Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (May 26, 1977)
"iuU HAVE 10 meH A UTILE LOUDER 10THIS BUNCH.'' Letters Not a quitter Response to Geary’s Appeal Take Two: So my approach has been ab rasive? Would any of you out there be abrasive if the Emerald misrepresented your position that your major efforts would be in the area of saving the whales and stopping the arms race? What if you were totally misquoted to the effect that you would “personally champion state legalization of pot and lowering the drinking age”? I support these issues, but realistically admit they would not consume much of my time as ASUO President. Would it make you abrasive to be placed last on the ballot (at statistically proven detriment) by a secret process? Would being told you had no right to due process under the ASUO Constitution, when you know bet ter, make you mad and abrasive? Would being told on Friday you could be a write-in candidate and many person hours and $56 later told it was not allowed make you mad? All these instances and more make me abrasive. I am not a quitter and I refuse to be stonewalled by editors, presi dents, vice presidents or apathy. I know my rights as an American; these people do not grant them to me. Wednesday’s editorial sug gests it was the 1,000 people who voted against me in the primary who cost me the election. By this same tortured and questionable logic 1,052 people voted against Feldman in the primary and a whopping 1,236 voted against him im the general election. This is clearly 336 more than voted for him. What is this about requiring a majority to elect? Also it must be pointed out that Perfor ers not criticized Self determination for the African people in Southern Africa. Theirs is a struggle against the white settler who imposes apartheid, concen trates millions into segregated areas, and demands passbooks for blacks to travel anywhere in the country. It is a struggle against night mares of repressive laws, near-starvation level wages, brutal working conditions, high unemployment, forced separation of families, and mis erable medical care. It is with this background that I wanted to make it clear that my letter which appeared in the Emerald April 27 did not in any way condemn the South African Black ‘77 production as a mouthpiece of the South African government. Furthermore, I wrote the letter as a result of a series of situations which I considered unfair over a period of two years in dealing with the Cultural Forum. This clarification is in response to Ken Dovey (ODE May 6) and the Cultural Forum (ODE May 10) as to their interpre tation and reactions to my letter. I have consistently supported and sponsored South African speak ers, films and symposiums on campus for those who are not aware of it, and as my principles dictate to me, I do not intend to turn around and condemn any constructive and educational activities in this direction. I do not think people would be so blind to see any logic in such contradic tory action anyway. South African blacks are super-exploited, the most wretched of the earth. The South African government is the most racist organization on earth, propped up by major firms and corporations of the developed nations. These corporations aid and abet apartheid. Their motive is to make huge profits from the labor of the African people. My criticism was directed at the motives of the Cultural Forum, not the performers themselves. Was there a profit made from the Black ‘77 production, and if so, was that profit going to aid blacks in South Africa or to subject them more? It is high time people begin to question issues like this in their entirety and not take words out of context to cover the truths. My apology to those who might have been misled by my choice of words (English being one of six languages I am familiar with). I know what discrimination, exploitation, and outright racism are, and I am aware of people who smile in your face and stab you in the back. I will not betray my conscience by condemning the Black 77 production. I belong to a group of concerned people who held a reception for the performers before and after their show. Why should I do this if I am against them? I am glad the Cultural Forum saw the need to expose the abject cruelties, the discrimination and the racism in Southern Africa. Thanks for your good work — I only hope your activities, past and future, are on a moral basis and not necessarily motivated by econom ics. Nelson Owusu Senior-Political Science 47 out of these 50 United States allow write-ins in their general elections. Response, Mr. Wasson? Craig W. Geary Senior — Political Science/History Self-interested few The real question at the core of the tuition issue is, who shall pay the costs of a college education? Should it be the clerk in Florence, the mill worker in Springfield, the banker in Portland and all of the other taxpayers of Oregon? Is there any equitable reason why these people should subsidize the liberal education of others? Those students who have been seeking an even greater subsidy have tried to ignore these basic ques tions. Instead they have tried to obscure the issue with “rev olutionary” rhetoric. “No tuition hike, no cutbacks,” they demand. Rather than directly asking Oregon taxpayers to fi nance these objectives they add, “No new taxes on working peo ple.” From where, then, shall the money come? Non-working peo ple? But even if there is some great source of income some where in this state that could and should be expropriated by the State government, why does it necessarily have to go to benefit college students? Why not use these newly discovered funds to reduce the taxes on the “working people?" These highly subsidized "rev olutionaries” are seeking to force the taxpayers, through the coer cive powers of the state, to pay them an even greater subsidy. It is a simple case of a self-interested few seeking benefits from others. Those who must pay are the tax payers of Oregon, either through a tax increase or the elimination of a possibility for tax reduction. Once again "revolutionary” rhetoric is used to disguise the ex ploitation of others. Russell Daggatt Senior-Accounting Pretentious whining Pity Craig Geary, the poorest loser to hit this campus since Gene Bartow. He just can’t accept the fact that some candidates lose elections, both primaries and runoffs. While I believe Geary is entitled to a full hearing on the legality of his write-in campaign, the game is still ultimately played by the rules in the ASUO Constitution. If he wants to change the constitution, that can be done; however, it would not alter the outcome of an election if that election was legal when it was held. I don't know Replace housing officials With the Amazon rent strike now in its third week, it should be clear that there is a communications chasm between the Housing Office and the people it exists to serve. And the remarks of Mr. Thorpe (Director of Married Student Housing) on page one of last Friday's Emerald (May 20) make it equally clear that there is a corresponding lack of communi cation between the Housing Office and the upper echelons of university administration. By announcing his intention to blunder through "one or a hundred evictions of striking tenants, Mr. Thorpe has not only put himself at cross-purposes to the restrained and open-minded investigation being conducted by Vice-President Hawk — who has promised that no evic tions will be forthcoming until the investigation is complete; in addition, he has offered public proof that the Housing Office is, in fact, what it has long seemed: an irresponsible, self-serving, autonomous institution. No doubt Mr. Hawk’s investigation will produce some means to alter that — particularly since he must have been embarassed by Mr Thorpe’s public threats at the very time he was attempting to reassure Amazon tenants that their expressed concerns were not falling on deaf ears. But we must all realize by now that the only sure way to change the character of the Housing Office is to replace the characters who run it. Clearly, John Thorpe should be one of the first to go. His attempt to bulldoze striking tenants into submission reflects one of two standard tactics he uses to deal with resident concerns; and it has been neces sary for him to use it now because the strike has forced him to abandon his preferred response to the challenges and responsibilities of his job: that is, no response at all. Ample evidence has been assembled by Amazon Community Tenants (ACT) to show beyond a doubt that Mr Thorpe is a do-nothing administrator whose tenured inactivity has been borne and supported too long by residents of Married Student Housing. But Mr. Thorpe is not alone; he does, after all, take orders and policy from H.P. Barnhart, who is ultimately responsible — or rather, irresponsible — for the management of Married Student Housing and must approve, presumably after a careful review of costs and services, any increase in rents presented for adoption by the State Board. As Director of University Housing, it appears that Mr. Barnhart has not so much shirked this responsibility as he has misused it to cover up gross mismanagement by his subordinates and to pass the bill for his and their joint negligence back to residents who must not only endure it but pay for it as well. Perhaps Mr. Barnhart, along with Mr. Thorpe, should be given an opportunity to learn responsibility at a level or in an area of the administration where their actions and inaction cannot adversely affect the lives of so many people. As for Sally Smith, whose saccharine performance as Assistant Director of Married Student Housing has been calculated to make the mismanagement of directors Thorpe and Barnhart palatable to its vic tims, let's hope that Vice-President Hawk's investigation reveals her for what she is: harmless in small doses but in her present capacity the agent of a cancer that has blocked the very channels of communication she was hired to keep open. John Eldridge Graduate — English about the martyred 601 who are supposed to be so alienated be cause Geary got the shaft by the establishment, but I for one am tired of this ex-candidate s ful some and pretentious whining Kris Banvard Junior-Journalism Save yourself The continuing furor aroused by the May 11 ODE editorial, “Save the whales — later,” brings to my mind a matter of even greater im portance. First, let me say that every one of us should try to conserve and to protect our natural resources, whether energy, whale or Alvord Chubb. Not to do so is an abroga tion of our responsibility as “caretakers” of this planet. But, believing that God has or dained a higher calling for all men and women, I must ask with Jesus Christ, “What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world (or saves the whales), yet forfeits his soul?” Perhaps there are some in volved in environmental efforts to save one or more of our natural resources who have not yet ac cepted God's plan for salvation. The apostle James said to “get rid of all moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent, and humbly ac cept the word planted in you, which can save you.” Another apostle describes in the first chap ter of the gospel of John, in the New Testament, who the "word” is. He is Jesus Christ If you con fess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord of all, and believe with your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. God knows our hearts, whether they are good or evil. His desire is that we will all be saved from evil, just as it is many students' and others desire that the whales be saved. Bombarded as we are with the many complicated questions of our time, God s purpose for men and women is often forgotten Do not fail to attempt to save dying species or to conserve failing re sources; but remember that in Gods eye, without Christ, man also is dying, spiritually (John 3:16-18). Paul Barnum Graduate-Journalism Nature catches up When I read Dave Tyler's opin ion last Friday, I was reminded of a quote by contemporary poet James Wright: "In my youth I used to be able to listen patiently enough to liars, cowards, and other ignorant, mentally-retarded sons of bitches. But Nature catches up with all at last, and I am unfortunately get ting too old to listen. I would prob ably go to sleep right in your face. Or on your face, if I had the strength left.” Walter Pavlich Senior—English
