University of Virginia Library

Setting An Example

There are a number of critics of the
current coalition movement who assert, in
spite of the attendance at its rallies and of the
whole-hearted endorsement and support, both
official and unofficial, it has received from so
many quarters, that the whole thing should be
taken "with a grain of salt" because it is not
in any way representative of the consensus of
opinion within the University, either among
the students or the faculty. To these critics it
is just "so much raving" by a few individuals
who have no constituencies or backing; or, as
the Richmond News-Leader put it, its
spokesmen are just "soap box
orators . . . mouthing the same old left-wing
nonsense — a mishmash of obsessive racial
demands identical to those obscenely shouted
by student anarchists from Berkeley to
Columbia."

Because such critics exist, and because
there is no certain way to prove or disprove
their charges, those who have the power to
respond to various proposals are provided
with an easy "way out" of action. A given
state administrator, for example, naturally
hesitates to react favorably to a given proposal
when people are whispering in his ear that
everyone except the individuals who offered
the proposal opposes it; he is in a much better
position to take immediate significant action
if he can be certain, regardless of what the
critics suggest, that a large majority support
the proposals. We suspect that much of the
hesitation the administration of the University
has displayed concerning the current movement
springs from skepticism of this sort
about the support for the movement, and, we
assert, unjustifiably so.

We are increasingly convinced that the
consensus of opinion at the University, both
among faculty and students, is one of general
sympathy with the ultimate goals of the
movement or with the principles which
underlie it. Many of its critics, for example,
are firmly committed to similar or identical
goals, but disapprove of its "radical"
methods. We are well aware, of course, that
there are a certain number of persons within
the community who are active, hard-core
racists, and that they are joined, in effect, by
a more passive group who find security in the
status quo. But we are certain that these
people are a small minority.

This week's drive for funds to finance a
transitional program of some sort for this
summer will be something of a test of that
allegation. Its planners hope (in addition to
raising the necessary funds) to demonstrate
beyond reasonable doubt that support for
their project is too widespread for the
administration to ignore it. If they are to
succeed, however, they must raise thousands
of dollars, which will obviously require
substantial participation by all those who
support the endeavor.

We encourage everyone to contribute as
much as he can, either by participating in
today's fast or by outright contribution if he
is too hungry, and by supporting the events of
this weekend which will benefit the project.
We encourage the University Union to turn
over as much of the proceeds of those events
as it possibly can. We encourage student
organizations to make whatever contributions
they can. We encourage individuals who give
through them to give again as individuals.

This is a mammoth undertaking; it will
benefit underprivileged students of all races
who might not otherwise be able to secure a
college education; through them it will benefit
the University and every member of its
community. The University has hesitated to
initiate it, doubtless for some of the reasons
suggested above, so we must eliminate those
reasons. If the students and faculty which
comprise the University can produce the
required funds, or even a substantial portion
of them, the official University cannot ignore
their efforts. If we can prove that there is
widespread support for the goals of the
coalition movement, the administration can
hesitate no longer. Too much is at stake to
allow this effort to fail.