University of Virginia Library

Colloquium

Some Alternatives To The Strike

By Jac Sperling

—Ed.)

On this Wednesday and
Thursday the Student Body will
have an opportunity to vote on the
following issue, which will be a part
of the ballot for the regular Student
Council elections:

"Do you favor a non-violent,
non-coercive moratorium on May 3,
4, and 5 to protest the war in
Indochina?"

The importance of the outcome
of this ballot should be apparent,
and therefore it is imperative that
each voter at least familiarize
himself with the issue, and with the
potential results and stakes involved
before he marks his ballot.

First the issue involved is not
opposition to the war in Vietnam,
and Indochina. Regardless of how
those on both political extremes
would like to link opposition to the
war with support for the strike,
they are separate issues, and should
not be confused. The issue involved
with the strike vote is simply one of
means, of how best to accomplish
the immediate withdrawal of
American men and materiel, or
rather how best to make the
Administration aware of the critical
necessity to do so.

The question is "Will a strike
accomplish this?" The answer is no.
The political issues involved this
spring are not the same as those of
last May. There have fortunately
been no catastrophic happenings to
trigger the threshold of American
society such as Kent State. The war
appears to grind on, and the
American electorate is growing
more and more displeased with its
continuance. The goal is no longer
to influence the ends of our policy
in Indochina, as it is becoming
apparent that eventual withdrawal
is agreed upon by all. The objective
is how best to convince the
electorate and the administration
that immediate withdrawal is
desirable, and necessary for the
health of this nation.

A strike at this time of
increasing polarization might well
be antithetical to these ends, and
therefore it is likely that many of
the students voting "No" on he
referendum will not be war
advocates, but rather individuals
who strongly oppose the war, who
do not believe that a strike will
have a positive effect on
accomplishing these ends, and who
are aware of the stakes that may be
exacted from the future of this
University if a strike should come
about.

First, the effectiveness of a
strike is highly dubious, as was seen
last May. War policy was not
altered as a result. Had it been
effective, the reaction to the
Cambodian invasion of last May
would have served to keep the
Laotian invasion from ever coming
about. It did not. Mr. Nixon is a
politician, and in that profession
you must have a keen sense of
timing.

Everyone has stated that the
withdrawal date is as good as
established publicly: November
1972. This date is critical for the
President's campaign for reelection
if he chooses to run. Nothing less is
at stake in speeding up the
withdrawal than Mr. Nixon's
political survival, and we have seen
that he is a master at surviving
against incredible odds.

A strike will not change war
policy, because it does not reach
the decision-makers in what is
recognized as a legitimate channel
of influence. I will not argue the
wisdom of such social constraints.
Rather I just present it as a fact
that we all recognize. Some cry
"repression," others "Fascism."
These people are full-blown
rhetoricians with little concern for
resolving the problems at hand. The
problem is to convince those in
power that immediate withdrawal is
desirable. And those in power are
to some degree sensitive to their
constituency. A strike does not
attempt to influence this electorate,
rather it almost seems to
antagonize.

At a time when the institutions
of higher education are competing
fiercely for a larger slice of the total
appropriation for education, at a
time when Marshall Hahn at VPI
can maintain "law and order," and
at a time when the University has
experienced the trauma of a
previous strike, it is only logical
that the result of a strike this spring
will mean that the University will
have to pay the price in losing a
greater proportion of funds to
Hahn's VPI.

Certainly, this is not fairness,
nor justice, but you can be quite
sure that regardless of the past
successes that President Shannon
has enjoyed in procuring funds for
the University and in keeping his
job, that he will encounter almost
insurmountable obstacles in
Richmond, if we do have a strike. It
is impossible to maintain a public
institution of academic excellence
with no cooperation from the
legislature. And that is exactly what
we are faced with in considering a
strike, at this time.

I urge students to consider the
issue of the strike separately from
the war issue, to ponder the
potential effects of such an action,
and to above all remember to costs
to this university that a strike might
incur. If students are sincerely
interested in changing war policy,
they must appeal to the electorate
by canvassing, open forums,
lobbying, etc.

Student frustration with the War
might dictate a vote in favor of the
strike. My realization of the issue
involved, of its improbable efficacy,
and my hopes for the future of this
university lead me to a personal
decision on how I will vote on the
Strike I hope that each student will
at least consider these issues and
the potential alternatives in the
context that I have presented
before making a decision.