Letters
Please attend
Tuesday, May 2, the ASUO
sponsored an open forum for
Eugene City Council candidates.
We consequently cancelled- ap
pearances throughout the after
noon, when it became obvious
that nobody was going to come.
I apologize to the candidates I
also wonder what’s happening
when so few are interested in im
portant races that will affect their
city government.
We will continue to sponsor
forums; we will try to publicize
them better, too. But please! Be
responsible citizens and find out
what is going on!
Tuesday, May 9, EWEB candi
dates will appear in an open forum
in the EMU from noon to 2:00 p.m.
Please come.
Kelt Osborn
ASUO Vice-President for
State & University Affairs
Here and now
Little more than a week ago, on
April 20, the Jewish Student Union
and the Campus Christian Minis
try sponsored a very fruitful dis
cussion of the NBC film series,
“Holocaust.” Near the end of the
session, a woman asked what ac
tion we in Eugene, in 1978, could
take to prevent such an outrage as
the holocaust from occurring
again.
The answer to this question —
if, indeed, there is an appropriate
answer — escapes me. The ques
f
tion did provoke, however, the fol
lowing thought: We in Eugene, in
1978. are being asked to consider
a proposal to refuse to homosex
uals guarantees against discrimi
nation in housing and employ
ment which ought to belong to
every American citizen as a civil
right. The proposal does not call
for a disabling' act, of the kind
which kept Jews and other religi
ous minorities out of public office
and out of certain professions in
many areas of Europe in centuries
past. But the proposal is evidence
of an exdusionist mentality that
has led, in the past, to disabling
acts and, in some instances, to
holocausts.
In partial and belated reaction to
the woman s question in the ses
sion on the "Holocaust,” I suggest
taking a firm stand against repeal
of the phrase of the city ordinance
guaranteeing non-discrimination
on the basis of sexual preference.
George Sheridan
Assistant Professor of History
Petty facts
I have to take a moment (more
time would be excessive) to thank
Jock Hatfield for his thoughtful
discourse on learning (Emerald
4/21). It is simply amazing that a
barbarian such as Jock can ex
press himself as eloquently in
Chinese as he does in English. It
is a tribute to his warm typewriter
and whatever other mental ap
paratus simmering in his subter
-Letters—
ranean vault. His perceptions re
mind me of a like-minded scholar
of the sixteenth century, Claude
Duret, who came to the conclu
sion that Chinese was a language
which belonged in the category of
“the unarticulated voices of ani
mals and birds." One can only la
ment the fact M. Duret cannot ex
perience Jock's language, but one
can guess that he would have
placed it in the category of that
braying animal noted for the tail
about its jawbone.
In spite of all the good Jock has
done for Chinese language teach
ing in recent days, this may be a
suitably obscure time and place to
announce (for the first time) that
the name of the language depart
ment he has so libelously referred
to is being changed from the De
partment of Chinese and
Japanese to the Department of
East Asian Languages. The
change will formally go into effect
this fall.
As an admirer, I can only hope
Jock never does get hung up over
petty matters of fact. I want him to
remain just as he is — hunched
over a warmed-over typewriter far
from those chilly cerebral climes
some folk call classrooms, chant
ing his Chinese text to the drip of
the water clock — for the next
thirty years.
Mike Fish
Assistant Professor
East Asian Languages
The Emerald will accept and try
to print all letters and opinion col
umns containing fair comment on
ideas and topics of concern or in
terest to the University commun
ity. Letters and opinions must be
typewritten, using 65-character
-Letters
margins, and should be triple
spaced. Letters and opinions
must be signed, with the author’s
year and field of study (or faculty
status) noted. Letters and opin
ions will be run on a first-come
first-served basis.
____opinion-.—
Misleading myth
Submitted by Greg Wasson
1976-77 Emerald Editor
Last Friday was the day of the second Great Debate. State Sen.
Victor Atiyeh, Rep. Roger Martin and former Gov. Tom McCall gathered
to face students and answer questions important to the higher educa
tion community.
The format of the "debate” allowed neither follow-up questions nor
questions from the audience of the three major contenders for the GOP
gubernatorial nomination. But it did allow McCall to make use of myths
surrounding his tenure in that office.
Atiyeh started it v^ien he used a question about higher education
funding to laud the Legislature's actions during the years of student
unrest. When he finished McCall reminded the audience he’d been
governor during that time. A check of budget totals shows Atiyeh was
right: the Legislature did not use unrest of the late 60 s as an excuse to
take financial swipes at higher education.
But a review of Legislative records and the 1969 Emerald, the
University’s student paper, show the Legislature and Gov. McCall were
not the students’ friends.
The 1969 Legislature passed and McCall signed into law a bill
allowing the Governor to declare martial law on campuses facing "an
emergency." The measure, HB 1880, required students and faculty to
show identification before entenng campus during an emergency. It
subjected unauthorized people refusing to leave to a possible $500 fine
and a year in the county jail.
At first, supporters of the bill tried to railroad it through the Legisla
ture spurred by unconfirmed reports of a SDS conference supposedly
scheduled for Oregon State University. Regular rules were suspended
and the House passed the bill in two days. Opposition, though , delayed
Senate action and final approval for about a month.
That same year. McCall responded to "obscene materials" pub
lished at the University in a letter to acting University Pres. Charles
Johnson. McCall demanded that “this kind of depraved mischief be
stopped.” University machines, he wrote, were not to be used to print
obscenities. The day after the letter was sent. McCall made it public in
Salem.
The letter, and its public release, occured at a time when the
Emerald specifically and students in general were under public attack
for the use of obscene words and graphics in their publications.
Chancellor Roy Lieuallen objected to McCall’s handling of the affair
saying McCall should not have made the letter public.
ASUO Pres. Dick Jones charged that McCall’s letter fueled public
concern that the philosophy of students and faculty members at the
University was represented by the SDS. He said the SDS was "only one
of the many student organizations on this campus. ”
McCall was accused of further political capitalization of the student
movement. He flew over the University in a helicopter during this time
earning himself a satirical award from the Emerald. The flight aggra
vated statewide concerns that the University was a "hippie" school to be
watched and feared.
Nineteen-sixty-nine was almost ten years ago and people change
Throwing the Vortex rock festival in 1971 to avoid violence at the
American Legion Convention in Portland was a novel approach for a
governor to take.
But, Tom McCall should not be returned to the governor’s office
because of myths surrounding his tenure there. And the idea that he
responded to student unrest differently is one of those myths.
—1 ' ' " 1 . np»n»in-, m !
ASUO elections: problems, apathy plague them
Submitted by Robin Patrice Geer
Senior, Graphic Design
I openly question the ASUO election system. I sin
cerely wonder if this is a direct tie-line between the apathy
felt toward the student governmental system by 90 per
cent of the population and the “parlor games” election
procedures that turn out a grand total of 10 percent
(maybe).
It disturbs me because I am, and have been for the
past 12 months, an active member of the ‘ system” on
several levels. And now at this election time it is being
dearly projected to me just how hazy the ASUO is.
Concerned as the ASUO is about getting students to
vote, it would appear contradictory that it would give such
a concern to a hastily thrown together cloister called the
“Elections Board”. It seems befitting that they would
make the same error twice in the same year. Last fall art
students were able to vote for SUAB # 10 which repres
ents only architecture. Being the SUAB #11 which rep
resents only art I pointed this error out to them. This spring
when the open positions were announced, my former
position was stated to represent art and architecture. The
positions have not changed Apparently neither has the
elections board or its problems.
The rationale in releasing the ASUO Voter’s Guide
on election day is quite questionable. It may remind peo
ple that it is voting day, but it also holds back the platforms
Paap 1
of all the candidates. Then, and only then, do we even
begin to grasp what all the commotion in the Emerald is
about and are able to start attaching ideas to the ads and
flyers.
If we consider how much time people have to con
sider candidates, and the amount of media as well, to
elections on other levels of government, can we in the
ASUO really be surprised that the turn-out is small. And
since most candidates direct their efforts toward the
“popular”, it is highly doubtful that the unpopular sector
feel they have enough input to warrent directing their
efforts to the voting booths.
And it is a bloody good way to keep the issues am
biguous. The Emerald made a notable effort to cover the
candidates. Still, the issues involved are cloudy. I think
most people feel ill at ease to vote for a candidate who has
platform concepts that suddenly appear out of nowhere.
Abolish the Bicycle Patrol?!
Apathy breeds in an environment where needs are
not being met and are possibly being ignored. I may be
running around with the wrong crowd but the needs I feel
people need are more on the level of SURVIVAL. While
the ASUO does make the university a better place, sev
eral candidates would appear to direct their efforts back to
the ASUO on the assumption that because it exists, there
fore it is right.
Before high-handed dreams, reality. Boyd wants to
change the registration system, how do these candidates
view it? Library storage? South Africa? Faculty Course
Evaluations are a hot item but what sounds peachy in
theory may be the pits in reality. New students and fresh
men probably know very little about what has been done
to date. Shouldn’t they, and the rest of us, b« permitted to
know what it is we are voting about? Some of the new
ideas aren't so new.
Individually released course evaluations have al
ready been investigated. As an administrator for "The
Guide’’ I feel that the sheer amount of manpower, paper
work, and cost to work within the course structure in this
campus is, at best, a so-so idea.
If we aren't meeting the students concerns why
should they be concerned about the ASUO. The current
Drake/Donald debate indicates that our “image” is get
ting more input from students than most ASUO issues.
The ambiguity of elections is forerunner to the prob
lem. It also keeps the system safe. We must cease with
the audacity that the apathy is entirely due to THEM. And
admit that it is much easier to do as one pleases if no one
knows what it was you were intending to do in the first
place.