kontinuing

failure
to understand
i t appointed a
thesituationwhen
retiredgeneral
as ambassador to
Vietnam. Thesituation
isneither
conventional
nor
even primarily
rnllitary. The
appointment
of U.
Alexis Johnson as deputy ambassador did reveal some understanding
that the problem must be solved by
political means, but the question remains, whose politics and whose
politicians? It must be remembered
that General Taylor, who now discussesspreadingthewar
to the
north as well as full mobllization of
the Vietnamese people, filed a surprising report to the President after
a fact-finding mission in November,
1961 He had little to say then about
the mditary emergency, but was extremely specific and hard-hitting on
the need\ for civil liberties and social reforms. It would be a mistake,
thus, to class Taylor with the usual

military mastodons, but the fact remains that he sees the war in terms
of attackand
counterattack now
that he is running the show.
O n the other hand, the Vietcong
link every military action to an overall political plan: As true followers
of von Clausewitz, they use warfare
asan extension of policy,
For these reasons, the Vietnamese
war is frustrating to official Washington, to advisers on the scene, and
to the poor Vietnamese soldiers. Expedient action in Vietnam and the
constantly changing programs have
not developed from any .workable
policy. The stated policy of helping
the Vietnamese tocreate a viable,
non@ommunist 1 democcacy for
themselves runs afoul of two facts:
Thepopulation ,wants peace now,
even withthe
Vietcong, andthe
Vietcong themselves are, more generic to the Vietnamese people than
I

any government in Saigon, Is U S .

aid now building up a plum for a
Vietcong take-over? USOM administratorsadmit privately that it is a
strong probability. Despite official
USOM protestations, the $242 million allocated for aid in thelast
fiscal year was spent on a number
of shotgun
programs,
many of
which may have aided the Vietcong
locally more than they helped estabof the Saigon govlishthereahty
ernment to the peasants.
Dean Acheson once described the
downfall of the Chinese Nationalist
Government by saying that the people did not overthrow it, for there
wasnothingto
overthrow. They
simply ignored it throughout the
country. That co-uld well be the
fate of any government in Saigon,
daily more isolated from the people
and even the army, despite massed
American support and advice.

Students Strike at California. . G&

Sun Francisco

tion center and acommunications

system. Jewish -students conducted
a Chanukah service. Two! locked
rest-rooms were opened, but carefully, by removing the hinges.
Off thecampus,about
150 deputies from
the
Alameda County
)Sheriffs office gathered, along with
a contingent of Berkeley police and
a sizable group from the California
Highway Patrol. Also among the
poised group of lawmen were about
200 policemen from
neighboring
Oakland-apolice
force notorious
throughout
northern
California,
particularly amopg Negroes.
University President Clark Kerr
and Gov. Edmund G . Browh were
both, as ithappened, in Los Angeles.
As the sit-in continued in what all
witnesses agree was a n orderly
manner, Edwin Meese, deputy districtattorney of Alameda County,
phoned GovernQr Brown thatthe
situation was out of hand and that
enforcement action was imperative.
Brown consulted with Kerr and with
the president of the universitys
Board of Regents, department-store
magnate Edward V. Carter. The
three agreed that intervention by
the police was
necessary,
and
Gene Marine, editor a n d journalist, -Brown gave the order.
Meese and the army of policemen
specialzzes an the W e s t Coast scene.

The Free Speech Movement (FSM )

the
at
University of CaliPornia
burst into headlines across the country with the sit-in by 1,000 students
in Sproul Hall on Wednesday afternoon, Dkcember 2, and with the arrest, on Thursday, of SO0 of them.
The issue u n p l y i n g the sit-in we
can reserve until this story of The
Day of the Cops is told,
At first it looked like a weak protest. FSM leader Mario Savjo came
out of Sproul Hall-the administratlon building on the Berkeley campus-to call for more support. But
by mid-afternoon,about 1,000 students occupied all four floors. At 7
P.M. the building was officially
closed, and the law, students were
told, was officially violated. Campus
police guarded every door, but no attempt was made to remove the students. Inside with the demonstrators
were several reporters(somewith
tape recorders) and one attorney.
Before the building closed, students left aisles for movement and
were careful not to block doorways.
After 7 oclock, they setuptheir
own press room, a food distribu-

482

Marine

moved onto the campus. FSM leaders, who had set up a public-address
system inside the building, advised
all demonstrators under 18, all foreign students, and one who might
be on probation to leave. Meese then
pointed outthe firstarrestee:the
attorney, Robert Truehaft.
With him out of the way, the police began at the top floor, ,arresting
one demonstrator at a ,time,varying
the order only to single out leaders,
Carryingtaperecorders,
they addressed demonstrators individually,
taking the n q e , then offering the
option of dispersal, then making the
arrest. Refusal to get up dnd walk
(mostrefused)was
also recorded.
Students werent advised at this
point, however, of theirright
to
counsel-an
omission on which
some la!w professors believe their
cases may eventually turn. Each arrestee was photographed with
a
number and taken to the basement,
Months of civil rights derhonstrationshavetaught
metropolitan police officers everywhere to
handle limp demonstrators; it requires two officers perdemonstrator, and it canbe efficient and painless. In Sproul Hall, however, police
chose to drag thestudents, male and
The

NATION

female,,by twisting their arms into

hammer locks, bending their wrists
cruelly backward, and hauling them
SO thatthe
pressurewas ontheir
twistedwrists
andtheir
shoulder
sockets. One girl was pushed into the
elevator onherfacefrom
several
feet away. It should be stressed that
there were reporters on the scenebut the police didnt always h o w it.
Downstairs, they were letting no reporters go up,
After about Porty arrests had been
made, the police saw that the process was taking too long. They withdrew temporarily (the students now
callthisthe
coffee break)),and
when they returned had apparently
decided to get rough. The new plan
was to bring women down in the
elevator, andmen by thenarrow
a fewunmarblestairs,although
fortunate women also made it down
the stairs. Some were brought down
by ,arms or shoulders, but reporters
present say that most were hauled
by their feet. One conscientious reas
porter counted the marble steps
he followed a girl whose head jarred
sickeningly as
she
was dragged
down. There were ninety.
As buses were filled, themen
were taken to the Alameda County
Prison Farm
at
Santa
Rita,
the
women to Oakland County Jail (until i t was full-then they too went
to Santa Rita). The first busload of
male demonstrators, whose arrests
hadbegunthreehoursbefore,ar6 :20 A.M.,
rived at Santa Rita at
Truehaft among, Ithem. They were
placed in a lasge cage, or bull pen,
andTruehaftagain,
asked, ashe
had in the (Sproulbasement, to make
the two ,telephone calls which California law grants all arrestees as
soon as is reasonably possible after
arrest. He was refused,andwhen
he insisted he was placed in an isolation cell. A judges phone call got
10 A.M.
I
atout
him
Booking involved a long questionnaire,
which
included
questions
about religion ,and nationality, and
the arrestees signature to a statement authorizing Oakland police to
open his mail. Students who balked
weretold
that unless,they cooperatedand answered all questions
correctly and signed the form,
their booking would not be considered .complete and they would not
be sowed telephonecalls or bail.
Back in Spruul Hall, the students
public-address system was still functioning,with
the microphone located near the head of the stairs on
I

December 21, 1964

the second fIoor, and protected by

a mass of demonstrators. As areporter stood by describing the scene
into a tape recorder, the police undertook what the students now call
the charge of the Highway Patrol.
(The reporters on the scene seem to
have assumed that they were highway patrolmen without malungpositive identification 1
In any case, a mass of police suddenly burstupthe
stairwell from
thefirst floor,in a flying wedge
aimed at the microphone. Whether
by accident or design, they crowded
students against the stairwell walls
and formed a double line,wlth a
spacebetween,
down to thefirst
floor. (At the top,movingtoward
the microphone, they simply took
each demonstrator who was in the
way and shoved him or herdown the
stairs. Policemen on the double line
operatedas a gauntlet. A student
whose body stopped halfway down
the stairwellwas
picked up and
thrownagain. At thebottom,witnesses saw a deputy sheriff raise one
limpgirl as she landed, say something to her and when she shook her
head, smash his fist into her face.
At the top, the policemen had
their clubs out and were pounding
furiously uiz the
demonstrators
around the microphone. Witnesses
outside the building, in the plaza,
could see through the hug? secondfloorwindows, and insist that the
clubswereusednotsporadically
and at random but slowly, methodically, repeatedly. As quickly as the
chargebegan, it ended.They got
the microphone, butthestudents
had another.

had disappeared. The University of

Californiawas
completely m the
hands of fiolice. In every wmdow of
Sproul Hall a police guard was visible. There wei-e guards on every
doori Police patrolled thecqnpus.

The Free Speech Rlovemem

Student groups at the Umversity

of California have for years used an
area at one of the principal campus
entrances,Sather
Gate, toset
up
tables in support of candidates or,
more often. ideas: to distribute materials, to collect money, to recruit
members for campus organizations,
etc. Technically, there has long been
aagainst
iule
swh
activity, buttheadministration
has
pretended not to notice.
InJune,duringthe
Republican
National Convention, Students for
Scranton set up a table at Sather
Gate. Thehead
of theCalifornia
Goldwater
delegation,
William
Knowland-publisher
of theOalland T r i h u m , former United States
in
Senator,
and
dominant
figure
East Bay polltics - protested to
ChancellorStrong.When
,thefall
semesterbegan,Dean
of ,Students
Katherme Towle announced
that
the old rule would be strictlyenforced: n o recruitmg, fund raismg
or mounting political and social
action. The outraged , cry of No
far was the begnnmq of the Free
Speech Movement-,originaliy, and
still i n part, an organ~zalion of
campus organizatlons.
The groups hardest hit were those
supporting civil rights actiyity, especially SNCC and CORE. Knowlandsnewspaper
is thetarget
of
a months-old anti-discrlmination
8
On Thursday
afternoon,
I picket,Ime, and most FISM members
comthe
publisher
watched the, endof The Day of the believe that
Cops. There was no civllian au- plamed, not to protect Gpldwater
but to protect the Tribune.
thorityanywhere
onthecampus.
Also, U.C. studentshadparticiPresident Kerr was still in Los Anpated i n sit-111 demonstrations in
geles, Chancellor EdwasdStrong,
San Franclscoearlier in ,the year,
chief Berkeley administrator(Kerr
ruils all nine university campuses), and subsequently stood trial. Seri8

as meeting the terms of the October

to have the university discipline 2 agreement. But in mid-October,
them-even expel them-but Ken, Kerr restored hope by askingthe
backed by many of the faculty, took Academic Senate to appoint ics own
Student Conduct Committee to hanno action. Some observers sawthe
new declsion as a protection against dle the suspensions (which the senany future accusation that such ac- ate could have done on its own, but
hadnt ), and enlarging the CCPA to
tivities had an on-campus origkn.

At any rate, the students resisted, eighteen members, with four seats
and on September 30 the university or the FSM.
The worst of the storm seemed to
indefinitely suspended six of
be over, but the public, at least, was
them for illegal activity at tables
nearSather Gate, and two others seriously confused. So far,ithad
for particlpation in illegal meet- read of an argument over whether
ings. The next day, Jack Weinberg, student groups could put up tables
a graduate student in mathematics and collect money. Nobody said
who had dropped out of U C . to civil rightsout loud. Whenthe
give - hisfulltime
to civil rights, CCPA meetings started, however,
manned a CORE table in the plaza the FSM quicklyd1scovered that its
administration and facultymembers
(an open areanearSatherGate)
aad was arrested for trespassing~and insisted on regulatingthe content
of the free speech involved. This
taken to a campus police car.
A crowd of angry students, even- issue was not negotiable; in fact,
administually reaching 3,000 (one of every the F,SM insiststhatthe
tration
refused
to
negotiate
at allnine enrolled)surrouhdedthe
cdr
and refused to ,let it move. It stayed that they merely proposed various
there for thirty-two hours, tyhile formulas on a take-it-or-leave-it
hundreds of police massed on near- basis. The students continued to inby streets and student speakers used sist that they could advocate as they
the car itself as a platform to ad- saw fit,without arbitrary curbs from
dress the gathering. Simultaneously the administration.
Itmust be stressed thatsetting
with
the
police-car protest, a
up tables was !never the real issue.
Sproul Hall sit-in took place.
,The real issue was, and is, the civil
rights movements. Therefore, it was
Theprotestpersuadedthe
administration to negotiate with the over advocacy that the talks broke
students, which ithad previously down.
If a student, on campus, recruits
refused todo.
Thedemonstratlon
was called off and Weinberg re- othei-s for an off-campus activity
leased ,when an agreement was which the student knows to be illereached on October 2. Prmcipally it gal, the university claims the right
to punish him. $Studentsgrgue, howprovided that the fate of the eight
ever, that the university h a s n o right
students would be turned overto
the
student
for
what
the Academic \Senate Oommittee on to punish
Student Conduct, which would rec- amounts to criminal advocacy until
the cwiE authorities charge him and
ommend action to theadministration (m;anystudents
missed that find him guilty. If civil authorities
dont find the advocacy illegal, or
point), and that
astudent-facultystuadministration committee would ex- dont act againbt it,thenthe
amine the whole question of politi- dent should be immunefrom miveSsity discipline,
cal behavior on the campus.
To make it more involved: supBut the Academic Senate (ie.,
the -tenured faculty) didnt have a pose nobody lcnows whether or not
Student >Conduct .Committee. The the advocated off-campus action is
Chancellor , therefore appointed a illegal? Some of those atthe,San
Faculty Committee on Student Af- Francisco sit-ins were found guilty,
fairs to hear the cases of the sus- others innocent, by different. juries.
pended students, he also appointed Was advocating the sit-in illegal?
the Campus Committee on Political Arid the question becomes all but
Activity, with four members each hopeless if the btudent is recruiting
from
administration,
faculty
and fora probably legal activity-like
a picket line-which later turns into
student body-two of thestudent
a possibly illegal one-like a sit-in.
seats being p e n to the FSM.
Students corqplained that the ad- How can the university, on its own,
ministration was not showing good arbitrarily decide when a student is
off-campus
faith. The. FSM refused to recognize advpcating unlawful
the administration-dominated CCPA activity? Guilt, the PSM argues,

ous political pressure was brought

must be judicially determined. (Judicially determined is taken to refer to final determination after all
appeal possibilities are exhausted.)
Hidden in the question of setting
up tables is the idea that even the
United States Supreme Court has
had- a great deal of difficulty over
the link between advocacy and action. If the lSupremeCourt hesitates
FSM
to make thisconnection,the
argues,the university administra- -tion is certainly not qualified to
make arbitranly.
it

Finally, in early November,

the FSM withdrew from the CCPA,
calling it already deadlocked over
the
issue
of political advocacy.
Tables went upagain;deans
took
the
names
of students manning
them, tension rose. The CCPAs six
faculty members then proposed that
the tables, fund raising, etc., be allowed, but that if off-campus action
were judicially determined to be illegal, its on-campus organizers should
be subject to university discipline.
The FSM rejectedthis, because it
still allowed theadministration to
judge advocacy; butboth
sides
seemed to regard itas a possible
basis for more discussions. At aBout
the same time, the facultys Student
Conduct Committee recommended
that the suspensions of the eight
students be lifted,with only mild
notes in the record, and criticized
theadministrationforgratuitously singling them out.
With at least the principle of judiclal determination apparently recognized, and with, the conciliatory
,Student Conduct Committee report
(manystudents
thought that the
administration had agreed in advance to accept i t ) , the FSM looked
forward to aregents
meetirig in
Berkeley on Ndvember 20. Three
FSM leaders, including the dynamic
Mario Savio, planned to speak
there. Hopes were high.
Between 4,000 and 5,000 students-15 percent of, the student
body-gathered on a lawn opposite
the building in which the regents
meetingwas held. Inside,the regents first refused to hear the FSM
leaders. Then Kerr recommended
more severe penalties for those suspended than had been recommended by the faculty group. And, ignoring tlie ten-point proposal of the
faculty
members
arid the whole
concept of judicial deterb.liriation,
he offered a single new rule, providingthat certairi c5Spus facilities

The NATION

484
1

..

.-may be used . , , for planning,

implementing.
raising
funds,
recruiting participants for lawful off
campus action, not for unlawful offcampus action
Students,said
the Sa11 Francisco Chronicle, stood andsat 111
stunned silence, and many of the
coeds burst into tears. Thousands
of students were (andare)
convinced thattheregentsand
Kerr
had revealed themselves as finks
-that they betrayed completely any
body, called a strike as soon as the
trustthestudentsorfacultymay
pohce
moved in-a strike certainly
have placed rn them. The assembled
effective
enough to be seriously disstudents voted for a sit-inthe following Monday, and they conducted ruptive. A large segment-almost
it in Sproul Hall for a few hours to certainly a majority-of the faculty
was sharply critical of the adminisshow their indignation.
tration.. A much-heraldedpeace
plan a few days later turned out to
There seemed no place to Ignore the advocacy question, and
turn. In -the eyes of the public, the further offendedstudentsbecause
students appeared to have
won.
it was worked outindetadahd
They had protested about the tables handed down rom on high without
, a n d thefund
raismg-well,
they any consultation with them.
got the tables and the fund raising,
Thefightisnot
yet over. As of
didnt they? Few understood that this wrltmg there is a lull, for the
the real issuewas advocacy.
Academlc Senate on ,December 8
At that point, the FSM may have offered a new compromisesettlebeen b,eaten, but on November 27, ment that was enthusiastically, enthe university sent letters (now call- dorsed by the students. Kerr, howed The Thhksgiving Letters)to
ever. has said that the proposal infour FSM leaders, summoning them volves basic changes of policy which
to disciplinary action for their roles wdl have to be studled by the board
in the .police-car demonstratlon of regents.Theregentsmeet
on
two months before. The inltiatlon of December 18, so Berkeley could
disciplinary action against six cam- have flreworlts for Christmas.
pus organizations,including SNCC
But whatever the outcome, one aland CORE,was also announced. A11 ready evident result is that the facexceptdie-hardanti-studentforces
ulty 1s awake and involved-The
now agree that the FSM had every Day of the Cops dld that When the
reason to believe it had beenoutuniversity has to be turned over to
rageously tricked. In bitter, frus- the Oaldand police, somethng must
trated anger, with hundreds, of stu- be seriously w;ong-and
many facFSM leaderspredentscheering,
ulty members think theyknow what
sented five demands as the price of it is.
, avoiding a sit-in :
The Mdtivcrsity
(I ) The dropping of a11 charges
against FSM leaders and orgamzaThe word is Clarlc Kerrs. He also
hons ,
,
speaks of the mllitary-industrial
( 2 ) a guarantee againsL further discomp1exnot with the faintly deciplinary actmn untll a final settlerogatorytonewhicheven
Dwight
ment;
Eisenhower
gave
It,
but
as
a
slmple
(3) no u7z1zecessary regulations
description of whats there. And the
agamst political a c b n t y on campus,
multiversity, Kerr says, mustnot
( 4 ) an .attempt by Kern to persuade
comonly come to terms with the
bhe regents that only
the
courts
plex, it should invitecollabo~ahon.
should regulate the co?zte~z~
of onThe role of the multiversiiy, he
campus pohtical expression,
( 5 ) agreement that the f o r m of such
said inthe 1963 Godlun Lectures,
expression (location on campus, u,se
is that of a factory,which proof sound equipment, etc ) ,should be
duces ideas in the form of research,
determined by a student-facultyand idea men in tlle form of gradadministration commlttee.
uates for the use of t,he military, inThe demands wereignored, add dustry and the government.
In reThe Day of the Cops began.
turn,the
multiversity ispaid
in
Graduate
studenti,
assembled grantsandcontracts.The
univerinlo an astonishingly
democratic
sity,presideqts role, he said, is that
December 21, 1SB4
;1

of mediator i n this process-and 1

mediator to the community, because
the multiversity IS particularly sensltive to thepressure of itsmany
particular publics.
The adminlstration of the Umversity of Callfornla is Clark ICerr.
ChancellorStrong,adlstinguished
philosopher, isas an adminlstrator
little more than a rubber stamp;, to
know Kerr is to know the admmistration. AssistantProfessor
John
Leggett, of the department of sociology at Berkeley, believes that in
Kerrs writings lie the keys to the
FSM and The Day of the Cops.)
All of us who witnessed that day
$were puzzled to understand how
such a situation could have come to
pass. That it invplved administrative ineptitude, m oneprofessors
phrase.wasundeniable;whatever
their motives, Brown, ICerr and
Strong were all convicted of ineptitude by the fact that thepolice were
not only presentonthecampusbut
in command of it. That it involved
studentintranslgencewasequally
undeniable; at th very least,there
was llttle honest qffort in the FSM
to see the other side obJectively. But
why
the
ineptitude
and
why
the
intransigence?

, \
$

The key to the first question,

Leggett suggests, is ,in- the relationship between Kerrs multiversity and
the clvd rights movement. As a
number of observers have pointed
is
out,the
civil rightsmovement
genuinely revolutionary; it threatens
a number of established standards.
As one example, a completely new
look at the economy is necessary If
we aregenuinely to opehthe job
market to Negroes at a time when
automatlon dominates the future.
This, in turn, is an open threat
to themilitary-industrialcomplex.
Inthe process of K e d s invited
collaboration, the civil rlghts movement o n campus is disruptive, and
being disruptive, it mustbe stopped.
(Clark Ken is far from being an
evil man, few university presidents,
in California
or
elsewhere,
have
shown as much conceJn forfreedom.But he i s , caught, i t would
seem, in thedilemma ,of 111s concepts. He would doubtless be horriBed at the idea of dehberately colfrom
laboratingwithracism,but
the point of n e w of the civll rights
movement, that is what his concept
of the multiversity requires. <There
are some things, :he said in the
Godliin Lectures, thatshould not
485

be compromised-then the mediator

needs tobecome a gladiator. The
pointis as valid as itis apt. But Kerr
also says that students lilay not use
the university as a fortress from
which they can sally forth with impunlty to make their attacks on society.
Perhaps
the
best comment on
those two quotations is in a statement adopted unanimously by the
anthropology faculty on The Day
of the Cops,in which they said that
the issue on the campus 1s the civil
rights movement, and that the administration must recognize its dynamism and decide clearly whether
it is for or against-without hiding,
behindeuphemisms
like off-campus political activity Or. one might
add, attacks on soclety.

There are, of course, matters

of law and ordkr, and democratic
procedure. But to the FSNI, it seems
that their appeals to law and order
and democratic procedure go unheeded. The administration,
they
argue, has all the power-arbitrary
power, from the students point of
view-and,
like Negroes, thestudents are not treated as equals, not
allowed a sufficient governing role
in their own affans, forced into a
second-class status.Thus, like Negroeg and their supporters, the studentsturn
to new weapons-the
mass demonstration, the march, the
sit-in. Yet, rightly or wrongly, most
of us !or perhaps most of us over
30) would have bent a little, would
havesoughtthe
common Interest,
would have worked at the behindthe-scenespoliticalside a little harda total victory
er. Why insiston

which is so hopeless from the start?

without
Leggett refers - not
amusement, but yet seriously-to
a
paper co-authored by Kerr and dealing with the relative propensity of
some laborunions to become involved in protracted, class-struggletype strikes. The paper examines the
characteristics of those workerslongshoremen, miners, loggers who tend to be mostmilitantas
union members, whose labor disputes become pojarized, who are disposed, ,in a word, to be intransigent.
First of all, their working conditions are usually terrible-they have
jobs. Second,
thehardest,dirtiest
they tend tobe isolated fromthe
respectable, middle-class elements
in the community.Third,theyare
apt to be homogeneous-frequently
there is an ethnic identity, Fourth,
as aresult of these factors, they
form closed- lcommunlties - they
have their own folk-dancing groups
or hang out in their own bars or
whatevk, so that there is a lot of
internal communication to counter
theisolation from thecommunity.
I t needs littIe imaginationfor
anyone who has ever been on a university or college campus to apply
these criteria to that group of students who tend to be well informed
andwhat we used to call socially
conscious. The conditions under
which they can .pursue their own intellectual m d political interests are
abominable. Theyre isolated,often
voluntarily, from
the
fraternitysorority, rah-rah life of the respectable element. In their isolation,
they form their own groups; their
talk is cross talk;they dig music
and poetry, political theory and po-

litical action that is foreign to the

middle-class orientation of most students and most faculty members.
And out of this isolation comes
distrust - distrust of a university
administratlon that can bend to a
Knowland, distrust of anybody over
30, &strust of anyone who seems to
be paternal or patronizing. A prornise is a promise, and fair is fair, and
why allthis pussyfooting around?
Balance and perspeFtive, and a
willingness to look at the other guys
side, do not come from such an environment The tragedy of the University of California would seem to
be that there was no third forceone is tempted to say, in Clark Kens
words, no mediator-to bring balance and perspective to the polarized positions. Tbe ,rple would seem
to have belonged $o,tbefaculty-dot
a few individuals, but the body 8s
a whole; certainly many
faculty
members now think so. But beyond
that, there -are a few who have a
moreradical
position ( a position,
incidentally, with which Mario Savio
appears to agree): that the university ought in fact, not merely in
principle, to be run by the students
and thefaculty. In Savios phrase,
the job of the administration should
be merely to see that the sidewalks
get swept.
We on the faculty, Leggett says,
have allowed theadministration,
over theyears, to taketheuniversity away from us, to turn it into
the multiversity. It isnt easy, but
were going to have to try to take it
back. The students and the faculty,
together, should control the university. The administration should administrate.
,

Moments in a Southern Town

TH18SLITTLE-LIGHT

1
i

table he saw. In a nearcorner, a

plump, brown-suited woman popped
a white hand to her full mouth, but
let escape: Oh my soul and body!
To the right, a child pointed, and its
mother slapped the
tiny
hand
and whispered urgently. Sprav-man
tucked a shirt wrinkle into hisblack,
Peterde Lissovoy, afrequent Nation high-pegged trousers, removed his
contributor, w a s untd recently a campaignwrzter for C. B . ICzng, the first shades, studied . a water glass.
In the split moment that the door
Negro
cnndzdnte
for
CongTess f T o m
stood open, Phyllis Martin, a SNCC
south Georgia since Reconstruction.

Two hoursafterthePresident
put
his name to the civil rights bill last
July, Nathaniel Spray-man Beech
pulled open the wood-and-glass
front door of the Holiday Inn restaurant in Albany, Ga., and dashed,
like musical chairs, to the very first

.I.

Peter de Lissovoy
field worker from New York, had
slipped in before him. Her skin is
soft mahogany, her hair natural, a
silver-black bowl about herhead.
She stood, dark-eyed, staring around
the dining room, and I cameup,
after Spray-man, and stood next to
her. When the wax-smiling head
waitressapproached, Phyllis raised
her eyes a little a d p o i n t e d sternly,
and the waitress obediently led the
way to a central table. After a mo-