Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Jan. 8, 1957)
Oregon Daily The Oregon Daily Emerald is published five da> ' a week dur ing the school year, except during examinations aml^ vacation periods, by the Student Publications Board of the I’niversity of Oregon. Entered second class matter at the post office, Eugene, Ore. Subscription: $5 per school year, $2 j»er term. Opinions expressed on the editorial page are those of The Emerald and do not pretend to represent the opinion of the ASl'O or the University. ln*igned editorials are written bv the editor ; initialed editorials by meml»ers of the editorial board. K1L.L, N.MNn AKlilU, E.OUOr ‘ MARCIA MAUN KY, Editorial l’age Editor CHUCK MITCHKI.MOKE, Managing Editor KEN N I KHANS, Adv. Mgr. SALLY JO GREIG, SAM VAHEY. Associate Editors CORNELIA KOGLE. Nrws Editor JACK WILSON. Sports Editor DOROTHY BARKER, Ass’t Adv. Mgr, CHARM ION FORD, Office Man.grr EDITORIAL BOARD: Hill Mainwaring, Marcia Maunev, Sally Jo Greig, Sam Yahey, Chuck Mitchcimore, Cornelia Fogle, Jack Wilson. A1 Johnson Chief Make xip Editor: Al Johnson Ass't News Editot Cay Mundorff, Joan Dennis. Nancy Castle. Pepi>er Allen. Feature Editor: l*hi1 Hager Photo h.ditor: Brant uucfy Nat’l Adv. Mgr. : Jo Anne MilliKan l Unified Adv. Mgr.: Arlene Krauss Women’s Editor l>on>thy West i ircuumon .'ijjr. : mih \ .mrv A*M. Sport* Lditon: Jerry Ramify. Jim Larimore Kxrcutivf Secretary l*at Hollrv What Did You Get Last Term? Grades are out - - individual grades, the honor roll, pledge grades, house grades. Some of us are happy, some are not. Few are indifferent. Some of our fall term col leagues are not with us this term. Over a hundred freshmen women with a 3.0 GPA or better will be honored soon by Mortar Hoard at a Smarty Party. Other are begrudgingly starting a term of nightly study table. W inter term is nearly a week old. Yet, “What did you get last term?" meaning, of course, nothing but your GPA, is still heard all over campus. Grades seem to mean a lot to Oregon students. To some they mean staying in school or not. Others strive for an honor roll GPA. Evidently 39 student- aspired for a 4.0 last term - - and not in vain. But what else do grades mean? Oh, maybe wasting time on a snap course or two to help vour GPA. Or maybe leaving that fasinating history book so that you can pass a midterm in another course. Or skipping a lecture or concert you had vowed you would attend. Or maybe never even taking time to develop an interest in the University's extracurricular educa tional and cultural opportunities. All be cause you must study. Granted, making grades is not the sole or even primary, in many cases, reason involved here. Poor organization of time, activities, yielding to influence from the crowd - - all play a big role. But, “Have to study. Gotta make a B in this course - - is as common a rationalization as any lor making any ot the above sacritices. But far more serious than these indivi dual sacrifices is their grand total. We're letting our concern for grades completely overshadow the primary purpose for our being here: learning. W e make grades good enough to satisfy our own conscience or University requirements and then think we're getting a college education. In our pursuit of grades we are defying the Uni versity to fulfill its function. Let’s make an effort to reverse this. Let’s start daring that GPA to keep us from taking the great course we’ve heard is such a “bear,” or from getting the best prof in the department even though we’re afraid our grades might suffer. Let's dare it to keep us from taking extra time to dig into the meat of our favorite course; from going to hear the Tuesday assemblies anil the Browsing Room lectures. We’ll be doing ourselves and our alma mater a favor. We ll be letting the Univer sity of Oregon do what it is well able to do: pass on to us a great wealth of know ledge and give us a never-ending desire to learn more. This hunger for knowledge won’t be satisfied by a favorable grade in a course or by a college diploma. It will be a healthy, humble type of curiosity, always with us. And the continual satisfy ing of this curiosity will enable us to live fuller, richer lives and more beneficially to serve each other. Only then will “What did you get last term?” connote what it should: “What did you learn?”■ (M.M.) U.S. Mid-East Hope: Peace with Honor America’s latest instrument of national policy, put forth last weekend by President Eisenhower, offers much food for thought on the latest international problem, the Middle East crisis. Ike’s policy calls for as drastic a step as the employment of United States troops in the Mideast area to halt further Russian en croachment into the area. But indicated in the policy are many other points less appar ent. To begin with, the U.S. has helped to patch the differences between itself and the traditional partners of Britain and France. Those powers were throttled in their mili tary action in Suez by pressure from Wash ington and the UN. Now we have solidified our backing of our friends; this by joining in a common cause against the obviously greater danger of the imperialistic Russian bear. Curiously, it may have been a moral obli gation for the U.S. government to step in so strongly now in the crisis. Some have suggested that the refusal of America to go along with Nasser on the Aswan dam con struction triggered the dictator’s seizure of the canal, to save face with his Arab fol lowers. At any rate, the United States policy is a significant one. It is clearly meant as a pre ventive measure, but provides a powerful “cure” for another uprising. The contempla tion of another Korea is not pleasant, but it would be hoped that strong words may hold off much stronger action. The United States has hoped to secure a temporary foothold of presige in the Middle East gained as a result of its action in calling for Anglo-French withdrawal. It must be easily seen by the Egyptians that America has no designs on the area beyond keeping the peace. Underlying the problem is perhaps the real cause of trouble in the area—the Uraeli question. The U.S. has supported Israel generally in the past but the future bears watching. Our policy-makers will undoubtedly have their hands full with the power-hungry Xasser for many years, unless a coup elimi nates him as it did the former Egyptian leader Naguib several years ago. But the policy against further aggression in the touchy Suez area-^-obviously aimed at Russia—has served to at least issue no tice to the world of the American hope— peace with honor. Words have not always done the job, but President Eisenhower has promised more than words for Mideast in truders. As all policies, the new Eisenhower Doc trine must be tested by time. Unfortunately the sound policies go largely unnoticed be cause of their quiet efficiency and lack of attention. This policy, we hope, contains such promise. (A.J.) Oops! Ill TTTIll ,!!l MllfJ f— PtP 01E AADSCLE-MOl/TH TAKE ftXL7UWX?// Interpreting the News Ike's Mid-East Proposal Only Outline for Program By JAMES MAKI-OU AP New* Analyst WASHINGTON F The Els enhower administration, fi»oe<l with the necessity uf taking Home kind of leadership in the Middle East where the Brit ish and Krench have been dis c rented, has acted dramat ically but vaguely. The President went before Congress Saturday with what has been called a program but which is really an outline for a program. And. for the most part, it was not new. Its vagueness raised ques tions which may keep the Rus sians guessing. The questions will also keep Congress and the public guessing until Kiscnhow er’s aides answer some of them. Neverthless, since action is needed at this time, and since some action seems better than drifting, Congress will probably approve some of what Eisen hower has asked. Time and events will show whether his judgment was good or bad. This country has given the Middle East economic aid. Eis enhower asked Congress to in crease it. But how it will be used he didn’t say. At this time he probably doesn't know since it isn’t clear what Middle East ern nation wants it or would ac cept it. He told Congress he wants to give Middle Eastern countries military assistance—arms—and this idea is not new although Secretary of State Dulles ha* been hemming and hawing for months about giving that area arms. He held off giving Egyptian President Nasser arms until Nasser got them from Russia. He wouldn’t sell arms to Israel but left the door open for Amer ican allies to supply the Israelis, which they did. He let tanks go to Saudi Arabia. Last Feb. 4 Dulles said this country “does not exclude the possibility of arms sales” to Israel and the Arab states “when it will preserve peace.” Arms for pro-Western countries in the area, like Turkey and Iraq, may pre-nerve peace. Hut what assurance will the Klsenhower administration want from other Middle Kastern na tions that any arms they get will be used only for defense or to prevent rebellion? Me didn't say. He naked Congress for ap pioval beforehand to use Amer ican force* In the Middle Ksst to help any ration which asked for it to atop "overt aggression" by a nation controlled by Inter national communism. Did he really need thla stand by authority because of some emergency of which the general public doesn't know? Or did he ask it simply us a psychological Jolt to the Russian* anti Middle Hast Communist*? Almost cer tainly the latter. There Is no indication, unless the administration has informa tion withheld from the public, that Ku»*l» intend* an attack anywhere. Then what “overt” aggression was Klsenhower talking about? He didn’t say. But except for the economic help intended to stabilize Middle Kastern nations, and arms to quell rebellion, he offered no plun at all for what *eem* a fur more immediate danger in the area: Take-over by the Com munists from within a country. It is when he spoke of the United Nations that the Presi dent was truly vague: He said any action he took on using armed forces would be ' sub ject to the overriding authority of the United Nations’ Security Council.1' What does Shut mean? Hard ly lhat he’ dusk the council be forehand for permission to use American forces against Com munist aggression when Russia sits on the eouneil and could veto such a request. What he probably means is that the United States would act first and talk to the Se curity Council second. But this gives the Soviets the privilege of announcing the same thing about what they would call capitalist aggression in some area. Whore does this leave the United Nations? The council is supposed to decide what is and what isn't aggression.
