University of Virginia Library

Colloquium

West Point: Judge Ye Not, M

By CHARLES BAYAR

There is much to be said for
Mr. Stephen Wells' article on
the Pelosi affair ("Silence At
the Point,"CD, 20 June 1973,
p.4). The facts of the case as he
presents them are substantially
correct. Imposition of the
Silence" against Pelosi after
dismissal of the charges against
him was a violation of due
process in both its legal and
moral senses.

The harassment suffered by
Pelosi and the flagrant
command influence in his
Honor Board hearing are
deplorable and, as a West Point
graduate, I feel that changes
should be made at the
Academy so that similar abuses
do not happen again. I do not,
however, agree with Mr. Wells'
insinuations regarding the West
Point Honor Code itself, nor
do I appreciate the general
tone of his article.

First, a note of
clarification: Graded classroom
exams at the Academy are
handled in such a manner that
each cadet is allotted precisely
the same amount of time to
work. It is felt that a cadet
who purposely ignores the
instructor's order to 'cease
work' takes unfair advantage of
his fellow cadets and, in
essence, cheats.

The guilt or innocence of
Mr. Pelosi aside, such action is
indeed a clear-cut honor
violation at West Point, and
each cadet is made aware of
this before he ever enters a
classroom.

Mr. Wells says that the West
Point Honor Code is
"nit-picking," designed for and
interpreted by "rigid robots",
and "would appear to have not
room for human imprecision or
misjudgment and thus should
be abolished." As one who
lives and has lived under both,
I would agree that West Point's
Honor Code is much stricter
than UVa's. When I first
enrolled here I felt that the
UVA Honor System was too
lax. I could not, for example,
envision a viable honor code
which, for practical purposes,
sheds itself from the individual
once he leaves the immediate
vicinity of the University: The
West Point Honor Code applies
everywhere and at all times.

I now appreciate the fact
that UVA is a civilian
university and West Point is a
military academy, and
differences of this nature in
their honor codes are to be
expected. They are designed
for different environments,
have different goals and reflect
different ethical philosophies. I
would not dismiss one system
or the other as 'wrong', and I
would most certainly not insult
another school and its
graduates by suggesting that
they abolish their own honor
code. Mr. Wells apparently
thinks that he is qualified to do
so.

As for "human imprecision
and misjudgment" (which I
take to mean human error),
unintentional or inadvertent
acts are never considered honor
violations at West Point or, to
my knowledge, anywhere else.
In one sense, both West Point
and UVA leave not room for
"human imprecision and
misjudgment"; there are no
mitigating circumstances or
rationalization for violations of
the honor system, and there is
but one penalty.

Perhaps Mr. Wells was
trying to say that the West
Point Code makes excessive
demands of those who live by
it, yet can he truly evaluate
these demands as excessive for
anyone other than himself?
Again, he has no right to
criticize the standards of
honorable conduct at West
Point on the basis of his own
experiences at UVA.

Mr. Wells would
done better to
deep-seated antip
military men and inst
bit less obvious, for
his article's implicit
rational analysis and g
appearance of
propaganda. His glib
to cadets as "rigid ro
"mindless machines"
he overlooked "aut
automatons" or
golems") are totally
for.

It may well be t
individualistic men d
to attend West Po
authoritarian pe
adjust more easily t
discipline; these, at
questions wich op
people can profitable

To Mr. Wells, on
hand, I will merely
man who enters W
with intelligence