Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

PAGE TWO CLARK PANTHER, APRIL 1955, ATLANTA, GEORGIA The Clark Panther A Journal of College Life Published from September to June By the Students of Clark College, Atlanta, Georgia A promoter of school spirit by encouraging projects and efforts among student groups and individual students. A medium through -which an opportunity is provided for students to obtain experience in news gathering, reporting, book-reviewing, edi torial, and creative writing. An instrument for fostering friendly and constructive criticism of campus activities. HAROLD C. WARDLAW, Editor-in-Chief FRED MORGAN, Associate Editor GLENDORA PATTERSON, Assistant Editor J. F. Summersette, Advisor Charles Stinson Ned Johnson w M. Norman, T. Mathews, R. Powell. R. Flood, N. Johnson Aaron Favors.. M. Oliver, J. Reynolds Shirley Ballard E. Johnson, J, Reynolds, F. Kornegay Georgene Broadnax Harold Wardlaw ONE THING’S CERTAIN ... THE REST IS LIES That the Negro press has been effective in its fight for the “inalien able rights” of minority groups is a fact. The rest—? That it must continue its fight until a fully integrated society has been realized in America is a fact. The rest— I hold it true, which is contrary to some person’s beliefs, that— the impending era of integration will not, necessarily, behoove the Negro press to change its present viewpoint. On the contrary, this situation is a provisional one. It will depend upon whether the White press changes its attitude toward the Negro and the ne^s. We, as Negroes, are wont to join the bandwagon and arraign the Negro press unjustly. That it caters virtually to a Negro populace is a popular accusation. In other words, it publishes Negro news to the exclusion of other nationally important news dispatches. But by the same token, has not the White press all but excluded the Negro from its limelight ? It is a question of just what is important to whom. And we are important—if to nobody else but ourselves. Surely, we consider, for example, our society news to be just A yf D-at of any other group. Accordingly, we feel that our sports idols merit as much recognition as other sports idols. Equality of recognition is our creed. The White press, on the one hand, caters to a white populace; and the Negro press, on the other hand, caters to a Negro press. The day the Negro press agrees to present a comprehensive report of the news, to the exclusion of “Negro news,” is the day it will annihilate itself, as such. That “we don’t need a Negro press” is just empty cant. Suppose that if and when social integration does come about, the White press does not consent to publish news indiscriminately, irre spective of its racial tinge. What then will the Negro do for adequate recognition ? With all of its limitations, short comings, and sensationalism, the Negro press is, nevertheless, satisfactory for its purpose. Were the Negro press to be abolished this day, imagine what a shock we would receive. This problem can be likened unto a game of checkers: If and when “integration” does come about, the Negro press must, of necessity, wait for the white press to make the first move. Are You Holding Empty Honors? The Panther feels proud that Clark College offers many spheres for student leadership. To indulge in gross understatements, the Panther views these student opportunities for leadership as a good thing. To point to just a few, some of the areas in which students learn to lead and serve are: (1) the dormitory senate, (2) the class organizations, (3) the Greek letter organizations, (4) the departmental clubs—Social Science Club, Mathematics Club, Spanish Club, Literary Symposium, and others. The Panther desires to counsel the student leaders not to be only office seekers and name builders with a singularity of purpose: honor. Responsibility and honor are brothers; they go hand in hand, the Panther humbly offers. The Panther is thinking of class reporters and club reporters who simply are not reporting news to the Panther, yet, the organizations about the campus look to the Panther for news about them. Is the Panther to deduce that the clubs and class organizations on the campus are leading a nominal existence only, doing nothing? The point, then, is clearly drawn: class reporters and club reporters are not report ing news to the Panther, which negligence makes it difficult for the Panther to go to press as often as it would like. It all causes the Panther to wonder if, like the class and club reporters, all Clark’s student leaders fail to see the relationship between responsibility and honor. STUDENT APATHY . .. Student apathy is now beginning to hurl its poisonous arrows at the Panther and with dangerous effects. For some time the Panther’s “Let ters to the Editor” column has been conspicuously missing from publica tions. This absence, of course, stems from the fact that the editor re ceives no letters. Is the Panther to assume that Clarkites just don’t care about things, that they are caught up in the fetters of apathy and lethargy and that responsiveness and sensitivity are completely out of vogue ? Or is the Panther to infer that it can do no wrong, no right and therefore, comes in for no comment, no criticism, no praise? Aaron Favors To Evacuate Or To Retaliate The United States is seeking the answer to a perplexing and intenizt- tionally vexing problem. It is seeking the solution through all the media of diplomacy and military militancy available. We find ourselves in t*vs ticklish situation of having to decide whether to meet Red China : s agression with aggression—thereby assuming the risk of a third world war, or to remove the Chinese Nationalists on the surrounding islands of Quemoy, Matsu, Nanchisan, and Tachen and consequently “lose face” to the Communists. Consequentially, one poses the query as to how the United States allows itself to be dragged into subterfuge of international incarceration. Or, in the jargon of the vernacular, “Wha’ Hoppen?” Though the ques tions are posed with characteristic ease, the answers bog down in the quagmire of intricate international inferences. There are, however, several simplifications that must be made because the available space negates any attempt at an adequate coverage of the “raisons d’etre” of the Formosa fracas. There is no desire to succumb to superficiality; only a wish to stimulate further interest and investiga tion in this all important issue. Many of the members of the press tend to locate the “sore spot” in the intra-individual ambitions of the Nationalist Leader, Chiang Kai- shek. They hold to the opinion that, were it not for the somewhat sub terranean manipulations of this ambitious Asian, the diligence and care with which he negotiated an agreement from the United States to defend Formosa, and his idiosyncratic insistence that the mainland of China belonged to the Nationalists even though they fled in disorder and near panic to Formosa from the onslaught of the Red China forces, we wouldn’t be as involved in the issue as we are. Red China views the situation as a direct result of the “imperialistic, war mongering capitalists” desire to assert their dominance over the peoples of the East. Radio Peiping blasts the United States for inter fering in “domestic” affairs. If these blasts were just mild protestations, or further evidences of Red Propaganda, concern for them would be at a minimum. Chou En Lai has made it quite evident, however, that the “Peoples Republic of China” will meet any act of “aggression” on the part of the United States wtih mass retaliation. President Eisen hower was firm in the statement that the United States 7th Fleet would defend Formosa from any “aggression.” Neither does the statement of newly “elected” Premier Bulganin that Soviet Russia would assist the “Peoples Republic” detract from the seriousness of the situation. The problem that faces the United States then becomes apparent—■ should the 7th Fleet pull out, thereby enabling Chou En Lai to follow his plans of conquest; or, which is more serious, breaking the agreement with Chiang Kai-shek? This act would further demoralize the Nation alist forces and turn the millions of persons in present anti-communist countries into the hands of the communists because of a desire to be on the winning team.” Such action would cause the United States to “lose face” which would in turn seriously hamper the effectiveness of our diplomats in foreign countries. The other alternative is to meet the Chinese Reds with forceful opposition, give out-and-out tactical military assistance to Chiang and, if possible, drive the Reds back to the mainland. This involves defending the Pescadores, a chain of islands essential to the strategic defense of Formosa. We must realize that such an action could, at the least, heighten the friction between this country and Soviet Russia, subjecting us to all sorts of Red propaganda or it could lead to a devastating World War III. Such retaliation is plausible because Formosa is an important link in the chain of defense of air bases located on Okinawa and in Tokyo. Surely, such a strategic land mass cannot be given up at the insistence of a power that poses as a formidable foe to the free world. Already the United States has evacuated Chinese civilians and Na tionalists from islands that, according to Chiang, “would be defended to the death.” If the U. S. and Chiang continue to give in, Chou En Lai will demand just that much more. He is not willing, on the other hand, to risk a third world war just yet, but he is willing to push to the hilt any advantage that he has or hopes to have over the allied forces of the Chinese Nationalists and the United States. Throw in the issue over admission of Red China to the United Nations for good measure, stir with the enmity of the eternal conflict of existing racial and cultural differences between the two hemispheres and mix in the bowl of the China “heartland” containing a major proportion of the world’s population and we come up with a concoction that defies description and resolution. There is an answer to these questions and issues. Whether it is to be found in an “agonizing reappraisal” of Asian diplomacy or in the acquisition of “friends” through revamped “Marshall Plans” remains for the United States to decide. Whether it is to come about through an assertion of numerical strength or weaker nations, tyrannical oppression of individuals or in the “peaceful co- (Continued on Page 3) Sports Editor Religious Editor Reporters .Circulation Managers Art Editor Staff Typists Exchange Editor Copy Readers Secretary to Editor Fred Morgan Debate Maketh A Ready Man No Team; Why? Debate Maketh the Ready Man No Debating Team—Why? It has recently been this writer’s delightful experience to engage in some heated discussions with a few fellow students on issues of high controversy. Discussed were such points as (1) the Bible; its authenticity and significance (2) predestination (3) immortality (4) socialism (5) communism and (6) possible utopian societies. Though both religion and politics have long been considered vain subjects for argument, they were nevertheless taken to task and not without con siderable delight for the task-mak ers. The issues being so polemical and humans so given to prejudices, there were, of course, no victors, but the discussions were not en tirely worthless: everybody’s think ing was stirred and his beliefs shaken. For this reason if for no other, the discussions were invalu able. But there’s’ another and more urgent point to this. During one of the discussions, a fellow remarked that he enjoyed exchanging views and discussing controversial issues but that, “around Clark, few students seem interested in this type of thing." During another of the discus sions another student remarked— with regard to fatalism and the existence of heaven and hell—, “we aren’t supposed to know those things.” To your writer the two above quotes signal appalling and deplor able problems. In the first instance, I reflect that Sir Francis Bacon said “Reading maketh the full man; debate the ready man; and writing the exact man.” In all our fullness and precision, are we con tent to be eternally unready to respond on the spot? Of little value is learning which the stu dent cannot command at his pleas ure. There is very definitely and educational void among (our) stu dents. Even in classes we are slow to speak our minds and challenge one man’s conceptions of a thing. That education fails itself which does not provoke intellectual dis quiet, discussion, and debate. It suggests to me the need of a de bating team, or would student apathy kill this too? In the second instance I think how strangely inconsistent it is that we wish to know more about music and biology but do not wish to know more about religious is sues. That education is most effec tive which touches life responsively at the most points. CONSEQUENCE By Preston Mobley When poets are done with writing And hands refuse the pen, The mind will know no beauty, And hearts will feel no duty, The peace will end in fighting, And virtue turned to sin, When poets are done with writing And hands refuse the pen When artists cease their painting And skill forsakes the brush, The eyes will dim, not smiling, And thoughts will fade, beguiling, Conceptions marred by tainting, And beauty sloth will crush, When artists cease their painting And skill forsakes the brush. When bards are done with singing And voices fail to chant, The stage will stand in silence, And souls will fall in violence, The bells will still their ringing And music fain will rant, When bards are done with singing And voices fail to chant.