University of Virginia Library

Letters To The Editor

'A No-Win War'

"Empty barrels make the most
noise." How true it is when one
observes the Moratorium people,
especially certain pseudo-progressive
faculty members, and of course
the really big "barrels" wheeled
into our community from the
outside. Thus, it was very heartening
to see the reasonable views
expressed in The Cavalier Daily by
Professors Claude and Battestin,
and also by President Shannon.

The trouble with this "Moratorium
carnival" is not the purpose,
but the people running it. They are
completely out of touch with the
feelings of the American people.
The Ordinary Joe wants an end to
the war not because of the
nonsensical reason that it is immoral,
but simply because it is a
NO-WIN war. It was made a
NO-WIN war by the very Washington
liberals who first sent American
boys into Vietnam and forbade
them to bring about a united
(North and South) non-communist
Vietnam. Every time a strong
regime shaped up in Saigon, there
was pressure to make it more
"democratic." The Vietnam morass
is the liberals' own creation.

If the Moratorium people are
really honest about this thing, let
them send a letter to Hanoi (not
only to Washington) demanding
(not begging) an end to the war.
You know, it is really high time
Ho's boys made at least one
concession. Who knows, maybe the
man in Hanoi who reads such a
letter will be sane, and the Moratorium
people will after all be
credited with stopping a war rather
than dividing a country.

Vote

As a fourth-year man I have
witnessed for three years the annual
cries for administrative reform
and increased student power in
university affairs.

Amid these cries for power we,
of the Judiciary Committee, have
worked diligently to create a
constitution, not restricted by a
sometimes antiquated administration,
but worthy of responsible
student management. A constitution
which, moreover, could be
very important in the months ahead
if student protest reaches its possible
excesses.

Therefore, help us avoid another
defunct election because of useless
student apathy. We've worked hard
to prepare a good constitution — it
doesn't take much to pick up a
ballot and check yes or no — maybe
10 seconds — it could be more
important than you think.

Miss Scott

I was most amused at Friday's
Cavalier Daily article concerning
Virginia Scott...

According to Miss Scott, "An
honor System is superfluous because
honor is something an individual
should determine for himself.
A system should not be imposed on
him." Perhaps the general term
"honor" is rather vague. I suppose
that it could mean different things
to different people. However, the
underlying principle of this university's
honor system is not vague. In
a word it is integrity. Integrity is
the promise that a man's (or a
woman's) word is his bond — it is
unquestionable. A man of integrity
can be relied upon by his peers to
be honest and dependable. This is
one aspect of the University's
atmosphere that is unique from
many other universities. The spirit
of integrity makes this university a
much more enjoyable institution.
The development of integrity in an
individual is a very vital part of the
maturing process. Where else could
such a concept be more appropriately
found than in a great
educational institution.

Miss Scott also takes potshots at
the coat and tie tradition. She
makes the comment, "I don't see
that dress is especially relevant to
what's happening in your head."
She is quite right. In fact, I rarely
wear a coat and tie myself.
However, I am not quite sure of her
reasons for saying this. The argument
could be made that the
wearing of "more comfortable
clothes — bells and loose shirt" is
also not particularly relevant to
what's happening in your head. My
point is that grubbiness for the sake
of comfort should not be a
substitute for neatness. Appearance
is important because it reflects a
person's self-evaluation of himself.
Bad appearances create bad impressions
on outsiders and thus reflect
on the entire university community...

In our efforts to change the old
into something better, we should
not be so indiscriminate that we
destroy the fine qualities along with
the bad. Surely such rashness will
lead to the establishment of ills just
as unacceptable as those which we
reject.