolerate TNE, or any secret
organization like it.
A similar situation occurred in 1936. At that time the stu
dents in TNE were asked to cooperate in exterminating the
organization, promised to discourage organization of and par
ticipation in such an organization.
Three years later TNE had been formed on the campus
again.
There will always be a group of stupid, ignorant, immature
fools who want to band together in a secret organization and
control “things” so they can become campus cogs. These “stu
dents” fail to realize the true situation, and get swept away by
“big boys” in the back room.
What can be done to eliminate this situation and protect the
fools from TNE, and the students from the TNE fools?
The best thing that can be done is for students to fight TNE,
to pay no attention to its orders and dictates, to judge situa
tions individually rather than as told to judge them by TNE.
But this is sometimes difficult, particularly when TNE remains
concealed and hidden.
But the administration of the University can take definite
action. The plan used in 1936 was not effective. Because as
soon as the TNE group had been graduated the affair was for
gotten. This time the administration must remember TNE,
and realize that there is always the possibilty of it being form
ed as long as there are scheming men and fools to follow.
If the University does not wish to expel the TNE mem
bers ; if the fraternities do not wish to expel the TNE members
from fraternity membership; then action less drastic but
equally as effective must be taken.
These TNE members must:
Be prohibited from holding ASUO offices.
Be prohibited from holding any elective or appointive stu
dent offices at the University.
Actively discourage oragnization of or participation in TNE
or any similar organization.
Pledge not to join TNE while a member of the University
family.
In addition the University administration must make
thorough investigations every year or so to see that no such or
ganization as TNE is being formed. And the University must
go on record as disapproving of TNE to the extent that in the
future any student of the University found to be a member of
TNE be peremptorily expelled from the University. This must
be made clear. Clear enough so that any student who hears the
word TNE will automatically think of expulsion; clear enough
so no student will be able to think that membership in TNE is
not dangerous, or that the University will not expel him if his
membership is discovered.
The University’s policy toward TNE, and any organization
similar to it in nature, must be explicit, definite, and strong.
This is no time for wishy-washy statements full of double
talk.
Oft the Baf
Throw the Old Thing Out
JleMeAA.
Dear John and Betty Q.
Student,
Once upon a time, in fact
way back in the year 1946, a
group of hard-working stu
dents got together in a meet
ing known as the Executive
Council and drew up an im
proved Constitution. This
Constitution was to replace
the one passed in 1943.
The proposed 1946 Consti
tution was placed before the
students in a special election
The mass and majority voted
(YES), but not the 50% of
the student body that was
needed to enact a new Con
stitution. So the Executive
Council decided they would
have it voted on again during
the Spring Term ASUO elec
tion.
bprmg came to the Univer
sity of Oregon campus, boy
politicians gnashed their
teeth at one another, the stu
dents went to the polls and
they voted. Again the pro
posed Constitution was over
whelmingly approved, but
not enough students took the
trouble to vote and therefore
it was not legal.
Now three years have pas
sed and a new crop of inter
ested students now appears
upon the scene. Ah! theirs is
a sad state of affairs, for they
see, all too readily that this
1943 constitution is not rep
resentative enough, it does
not include enough students,
it is outdated.
Now’ these students, like
the students in 1946, sat down
and bent their pens to the ef
fort of proposing a new con
stitution. They placed this
constitution up for a vote of
the students in a special elec
tion—guess what ? History re
peats itself. 48 per cent of
the students voted, with a tre
mendous presentage voting
FOR the new constitution.
Tears began to fill Art John
*74# GutemaU
Red Shoes and Blue Music
^ Qe&Ufe Sfxelou*
There are three shows in
town which sound pretty
good — “The Red Shoes,”
"The Reformer and the Red
head,” and “Young Man
With a Horn.”
To relax those jangled
nerves after last week’s po
litical campaign and today's
election, the “Reformer”
might fill the bill. However,
it’s a comedy about politics
and the triumph of the forces
of light and right over local
politicos who control things
from smoke-filled backrooms.
So far many Oregon students
this theme might spoil the fun
because of the proximity of
the memories aroused.
But don’t feel too sad if
you count this one out—June
Allyson and Dick Powell
don’t do much of anything ex
cept hang around as back
ground for David Wayne’s
comedy. There are some high
spots, but mostly mediocre
spots in the “Reformer.”
“The Red Shoes” is back
at the Mac at popular prices.
Those of you who missed it
before will want to see it now;
and those who didn’t want to
see it before will probably
still not want to see it.
The film is good—good
ballet, good music, good tech
nicolor, good drama. It is
noted mostly for the ballet
(lancing of Moira Shearer,
who portrays a girl who must
decide between a dancing ca
reer and love. The story takes
on the play-within-a-play
technique when Miss Shearer
dances the ballet of the red
shoes.
Another film that sounds
good is “Young Man With a
Horn,” at the Rex. This one I
haven't seen, but reviewers
have treated it kindly in most
respects. Doris Day’s songs,
and Kirk Douglas’ acting,
seem to be the things that
make it rate, in addition to an
unusual story. Lauren Ba
call is around also to tie
things up.
son’s office, you see 4S per
cent was just 2 percent short
of making it legal. The Exe
cutive Council, because it felt
that not enough students had
been given time to acquaint
themselves with the new con
stitution, extended the voting
days.The constitution passed,
and a procession that began
at Fenton Hall ended up at
Emerald Hall. Nine days
later the extension of the vot
ing days, after the election
had begun, was declared il
legal ; the constitution was
tossed out the window.
History has again repeated
itself. The Executive Coun
cil has decided that if the stu
dents want the new constitu
tion, that they shall have an
other chance to vote on the is
sue May 22, May 23, and May
24.
Now, here we are on elec
tion clay 1950. Interested stu
dents have been trying to pre
sent an improved constituti
tion to us for quite some
time. Student government
isn’t just the job of your room
mate or the kid across the
hall; student government is
everyone’s job.
If the proposed constitu
tion isn’t passed this time, it
means that voters are going to
elect student body officers to
a job governed by an out
dated, inflexible, and vague
constitution.
ALL the candidates approve
and URGE the students to
vote for the new constitution.
—I don’t blame them, no one
wants to work under the old
one.
W. D. Kirkpatrick.
The Thursday Night Affair
Thursday’s “ruckus” was a disgusting display of student im
maturity that resulted in poor publicity for the University.
One good arose from the disturbance—the administration
of the University became acutely aware of the TNE problem.
But it was a high and unnecessary cost to pay for the abolition
of TNE. [
The attitude of the citizens of Eugene and the city depart
ments towards the students and University was hardly im
proved by the Thursday night affair. If the city shows reluc
tance to cooperate with the University in future instances
when plans are made for legitimate street demonstrations, the
city can hardly be blamed.
The blame for the ruckus would be hard to place—it cannot
be placed at the hands of any one or two or three individuals.
It was rather a case of mob psychology over-running indi
vidual reason.
The credit for bringing the disturbance to an end can be
given to Donald DuShane: The action of the students was di
riceted mainly aaginst the police (who didn’t really care who
gets elected student body president.) The police and fire de
partments were naturally reluctant to leave a mob of students
which might possibly turn to the destruction of private prop- i
erty. Mr. DuShane, despite water-bagging and heckling from
students, expressed his faith in the students and asked the po
lice to leave. After the police left, the students dispersed.
It took more than the usual amount of courage for Mr. Du
Shane to appear in the midst of the student mob. The embarass
ment he suffered must have been great. The embarassment the
students felt the next day was also great.
But blame and credit are not the most important things to
be considered. The fact remains, that rioting is not necessary,
and is not indulged in by alert, mature, and intelligent persons
Lil' Ole Constitution
Don’t forget the Constitution.
It’s come through the campaign unscathed. It has incited no
riots. It has retained its reputation. It has been accused of ho
unsavory affiliations.
In fact, it has caused hardly any excitement or stir at all. And
it has not been withdrawn from the ballot.
The Constitution has remained firm, stable, and dignified
throughout the entire campaign. It has the support not only
of both AGS and USA, but also of non-partisans.
Of course, the Constitution has the advantage of having re
cently weathered one campaign and election; so today’s, Tues
day’s, and Wednesday's vote upon it will be old stuff.
The Constitution is one thing you can vote upon today from
a completely objective point of view.