University of Virginia Library

Letters To The Editor

No Right To Impose
Politics On Students

Yesterday a petition supporting
the proposed moratorium of October
15 was circulated in our
department. The first three paragraphs
of the statement expressed
dissatisfaction with the policies and
questionable morality behind this
country's military involvement in
Vietnam. As a private citizen, I
would gladly have endorsed this
part of the statement, for I share
with those who drafted it the view
that our present commitment in
Vietnam is both futile and deplorable.

The final paragraph, however,
was addressed to me not as a
private citizen but as a member of
the faculty of the University, and
would specifically have enlisted my
support of the plan to turn class
time into time for discussing and
protesting the war. I did not sign
the petition because it seems to me
there is an issue at stake here at
least as important (and as sacred) as
the cause the petition was designed
to support: I refer to the principle
that universities, as institutions
dedicated to the open and dispassionate
pursuit of learning and the
advancement of knowledge, must,
ideally and officially, be kept free
of private or political bias. On
October 15 I think it entirely
proper for a student to have the
option to attend class or not, as his
political and moral beliefs may
direct him. As a member of the
faculty, however, if I had a class
scheduled on that date, I would feel
obliged to meet it for by not
meeting it, it is clear to me that I
would be imposing and in a very
impressive and dramatic way my
personal and political beliefs on my
students.

I do not regard myself, at least
professionally, as a politician or a
crypto-evangelist. I believe that the
meaning and effectiveness of this or
any other university are in jeopardy
when such distinctions are no
longer made.

Professor Claude's letter in Wednesday's
Cavalier Daily raised the
question of the role of
the university. He apparently sees
the politicization of the university
as the supreme bete noire to the
future of academic freedom. While
my own thinking on this point is
still in the "fuzzy" stages, I very
much support the Moratorium and
the cancellation of classes on
October 15. I do so even though I
am tempted to agree with Professor
Claude's point of view.

My quasi-syllogistic reasoning
has evolved because I think the
magnitude of the issue makes for an
exception. Since the war is the
cankerous sore threatening to destroy
the fabric of our very society,
it has become something more than
a political issue. The severity of the
war; impact on this country is so
great as to cause the issue to take
on dimensions of universality,
transcending, but not divorcing
itself from, the label of "political
issue." Consequently, I believe the
nature of the issue dictates a
turning away from the ostrich
approach in this particular case.

I make my point fully aware of
its major weakness, i.e., that by
making a subjective determination
of what is or is not an issue of
"such great magnitude," I open a
Pandora's Box. However, I think a
consensus exists that the war and
racism are the two issues which
today are at the heart of America's
emerging polarization. As such,
these issues deserve cathartic treatment,
even by the universities. In
weighing the dangers, I find the
danger pointed out by Professor
Claude, at least in this particular
instance, to be less dangerous than
making an "exception" for an issue
of "great magnitude."

Crafty Richard

I am in agreement with Robert
Behage's letter which appeared
Thursday, September 25. At that
time Mr. Behage asked the editors
of The Cavalier Daily to "show the
respect due to the title of 'President'
" by not referring to Richard
Nixon as "Tricky Dick." This seems
only fair. Do you not think that
"Crafty Richard" might be a more
appropriate title for a man in his
position?

C.D. Racism

I agree with the obvious editorial
discretion displayed in Tuesday's
Cavalier Daily concerning the
beating of a University man and
subsequent rape of his date. The
use of "negro" in this case and in
most cases is needless and usually
inflammatory.

But, alas, as I read further, I
found a glaring inconsistency with
this noteworthy policy. Concerning
the beating and robbery of two
hitch-hiking students, the assailants
are referred to as "rednecks."
"Redneck" is a generic term usually
applied to rural, southern Caucasians.
Gentlemen, who are the real
racists at the University? Evidently
The Cavalier Daily has a racist-in-residence.