Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Feb. 28, 1974)
WE SAVE OUR WORST PUNISHMENT FOR YOUR TYPE, COMRADE—WE MAKE YOU RICH AND FAMOUS EXILES!' Letters Support for boycott The Asian American Student Union (A.A.S.U.) joins the Third World Student Coalition, Mecha. and other progressive organizations in solidarity in support of the farmworkers' struggle for decent wages, working and living conditions. We are showing our support by boycotting the sale of scab lettuce and grapes on campus. The basic economic survival of the farmworkers depends on the success of the boycott against the California agrobusiness, Safeway, Gallo, Tenneco (Kern Land Company), Bank of America, and many others. Throughout California’s agricultural history, third world people have been continually exploited by the big growers, corporate monopolies and repressive labor legislation. Therefore, when the boycott is carried out on the local level as it was during the Oregon Editors’ Conference we should support and join the picketing of non-union lettuce and grapes in the EMU. in dormitories as well as in community food facilities. WE CONDEMN the University ad ministration’s singling out of two politically conscious students, Esawey Amasha and Tony Gregg from the many who protested at the editors' conference. This is clearly another attempt of the University administration to silence student opposition to social injustice. “If you believe in some kind of morality then you must believe that farmworkers have a right to live. The injustice right now is due to the imbalance of power. You can never get equality and justice without power.” Stated by Philip Vera Cruz, V.P., U.F.W.U. ONLY THROUGH a united struggle will the farmworkers fight for the right to decent wages and living conditions, and human dignity be victorious. Let us continue to put forth a united effort to end the sale of scab lettuce and grapes. Asian American Student Union Sandra Muraoka 686-4342 Later than sooner Did you know that the University buys roughly enough paper in a nine month school year to cover the entire University including Autzen Stadium one and one-half or about 1,000 square feet of paper per student per year This of course doesn’t count books or all the paper students buy, just what is needed by the University bureaucracy. 1 SUPPOSE a case can be made for the use of all this paper. After all think of all the paper pushers who would be out of jobs if the University ever made a serious attempt at reducing consumption. However, the use doesn’t bother me as much as the disposal. I would like you to consider the three following facts. (1) The University is the Viewpoint Program support asked The objective reasons for the establishment of a separate Women’s Studies Program at the University are obvious. That one-half of the population is ignored by those who claim to study human realities is an intelectual crime of the first magnitude. AS SOCIOLOGISTS, we recognize that the primary path of liberation is knowledge-of-self. As such, we realize that for women as a class to begin understanding themselves and the place of womankind in the struggle against oppression a number of in dividual consciousness-raising events must occur. To achieve this self-reflexive con frontation with reality, women must help each other to overcome lifetimes of socialization into perception of self as objects, as well as lifetimes of being told that they-we are less-than-human. SOME MAY ASK why the program might not be subsumed undo1 existing programs. The answer to this ideological nonsense is two-fold. To begin with, the existing programs have proven themselves to be so weighted down with past oppression that they are incapable of striving the problems which they have created. In addition, the advantages of a Center and Program for and by women cry out for actualization. All of this may be boring to those who come to the University for lack of anything else to do. Many of us are guilty of being “sunshine” advocates of liberation, only to turn our backs when the situation either becomes difficult or ceases to be “In.” Now is the time for all to choose sides. THOSE WHO DO not actively struggle to help our Sisters and Brothers to liberate themselves are passive hinderances to the ongoing confrontation with entrenched power and oppression. We plead with our Brothers and Sisters mi the faculty to support this program The Sociology Student Union Insurgent Caucus: Jeff Sonstein, Mary Minniti, Vicki Malcom, Teri Teamen, Wayne Washburn, Lynn Washburn Faculty Endorsement: A1 Szy manski Viewpoint The Hirons strike 'Neutrality is impossible' My viewpoint of last Wednesday has produced a number of letters crying “Free Speech” which accuse me of advocating censorship. Contrary to the almost hysterical claims of these let ters I believe in free speech and not advocating censorship. I believe that John Hirons should have the same rights as defenders of the strike at his store to the editorial pages of the Emerald. He should have every right to defend paying his workers less than $2.00 an hour and every right to explain why he refuses to grant sick pay. A great number of the paper’s readers would be most in terested in his arguments. The Emerald, as the voice of the students, should refuse no one access to its pages THE EMERALD’S advertising policy is, however, an entirely different matter. The purpose of a newspaper should not be prostitution to business. The Emerald can not escape the fact that whether or not it runs ads for Hirons it is taking a political stand. If it runs ads it is gravely hurting the strike. If it does not run ads it is helping the strikers. Neutrality here is impossible. The Emerald, if it is the voice of students, must deny to anti-union reactionaries such as John Hirons the power to defeat the legitimate aspirations of working people. Hirons is a student issue; not only are many of his employes students and many if not most of his customers connected with the University, but a great many students will eventually end up working for money hungry men like John Hirons. An unprincipled stand by the Emerald in refusing to stop running Hirons’ ads is revealing the true nature of the paper as an organ of money hustlers willing to subordinate them selves to the power of business THE EMERALD’S stand in sup porting Hirons’ position in the strike reflects the consistent anti-union and anti-working people position of the paper. A position which is clearly against the interests of most of the student body. Most University students will take working class jobs once they leave the University. Only a small minority will become John Hironses. Only a slightly larger percentage will even become successful doctors and lawyers. According to U.S. government statistics over the next decade the Universities will be producing almost twice as many graduates as there will be new job openings for college educated people. If the Emerald were to act in the interest of its constituency rather than in the interests of its anti working class advertisers, than it would give wholehearted endorsement to struggles such as that of the Hirons’ clerks and the United Farm Workers in their pursuit of decent working and living conditions. THE EMERALD should refuse to carry further advertisements from Hirons until the strike is settled and should actively support the campaign to get the University to stop using scab lettuce and grapes The Emerald is presently supporting the wrong side The “defense of free speech” and the ‘‘freedom of students to choose scab lettuce” are transparent facades for alleviating guilt while getting the monetary benefits of siding with the rich against the working people of this country A1 Szymanski is an Assistant Professor of Sociology largest contributor to the county landfill (2) About 90 per cent of what the University throws away (excluding dorm cafeterias) is recyclable paper. (3) The University has informally taken attitude that it isn’t going to use any of its resources unless forced to. It merely tolerates recycling groups rather than actively supporting them. WHAT IS THE answer? Well first the University must recognize that this is a university problem and that the only way it can be solved is through a decisive well coordinated plan of action. A plan that will require funds and the cooperation of the entire university community. The University of Oregon has a chance to be a national leader in this area. I can think of no other single project which would enhance our reputation more. My guess is that sooner or later the University will recognize the problem. My greatest fear is that French Pete, South Umpqua, and many of our beautiful forests will be logged off because the University and other paper hungry bureaucracies chose to recognize the problem later rather than sooner. Gary Prasil Finance-Grad. Business as usual? Wendell Brunner’s letter and proposal were a pleasant change, after several days of specious arguments in the name of freedom of speech and press. It’s amazing how people can start thinking a lot of nonsense when the forget the world is changing, and we’re part of it, and so is the Emerald. TAKE THE STRIKE at Hirons’. Student response is important, and for this reason, what the Emerald prints is important. Some people have tried to say the Emerald is, or should be, “neutral.” How is this possible*’ When the Emerald opens up its editorial pages for argument and discussion, it is supporting one side. When the issues are put out in the open, in variably, one side benefits. In this case, were students to understand the history of the strike and its key issues, most would support the strikers. When the Emerald opens up its pages to paid ad vertising, it is supporting one side. It supports the side with the most money or the side that benefits from not facing the issues of the dispute. In this case, it’s the owners of Hirons’. IN A CHANGING world, the Emerald surely ought to take a side—the side that benefits from open and full discussion. The Emerald, our newspaper, ought to help us decide on the basis of knowledge of the issues and not cut-rate toothpaste or Playboys or the false image of “business as usual.” It was suggested that during a bona fide labor dispute, the Emerald should open up its editorial pages to both sides, but not allow either side paid advertising. This seems to be an excellent proposal. It is similar to the policy of the State Em ployment Office which refuses to recruit for employers (or Unions) during such disputes. This if a principled, rational, workable proposal that deserves your immediate consideration. Dennis Gilbert 2278-2 Patterson Dr. x5201