DIY History | Transcribe | Campus Culture | University of Iowa anti-war protests, January-April 1971 | 1971-02-06 Daily Iowan Opinions: ""The trials are over""

Transcribe
Translate

University of Iowa anti-war protests, January-April 1971

1971-02-06 Daily Iowan Opinions: ""The trials are over""

The Daily Iowan
OPINIONS
Page 2   Saturday, February 6, 1971   Iowa City, Iowa
Editor  Leona Durham
Managing Editor  Amy Chapman
News Editor  Lowell May
City-University Editor  Willard Rawn
Editorial Page Editor  Cheryl Miller
Photography Editor  Diane Hypes
Fine Arts Editor  Valerie Kent
Sports Editor  Jay Ewoldt
Associate News Editor  Mike McGrevey
Assoc. City-University Editor  Debbie Romins
Assoc. City-University Editor  Richard Ter Maat
Assoc. Sports Editor  John Richards
Assoc. Photo Editor  Jan Williams

The trials are over
With a little luck, another session of the University of Iowa management's judicial hearings are over. Two days of testimony by 10 students and former students charged with disruption and obstruction at a demonstration that was, if nothing else, successful in preventing a Defense Intelligence Agency recruiter from fulfilling his duty on the Iowa campus—well, it's over. Or nearly so.
What's left of the hearing? For many attending students there remains memories of mirthful hours, thanks to none other than Judge Garfield himself, whose unintentionally droll output brought smiles even to the faces of acting prosecutors Howard Sokol and John Larson.
But the results of the hearing may not be so funny to those people charged by management. Immediately they have to worry about possible expulsion; in the future they may grimace when application forms query: Were you ever charged or disciplined by your college?
In principle the stakes are at least as high for every student, bcause it is through kangaroo court proceedings like this one that the university management maintains its authority over students.
Why, for example, does management, when its Security force catches students with dope, pressure those students into signing a statement that in effect nominally prohibits the student from appealing any university sanctions to civil authorities? The first aim is to maintain the management prerogative of keeping students who have broken civil laws out of the civil courts. The effect of that is to guard the elitist position of our predominantly middle-class student body. The so-called apolitical university management has a stake in maintaining a clas society, and that obviously entails looking after its own.
Secondly, by promoting a monopoly on discipline, at least in the student's mind, management retains its power in loco parentis, thus retaining its power to manipulate students within the kind of university it wants.
And in all these endeavors, this "apolitical" university management has its allies. It has been state and local authorities who have allowed the university to convert a large proportion of its Security force into civil police agents with the power to arrest.
All this adds up to a well-organized system, a system designed to perpetuate the norms of this society, along with its recognized and unrecognized injustices.
Within this system lies the DIA hearing. Like the tip of an iceberg it exemplifies an underlying menace.
In an attempt to weed out those who refuse to conform to the system, the DIA hearings demonstrates the destructive class biases and prejudices of managers.
And in its attempt to stifle challenges to its authority, it denies the dialogue of issues that university managers claim is the funciton of "their" institution.
—Lowell May

Saving...

The Daily Iowan OPINIONS Page 2 Saturday, February 6, 1971 Iowa City, Iowa Editor Leona Durham Managing Editor Amy Chapman News Editor Lowell May City-University Editor Willard Rawn Editorial Page Editor Cheryl Miller Photography Editor Diane Hypes Fine Arts Editor Valerie Kent Sports Editor Jay Ewoldt Associate News Editor Mike McGrevey Assoc. City-University Editor Debbie Romins Assoc. City-University Editor Richard Ter Maat Assoc. Sports Editor John Richards Assoc. Photo Editor Jan Williams The trials are over With a little luck, another session of the University of Iowa management's judicial hearings are over. Two days of testimony by 10 students and former students charged with disruption and obstruction at a demonstration that was, if nothing else, successful in preventing a Defense Intelligence Agency recruiter from fulfilling his duty on the Iowa campus—well, it's over. Or nearly so. What's left of the hearing? For many attending students there remains memories of mirthful hours, thanks to none other than Judge Garfield himself, whose unintentionally droll output brought smiles even to the faces of acting prosecutors Howard Sokol and John Larson. But the results of the hearing may not be so funny to those people charged by management. Immediately they have to worry about possible expulsion; in the future they may grimace when application forms query: Were you ever charged or disciplined by your college? In principle the stakes are at least as high for every student, bcause it is through kangaroo court proceedings like this one that the university management maintains its authority over students. Why, for example, does management, when its Security force catches students with dope, pressure those students into signing a statement that in effect nominally prohibits the student from appealing any university sanctions to civil authorities? The first aim is to maintain the management prerogative of keeping students who have broken civil laws out of the civil courts. The effect of that is to guard the elitist position of our predominantly middle-class student body. The so-called apolitical university management has a stake in maintaining a clas society, and that obviously entails looking after its own. Secondly, by promoting a monopoly on discipline, at least in the student's mind, management retains its power in loco parentis, thus retaining its power to manipulate students within the kind of university it wants. And in all these endeavors, this "apolitical" university management has its allies. It has been state and local authorities who have allowed the university to convert a large proportion of its Security force into civil police agents with the power to arrest. All this adds up to a well-organized system, a system designed to perpetuate the norms of this society, along with its recognized and unrecognized injustices. Within this system lies the DIA hearing. Like the tip of an iceberg it exemplifies an underlying menace. In an attempt to weed out those who refuse to conform to the system, the DIA hearings demonstrates the destructive class biases and prejudices of managers. And in its attempt to stifle challenges to its authority, it denies the dialogue of issues that university managers claim is the funciton of "their" institution. —Lowell May