OCR Text |
Show Letters to the Editor Anti-War DeaT Editor, From the beginning of human hu-man history, mankind has always al-ways turned to war as a solution solu-tion toward ultimate peace, and from those same beginnings, begin-nings, war has led to more war with small intermittant periods of peace used to prepare pre-pare for the next conflict. In our own history, the Revolutionary Rev-olutionary War brought our independence in-dependence so that we could become a great power and wage our own conflicts for freedom. The Civil War, of course, solved all of the basic social conflicts between the North and the South, and World War I was the "War to end all wars." World War II and the Korean War were merely "residual conflicts" to maintain freedom. Weren't thev? quit babbling about the ideals like "the brotherhood of man," the dignity of the individual, and men as "Children of God" and face the fact that man is a reasoning animal who uses his reason for the development of more sophisticated devices of self-destruction unlike other animals who rely wholly upon instinct to achieve the same end. But why fight for freedom in this "piece-meal" fashion of sending masses of individuals to fight other masses of individuals. indi-viduals. Let us attain "total freedom" by exchanging nuclear nucle-ar weapons in a world-wide holocaust. If war is the' answer to freedom, why accept a "limited "lim-ited freedom?" Better to have "total freedom" through "total destruction." If WAR, FAMINE, PESTILENCE, AND DEATH are equated with freedom, then your logic far transcends mine. If this solution is insane, why don't you suggest another, based on an assumption other than "war is a means to peace." Bill King to all others as to require the most attention." It appears that the "Chronicle" "Chron-icle" has reached a state of decline. For the past few days we have had articles from the Collegiate Press Service by Ed Schwartz. These articles have been good, yet it seems they are space fillers used out of desperation rather than actual choice. If the "Chrony" is so desperate for news, perhaps they'd like their readers to refer them to articles they can print. They might try reports from the weekly newspaper, "The National Observer." Anything Any-thing would be better than Margaret Larson's trite article "IBM Cards and Greasers" (Dec. 1, 1965). Is the "Chrony" now to be a fraternity-sorority society newspaper? Worse yet though is the resort to printing "Apathy S p o 1 1 i g h t." The "Chrony" is showing its apathy too by reveling in such common com-mon knowledge news. Likewise they are reflecting that their readers are of low mentality. They expect "words of wisdom" wis-dom" to just drop in at the office. They shouldn't expect much when they insult readers' read-ers' intelligence. Reporters, remember re-member your journalistic training train-ing (if any) "SEEK AND YOU SHALL FIND." Perhaps if an effort is made, our newspaper news-paper content might be worth reading. As it is now attacks on Jim Moss who's already showed us where he stands junior conservative and Zane Miskin and Michael McKain political group opponents are revealing to the "Chrony's" small focus on campus life and activities. Does everything revolve re-volve around these people? I would think not. Surely there must be a larger student body on campus but maybe you're not aware of it. The "Chrony" invites readers read-ers to write columns subject to certain word length. Yet they give unlimited column space to staff members occasionally occa-sionally on political issues an example being Zane Miskin's articles written prior to Thanksgiving vacation. What has happened to other reporters? report-ers? Is the "Chrony" under the management or mismanagement misman-agement of a female subject to whims and vengeances? Do we have a "Chrony" dictator or a "Chrony" speaking out staff? If the "Chrony" is having difficulty filling space, they could run a page of advertisements. advertise-ments. I'm sure it would benefit bene-fit students as much as some of the "Chrony's" recent articles. arti-cles. Let's have the "Chrony" care too about representation of views. Don't fall into the apathy you so often criticize, "Chrony" staff. Long may the "Chrony" live but not in its present state! Sheila Hackett It's A Girl Dear Editor: Very seldom a day goes by that I don't read the "Chronicle". "Chron-icle". Some days I enjoy it and other days I can't believe it's real. You have set the pots of indignation aboiling many times by what you say and how you say it. I know I'm not the only one whose anger you have kindled, for I have talked to many and know how they feel. I want to say I'm VERY SORRY no one has applied for the position of Apathy Chairman. Chair-man. However, it does seem the "Chrony" is being quite childish. child-ish. Like a girl, she thinks if she has a temper tantrum, she will get her father's attention and obtain the goal she's set out to accomplish. You can't blame her, for all children act that way. But like understanding understand-ing parents, the student body knows that she will come to the realization that such acts as sarcasm and biting attacks don't arouse noticeable attention. atten-tion. I myself will be glad to see the day the "Chronicle" grows up. Kurt Mons - j . Now we have the Viet Nam confliction, another incident in which we are called upon to defend freedom. We are supposed sup-posed to endure this war for a period of "twenty-five years" (Gen. Westmoreland) with unlimited un-limited numbers of human beings be-ings on both sides dying because be-cause neither can see that war is at most disastrous and at least ineffectual as a means to peace. All of the draft-card burning, burn-ing, Viet-Cong flag peddling, self- incinerating, and the myriad of other ineffectual methods of demonstrating are but the outcrys of people who, consciously or unconsciously, are begging for leadership that will work from the basic assumption as-sumption that freedom is achieved only in peace, and cooperation. co-operation. The saddest commentary com-mentary concerns those mothers, moth-ers, wives, and children that have all sought an explanation as to why their sons, husbands, and fathers had to "die for freedom" century after century. cen-tury. What sort of freedom are we talking about? Are these "fatherless children" being brought up so that they too can have the opportunity to crawl in the "mud of freedom" and die in the "grave of patriotism?" Above all, let those who support sup-port wars for freedom, be over there fighting. Demonstrators are often called "traitors and cowards" by psuedo-patriots, and no doubt that some are deserving of that appellation, but c o u n t e r-demonstrators, who advocate war without considering con-sidering other possibilities, should be our bulwark of bravery brav-ery by volunteering their services serv-ices so urgently needed. Let those who advocate "our policies" poli-cies" support their "oral bravery" brav-ery" with action by fighting side by side with those worthy men who see the annanities of human conflict. Calling another man a coward is a neat blind for covering ones own brand of cowardice. Oh! You say that the other side is the aggressor. True, and if aggression can only be met with aggression, then let us 'Chrony' Apathy Dear Editor, I would like to refer you to the "Newsweek" magazine of Nov. 29, 1965. Louis M. Lyons says, "Some publishers' reaction reac-tion to criticism is at times particularly paranoiac. It has restrained all but the hardiest souls from criticism . . . Yet the newspaper is critic of everything else ... It is a paradox that it should be least capable of taking what it daily dishes out. It is the least criticized criti-cized institution in our society, and so strategic in its relation |