University of Virginia Library

Mike Capobianco

— Ed.

The Honor System is supposedly based upon
a general student "consensus of honor" here at
the University. But, as it turns out, the students
are preselected to fit the present format of the
system — there is a section in the application
form where a student must agree to support the
system or he will not even be considered for
admission. Further, although the code claims to
represent the students, in my two and one-half
years as a student here I can not remember
being asked even once if I want it — only if I
will obey its, tenets. All candidates rant about
how they are going to make the code more
responsive to student opinion. My candidacy is
the purpose of discovering this opinion on
the most obvious level: whether the students
want an Honor System or not. In order to
answer this basic question, I am attempting to
turn this election into a referendum. If you
support the system and want to see it

continued, vote for any of the other six
candidates — their platforms are virtually
identical. If you oppose the system, this is your
first and perhaps only chance to make that
opposition known by voting for me.

I am opposed to the Honor System. The
reasons for my opposition are many.

First of all, the code fails to take into
account the actual extent of its penalties. If I
were to be thrown out of the university now, I
would not be able to get back into any school
until June at the earliest. My draft no, is 66,
and the Selective Service Board for my area,
being as tenacious as it is, would undoubtedly
get me before then. I would be inducted, go
through the absolute torture of basic training
for six weeks or more, then undoubtedly
brainwashed and sent to Viet Nam.
Immediately after that, I would probably be
found dead, a piece of shrapnel embedded in
my groin. The offense — lying: the penalty — death.

If the penalties were reduced, it would be
tantamount to abolishing the system anyway.
Lesser penalties would do little good, and
would indeed provoke contempt among the
student body. A system such as this is prevalent
throughout the U.S., examples being found at
VPI, NVCC, and Madison.

Second, if real learning were taking place at
the University, then cheating would be a crime.
However, since the University is rapidly
changing into a draft sanctuary only, and the
educational process is practically nil, cheating is
not only justified, but is actually a rational
response to a useless system.

Third, stealing should and can only be
prosecuted under law.

Fourth, the system is selectively enforced.
The average student will no longer turn
someone in, especially for a minor violation.
Only when there is an annul cretin around do
such violations get reported.

Honor is a personal code, and can not be
classified into such limited categories as lying,
cheating, and stealing. The only true code of
honor is that which is dictated by the Golden
Rule: "Do unto others as you would have them
do unto you." Of course, this code cannot be
formalized into a set of rules that are easy to
follow.

If the only arguments that can be mustered
in favor of the system have to do with being
able to cash checks and take un proctored
exams, I will at least work to have the name
changed to the Convenience System.

I, therefore, pledge to vote "not guilty" in
all honor trials.