Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Jan. 28, 1987)
Page 2/The Battalion/Wednesday, January 28, 1987 The Battalion (USPS 045 360) Memberof Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Conference The Battalion Editorial Board Loren Steffy, Editor Marybeth Rohsner, Managing Editor Mike Sullivan, Opinion Page Editor Jens Koepke, City Editor Jeanne Isenberg, Sue Krenek, News Editors Homer Jacobs, Sports Editor Tom Ownbey, Photo Editor Editorial Policy The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspaper oper ated as a community service to Texas A&M and Bryan-College Sta tion. Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the editorial board or the author, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Texas A&M administrators, faculty or the Board of Regents. The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaper lor students in reporting, editing and photography classes within the Depart ment of Journalism. The Battalion is published Monday through Friday during Texas A&M regular semesters, except for holiday and examination periods. Mail subscriptions are $17.44 per semester, $34.62 per school year and $36.44 per full year. Advertising rates furnished on re quest. Our address: The Battalion, Department of Journalism, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-4111. Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battalion, De partment of Journalism, Texas A&M University, College Station TX 77843-4111. Cities on the rocks Marchers violated personal rights .■'IT*/- :: sT . ’i: At the con siderable risk of being labeled a prejudiced, ra cial bigot, I Byron Schlomach write this column offering my inter pretation of recent developments in Forsyth County, Georgia. As for what I have seen in the news media, there was no reason for the first march to have taken place. Was there some historic or contemporary reason for its occurrence besides Dr. Martin Luther King’s birthday? If not, there was no good reason for it. Apparently, many people living in Forsyth County are what I call “white trash” and I would not want to count many of them as my friends. But For syth County is their home and as long as they hurt no one passing through or moving in, they have a right to their privacy. Both marches seem to have been direct violations of those people’s pri vacy. Busing marchers into a county known for its racist attitude was not marching for civil rights if the people of Forsyth were guilty of nothing but holding an opinion spawned by igno rance. Such a march was nothing but a theatrical baiting tactic, and, as such, it was wrong, just as it was wrong for the Forsyth fools to rant and rave and throw things. The First march was al most as racially motivated as the peo ple running around in bedsheets. Much has been said of the resem blance of the second march to the civil rights marches of the 1960s. I fail to see much resemblance except for the colors involved. Marches of old had participants who were mostly indigenous to the area in which they marched, and they protested actions. The marchers in the 1960s were usually outnumbered and law offi cials opposed them with deadly force, but the marchers won because their motive was pure and their cause was just. The second Forsyth march’s par ticipants were bused in, and they out numbered their opposition by at least 10 to one. Law enforcers surrounded the marchers and were well-armed, but the arms were not meant for the marchers. The motivations of the leaders of this march were about as impure as Bryan-College Station wa ter. The marchers were misled to be lieve they were opposing established tyranny once again. However, the reason Jesse Jackson and Gary Hart were there was not to right a wrong, nor was it to bring peace. Strife was what they sought — and to their great joy, they found it. Regretfully, the march ended its glorious advance to the poetic, often confusing strains of Jesse Jackson rhetoric and Gary Hart drum-beat ing. However, the march was truly glorious because the tables were turned. Though we must guard against return, the cruelties of the past have been firmly denounced by most leaders and laymen. The mes sage the political leaders of the march wanted to communicate was that ra cial discrimination is still all-pervasive and that suffering specifically be cause of it is still widespread. The march itself, in evidence, says just the opposite. One must be aware that much of the rhetoric on civil rights today serves only to fuel racial ten sions brought on by attitudes among all races. While much of the physical and verbal evidence of racism has dis appeared, the rhetoric is still at high pitch. The results have been that blacks wear their feelings on their shoulders, and whites, myself in cluded, are simply sick and tired of “civil rights leaders” shooting off their mouths for what are really at tempts at personal gain, as opposed to truly fighting for justice and free dom. Of late, the worst instances of ra cially motivated hatred and violence have been in the North where liberal Democrats are regularly elected to office, and that is why no mass marches have been staged there. It’s much easier to pick on a small rural county in Georgia than on large cities with liberal voters in the North. I’m sure you’re thinking I contra dicted myself somewhat concerning my attitude toward the march in For syth County. Well, I did. I have con tradictory feelings about it. The march was contradictory in itself. At the same time, it was a march against racist tyrannies and represented great victories over them, while it was also a march that could easily lead to the re-fueling of the dying embers of racial hatred left in the hearts of peo ple of all races. Let us hope that these embers are not fanned and hence, do not turn to flame, consuming us in needless strife. Byron Schlomach is an economics graduate student. Columns submitted for Farmers Write should be be tween 700 and 850 words. The editorial staff re serves the right to edit for grammar, style and length, but will make every effort to maintain the author’s in tent. Each column must be signed and must include the major, classification, address and telephone num ber of the writer. Only the author’s name, major and classification will be printed. Opinion The Texas attorney general seems determined to maintain the state’s haphazard highway safety policies at any cost — including the lives of Texas motorists. An opinion issued Jan. 16 by the attorney general’s office said city ordinances prohibiting drinking while driving undermined the authority of the state’s alcoholic beverage code. But not having laws or ordinances against drinking while driving undermines common sense, not to mention social progress. By claiming that cities with such ordinances have exceeded their authority, the attorney general is prohibiting local governments from fighting an inconsistency in drinking legislation that the state government refuses to acknowledge. Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Riggs, who issued the opin ion, says that if cities want an open container law, they should lobby the Legislature to enact one. In the meantime, which inevitably will be long, all Texas motorists are free to ignore city drinking ordi nances and drink and drive, risking their own lives — and worse, the lives of others. While the Texas Legislature was quick to pass a mandatory seat belt law and raise the drinking age to 21, it has never found enough political justification for passing open container legislation. Perhaps state legislators find the drive home each evening too long to wait for a cocktail. City ordinances were the last chance to curb Texas’ highway poli cies that are consistent only in their inconsistency. But take heart in the laws that the state has for your protection, Texas drivers. Drivers must be 21 years old or older and wearing a seat belt before this state will allow them to chug their brew behind the wheel. ; WASH! Phil Gran partment targeted c tion’s first for live ye gress a c 4 g ep m U said the c reassessmi its timetal Hoject ar projected Gramm Btrned tl ejh>v will i plan in re ly me ant waste rept ■ The would me Hftted cur ■pository could niei ■ar wasi Abolishment of Corps is Owi key to A&M’s growth Local r G. Vance going to Although Texas A&M’s Corps of Cadets once served a noble purpose, it’s no longer a necessary element of this University, and, because it will con tinue to create a distorted image of A&M in the future limiting A&M’s A&M’s dedication to research and its desire for a world reputation are ob vious considering the time, money and brainpower it’s pouring into its new re search park, ocean studies, biotechno logy, research in space and, of course, agriculture. higher learning on, and it's not wb? tracts students who are interesKj quality education. Attending a sity simply because one of yourprf did is tantamount to not pursuing lege education at all simply M your parents didn’t. Mike Sullivan recognition for academics — the Corps should be abolished. Before you dismiss this idea com pletely, allow me to conduct a brief ses sion of word association. When I say “Harvard University” what comes to mind? I think of Harvard MBAs. How about University of California, Berke ley? Outstanding liberal arts program. Johns Hopkins University? Superior medical school. University of Michigan? Prestigious engineering program. Texas A&M? Corps of Cadets. But any advancements A&M makes in its reputation for excellence in re search and education are quickly disre garded by a public exposed to state and national headlines telling of cadets who chase cheerleaders with sabers, cadets who died in hazing practices, cadets who beat up women and fights that cadets are involved in. And some say A&M can becoE tionally known, if not world recojp both as a militarily-affiliated univsj and a world university. 1 challenge: to name just one university withs: readily recognizable split persorl World universities want one repifi — an academic one. KORA tc Channel < ■ “It has have own ijam del them ove such as C' ■ Clear Ihc., whi Kentucky Qklahom station Kl don, plan the two si val of th< Commiss The p dons in And even if the Corps never gener ated sensational headlines, it still would- dominate A&M’s image. A perfect ex ample is the highly-respected Fightin’ Texas Aggie Band. If the all-cadet band truly is nationally famous, it contributes to the misconception about this Univer sity — that it’s an all-military institution. For the second time in its h A&M has a major decision te about its image. The first time was when the University decided it was best long-term interest to make enlistment optional. It wasthefn essary step for growth, and it waf Now it’s time for the second step opportui said L. L chief ex lannel Mays, I always have associated A&M with the Corps. I’m not originally from Texas, and, until I moved here, I thought A&M was a military academy, like West Point. Many of my out-of-state friends still don’t understand that roughly 95 percent of the students at this University have absolutely nothing to do with the Corps. But the problem is not whether the Corps is perceived by the masses as good or bad. The trouble is that the masses perceive A&M as the Corps. And that misunderstanding will keep A&M from distinguishing itself as a world aca demic institution. After all, a universi ty’s reputation is a crucial recruiting fac tor. If A&M decides to do nothinfi the Corps continues as is, the Units I never w ill aspire to its lofty goal,!: contrary, if the University takesthts logical step in growth by recogniziii Corps as an outdated concept k misconceptions about A&M and: lishes it, this institution of higherle ing may one day aspire to thesttf world university. Still, the image of A&M — a Univer sity with an enrollment of more than 36,500 — is determined by 2,000 Corps members. Some say the Corps and the tradition it represents at A&M is precisely what encourages many students to attend A&M. Unfortunately, that’s an absurd criteria to base four or more years of I like A&M, and I hope this In! sity chooses to grow. Mike Sullivan is a senior jourri major and the Opinion Page e# The Battalion. And that’s fine, unless, as has been a popular goal these last few years, A&M wants to achieve the status of a world university — successfully dealing with the problems of the world through re search and education and being recog nized by the world for its contributions. Don’t misunderstand me to say that military organizations have no place in institutions where higher education is the primary purpose. The United States should and does have a vested interest in the education of tomorrow’s military leaders. And through programs such as Reserve Officer Training Corps and military academies like Annapolis Naval Academy and West Point, the United States can educate and train its military leaders. But A&M’s Corps is not simply an ROTC program, nor is it a military aca- * demy. It’s a two-year ROTC program within a four year Corps program. All Corps members participate in ROTC their first two years at A&M. After their sophomore year, they either sign con tracts to be commissioned by the mili tary after graduation and continue in the ROTC program, or as is the path of most cadets, they do not choose to con tinue their military careers, and they be come drill and ceremony cadets, serving only A&M — with no ties to the military. Unfortunately, this unique program fos ters misconceptions about A&M. And those misconceptions can only hurt this University in the long run. If A&M is to gain any significant ground in the pursuit of a reputation for superior academics and genuine contributions to mankind, it cannot af ford to be recognized first as a military — or militarily affiliated — university.