Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 26, 1986)
Page 2/The Battalion/Wednesday, February 26, 1986 Government backed by popular demand Justice has prevailed in the Philippines. A dictator has been defeated. Democracy, at least for the moment, has triumphed. Fortunately the United States didn’t jump in and support the dictator just to protect its own interests. For once the United States didn’t force itself upon a sovereign nation. For once the United States did what was right and not what was self-serving. The lesson to be learned is that by doing right, the United States did serve its own best interests. Everyone involved acted rationally. President Reagan didn’t ignore the fraud and violence and support Ferdinand Marcos just because the virtual dictator was “untainted” by the threat of communist supporters. Corazon Aquino didn’t denounce the United States because of its past alliance with Marcos. Instead, the U.S. and new Philippine government both stressed calm and nonviolence and successfully waited out the storm. The two countries should be able to continue good relations. And the Reagan administration has finally demonstrated that it can support a government of the people rather than a govern ment of tradition. Now if only we only could apply that lesson in South Africa and Nicaragua. The Battalion Editorial Board Report debuts The Restaurant Report is a new weekly public service for our readers which debuts in The Battalion today. This addition to the The Battalion is not intended to be an attack on local eat ing establishments, but rather is meant to increase awareness about the conditions oflocal restaurants. The weekly story is compiled from County Public Health Department reports. These records are open to the public. We feel the purpose of a newspaper is to inform and educate its readers, even if it means a loss in advertising. We think the Report will be useful to our readers. The Battalion Editorial Board (E C0a«;NliN crjftTKWt m w Ctpmt AREA. MALFUNCTION ...It’s cold,but let's launch gtfvpfa\[... AREA OF MALFUNCTION Opinion We can’t if they’re reach for the sta in Reagan’s eyes irlioli led) vs wh ake This is the winter of Ronald Rea gan’s discontent. His instincts failed him on the Phil ippine elections. The situation in South Africa grows worse, the Sandinistas still reign in Nicaragua and not even the Richard Cohen anniversary cele bration of an Irving Berlin war in Gre nada offsets the recent tragedy in the suburbs of space. A symbol of American expertise and daring sways gently on the ocean bottom. All these situations or setbacks, to one extent or another, have been influenced by Ronald Reagan’s thinking. In the Philippines, he embraced authority even though it had been proven cor- rupt. In South.Africa, similar statements and an amoral policy have put the United States in bed with the racists. Nicaragua, squalid and a good six on the ten-point repressiveness scale, is nevertheless not the bogeyman of the president’s imagination. The same holds for the contras. They are not the Freedom Fighters of Reagan rhetoric. But of all the recent setbacks, the af termath to the Challenger tragedy illus trates where Ronald Reagan’s thinking goes wrong. Like many of us, his initial reaction was to reaffirm faith in the space program, to vow that manned missions would continue and to memo rialize the six astronauts and one civilian who were killed. They were good and necessary words that the president, as usual, delivered well. But because Reagan likes both the goals and the style of the space pro gram, because it excites his imagination, he anthropomorphized it and turned what is just another government pro gram into something out of the Oregon Trail — a heroic enterprise of pioneers. “Your dedication and professionalism has moved and impressed us for de cades,” he told NASA workers in his television address to the nation. Thes were precisely the sort of words the president would never utter to welfare workers who brave inner-city slums oi mine inspectors, up to their knees in cold water. Pioneers wear white coats and do things the president likes; bu reaucrats wear ties and jackets and do things he does not like. It is now becoming clear, though, that the men and women of NASA are bu reaucrats, too — always were, always will be. The investigation into the shuttle ex plosion reveals that even at NASA memos went astray and supervisors were not given cr itical information. The head of the shuttle program itself, Jesse W. Moore, has said that he was not in formed about low-temperature read ings at the base of a booster rocket. We are told that engineers for the rocket manufacturer twice warned that the weather was too cold for a safe launch and that NASA technicians themselves had doubts about the now-notorious O- rings — all of it put down, maybe in triplicate, on paper. This is the nitty-gritty of manage ment and administration. But NASA has no administrator. It has not had one, in fact, since Dec. 4 when James M. Beggs was placed on leave after having been indicted on fraud charges tiling from his days as a Geneni; nami< s executive. Since then,N,IS) had an acting director and, re«t real general manager. He wasrd of his day-to-day managerial dm lowing the explosion. What you have, in essence,is ture of an agency in Minic duressBby the president, who challengedN.^Oye do more with what it claimsissi daily less, was content to stick acting director. So successfulkl gan become in removing hi the consequences of his own sions — in mythologizing dash and ing and demonizing the pef"' work of government — that b asked not a single question ab(rf in Ins first post-explosion news® ence. 1 he press, too, assumedth explosion was, if not anactofGoi certainly was one of man. wanted to talk policy. Ultimately, maybe all the (ft regarding policy will amount to ing. Accidents do happen. Butth more likely when people—burtf — are overworked, tired, poor!' vised, not well-motivated andeitk well-administered or not admit 11 at all. What’s true for the Depart® 1 Health and Human Services is if the space program. It’s all govettt all people. One is not a bureau® be treated with scorn and the person to be treated with resp® can reach for the stars if we i we will never get there if the' ready in our eyes. Richard Cohen is a columnist ^ Washington Post Writers Group . J t t AIA using Soviet-style tactics to combat Marxist 1 By now you probably have heard of the orga nization Accuracy in Academia, but you may not know much about it. How did AIA originate? What is the purpose of AIA? What does AIA have to say about itself? ists” who “are some of the men who are molding the minds of our future jour nalists, teachers, lawyers, government ofFicials, legislators and clergymen.” How does AIA intend to correct this problem of “Marxist” professors teach ing in college classrooms? Judge for yourself. The following is the complete AIA plan of action: Glenn Murtha 1. We will enlist the cooperation of students who can help us identify prob lem courses. AIA was formed last August as an offspring of Accuracy In Media. AIM attempts to alleviate what it considers bi ased reporting in the media, in other words, liberal slant. AIA was launched to “do on college campuses what AIM has been doing with the media for the past 16 years — combat the dissemina tion of misinformation.” “Misinforma tion” means opinions AIM doesn’t agree with. 2. We will ask students taking such courses to provide us with tape record ings or notes of statements made by the teachers of such courses which they be lieve to be seriously in error. Reed Irvine, the editor of the AIM newsletter, claims, “It is especially un fair when the students know that they may end up with bad grades if they dis agree with the professor in class and fail to regurgitate what he has told them on the examination papers.” The profes sors AIA opposes are so-called “Marx- 3. If we agree that the statements are incorrect, we will take them up with the professors responsible for them, with out disclosing the source of the com plaint and will ask that corrections be made in class. If the professors are un willing to do this, we will endeavor to publicize the errors in existing campus publications or in an Accuracy in Acade mia newsletter. 4. Since young students may not have the knowledge or the time to carry out this function as carefully as would be de sirable, we are asking mature adults to volunteer to enroll in courses on cam puses near their home to serve as audi tors for Accuracy in Academia. If fund ing permits, we will pay the expenses, including tuition, for the volunteer au ditors. In many states, senior citizens may take courses in state colleges free. Since our funds are at present limited, we are anxious to get as volunteers se nior citizens who can take advantage of this privilege of free enrollment. 5. Our adult volunteers will be en couraged to take an active role of chal lenging questionable statements in class room discussions, providing alternative reading material and suggesting supple mentary course reading lists. Accuracy in Academia will try to be helpful in providing such material. Volunteers will also be encouraged to provide lead ership for younger students, encourag ing them to cooperate with AIA and obtaining their assistance in putting out AIA materials, including a campus newsletter. My First reaction to reading the AIA statements was anger. Who do these people think we are? Morons? I cer tainly don’t come out of a class com pletely molded in the image of the pro fessor. The professor isn’t God. AIA, like other rightist groups, seems to have this irrational fear that young people are so naive and impressionable that anything we hear, we’ll adopt. What is AIA so afraid of anyway? I doubt that accepting some Marxist ideas will turn America into another Soviet Union. Placing monitors in the class room presents a much greater threat of achieving a Soviet-style state than advo cating Marxist philosophy. I don’t think it’s Marx AIA is opposed to. Rightist groups like AIA tend to label anything they don’t like as “Marxist,” “Commu nist,” or “Un-American.” These are bad words in the American vocabulary. By using them, they just might get more people to take notice of their cause. If there are biased professors, I sus pect their numbers are relatively small. Many professors are opinionated but generally present both sides of an issue. No professor is naive enough to believe that every student will agree with him, especially if he gives an opinion without strong evidence to support it. On a test, if you disagree with the professor and support your arguments with evidence, you’ll make a fair grade. If you don’t, discuss the problem with the professor or someone else within the University, not with some external monitoring or ganization. Texas A&M President Frank Van- 11' diver recently wrote about AIA you begin to monitor what is W in a classroom, you are setting'- up as judge of what ought tob 1 This is a threat not just to thed$ and to the university, butfunda^ to the American mind.... It can fear, and nothing can ruin a u®’ faster than fear. Fear of student' ult y, of administrators, of a ho' 11 ' lie sterilizes and pits colleague';' each other, students against 0 the university against itself. AIA is solely an attempt to D* tact ics to silence speech it doe' 11 It’s easier to silence your opF opinions than to work to get accept your own, especially realize than you don’t have chance of getting anyone to agf'' you. By now I think we’ve learned son — the Salem witch hunts Scare, the McCarthy Era —2 stand for people who attempt I® 3 speech or forcibly alter the h others. It’s one thing to offer diffenuffl but quite another to try to silence ing views. Glenn Murtha is a senior pofej ence major and a columnist Battalion.