Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

Vol. XXIX, No. 5 CLARK COLLEGE - ATLANTA, GEORGIA March, 1966 Julian Bond and the Right to Dissent by William Hammond There has been much written and said recently about Julian Bond, controversial public figure and prominent Negro civil rights worker. The tumultuous events of the past few weeks have seen the development of an issue as yet unresolved. The right to dissent has long been a thorn in the legislative side. The problem is when this right should be curtailed and when does it conflict with our commitments as American citizens. Mr. Bond and his supporters have maintained that his agree ment with SNCC’s statement condemning the United States’ policy in Viet Nam was within his rights as a private citizen and guar anteed in the Bill of Rights. Certainly, there are few who would dispute or deny him this right as a citizen. The value of his state ment may be questioned, but certainly not his right as an in dividual. What then is the problem? When Mr. Bond spoke, he did not clarify whether he was speaking as a private citizen, or as a representative of his people. Since that time he has been more precise in his statements. Bond spoke as an individual, but the consequences of his statement have affected him and, more importantly, the people of his District, the 136th. Certainly, Mr. Bond is to be admired for his courage in expressing his opinion, but his timing leaves much to be desired. Perhaps, through his outspokenness on this sensitive and emotional issue, Julian Bond has placed himself in unnecessary jeopardy and thereby, unable to serve those people who elected him to office with overwhelming support. In the House, Mr. Bond could have contributed much to advance the cause of all of his constituents; outside, his aid must be limited. The results of this incident are most unfortunate for Mr. Bond and for the 136th District. Julian Bond may yet retain his seat in the House of Repre sentatives. A special election has been called by Gov. Carl Sanders to fill his vacant chair. If he does, and it is certainly to be wished, it is hoped that he will remember the words of Abraham Lincoln when he said that the duty of the public is to “do the greatest good for the greatest number.” It is further hoped that he will remember that judgment must temper justice and that the value of what he says will be measured on many scales. Many a scrutin- ous eye will be waiting to pass judgment on, or detract from previous accomplishments, and to retard any future efforts that may be undertaken. Presently there is a proposal before the House, introduced by Rep. Jones Lane, leader of the movement which resulted in Mr. Bond’s being denied his seat in the House, that would prevent the swearing-in of the young Rep.-elect if he is re-elected. A court decision on Feb. 11, decreed that Bond had gone beyond the limits of free speech in his endorsement of the SNCC statement. While Mr. Bond has said that he would appeal the decision, these two forces will undoubtedly limit his effectiveness as a legislator if he is re-elected and seated. The fact that he has placed himself in such a position is regrettable. We are in sympathy with him, but it would seem that Mr. Bond will have to wait for the dust to settle before he will be able to accomplish anything in the House. College Students and Vietnam Bernice Little The recent “Speak-Out” on Vietnam held in Clark College s Davage Auditorium served, for me, a two-fold purpose. The “Speak-Out” brought some issues into focus and cleared up some points concerning American foreign policy about which I was perplexed. For this I am grateful. The “Speak-Out” also, during a heated discussion concerning “Affirmation Vietnam” (spon sored primarily by Emory stu dents), brought a few questions into mind regarding the role of college students in respect to American foreign policy. These questions were perplexing, frightening, and enlightening, but I am still grateful. I was made to examine a bit more carefully the trend today of stu dent ideas and the possible out come of these ideas. One of the most shocking issues pointed out by a member of the audience was his fear that young Americans in favor of American policy in Vietnam are becoming brutalists, and that that quality of brutality is be coming more overt and wide spread. I’m sure students who favored American foreign policy were shaken. Students who were proud to stand and say “I’m with America” were, because of their strong, unshakable loyalty, being accused of a possible quality of brutality. Could this be true? Upon examination of reasons for upholding American foreign policy I had to admit that more than once I had said to myself “So what about the (Continued on Page 4) Clark College In the Spotlight by Arcie Bennett The Twentieth Annual Con ference of the National Alumni Council of the United Negro College Fund convened in the Statler Hilton Hotel in Cleve land, Ohio, from February 10- 13, 1966. The two main high lights of the Conference, ac cording to student delegates, were the crowning of Miss Na tional United Negro College Fund and the election of new officers for the National Pre- Alumni Council. On both oc casions Clark was in the spot light. The Miss National UNCF Coronation was held in the fab ulous Grand Ballroom on Friday night, February 11, 1966. Twenty-five young ladies, repre senting twenty-five of the UN CF Colleges, anxiously partici pated in the Coronation know ing that neither their beauty, charm, or talent would win them the crown in this pageant. The criterion for judgment was the college with the largest amount of money per capita. The crown went to Miss Charlene Hamilton of Houston-Tillotson College in Austin, Texas. Houston-Tillot son raised the largest amount of money, $6,218.50 with $11.20 per capita. Miss Arcie Bennett, representing Clark, was the first runner-up to the crown and trophy, since Clark College had the next highest amount, $5,- 716.10 with $7.39 per capita. We felt proud out-distancing all but one of the thirty-three col leges. However, our motto is “Second to None” and in next year’s contest we must live up to it. The major business of the final assembly of the Pre-Alum ni Council was the election of officers. The Nominating Com mittee prepared a slate of of ficers on which Mr. Calvin Sharpe’s name appeared as a candidate for the presidency. After official procedures of ac cepting these names from the Nominating Committee and others submitted from the floor, voting began. Each school had one vote to cast for each office. Sharpe won an easy victory over his opponent from Hampton In stitute, as he was the best quali fied man for the position. Mr. Sharpe very efficiently presided over the remainder of the meet ing. It now becomes his respon sibility to lead the pre-alumni of the remaining thirty-two col leges in their fund raising and educational activities during the 1966 campaign year. Vietnam Speakout at Clark On February 10, 1966, Davage Auditorium was the scene of the Atlanta University Center Speakout on Vietnam. The Speakout was presented in three sessions: two in the afternoon and one in the evening. Edmund Gaither, Morehouse College, served as chairman of New Program In Journalism What may be Atlanta’s first collegiate journalist-in-residence program began 2 weeks ago at Clark College. It brings to the city a well-known national mag azine writer who will conduct the program over a two-semester period. The new program is sup ported by a grant from the Field Foundation and has been de scribed by college officials as a pilot effort directed at encour aging more students to enter the field of newspaper journalism. It will be centered around a series of lectures and seminars featuring outstanding editors, writers and reporters who will be brought to the campus to help bridge the gap between classroom and cityroom. Journalist-in-residence and director of the program is George McMillan of Aiken, South Carolina, whose articles and special studies have ap peared in Life, LOOK, Saturday Evening Post, and other na tional magazines. McMillan is a former Lasker Fellow in Civil Rights and win ner of the Benjamin Franklin Award for the best magazine article of the year. He has con tributed extensively to the liter ature on the Negro movement for Civil Rights. His Southern Regional Coun cil-sponsored study, “Racial Violence and Law Enforce ment,” is well-known through out the nation and two years ago his article “Birmingham Bomber” was published in Sat urday Evening Post. On special assignments, he was among NBC-TV newsmen who pre pared that network’s investiga- the afternoon sessions. Speaking in the first session were Dr. Howard Zinn, Professor of Po litical Science at Boston Uni versity, and Dr. Robert Bris bane, Professor of Political Science at Morehouse College. During the second session John Barber, Executive Assistant to Martin Luther King, Jr., and Desmond Wilson, Professor of Political Science at Emory Uni versity, presented their views on the Vietnam situation. This was, perhaps, the liveliest session. A representative of the Affirma tion: Vietnam committee came to extend an invitation to inter ested persons to join the rally on February 12, 1966 and was subjected to many fiery ques tions. A representative of the Southern Coordinating Commit tee to End the War in Vietnam appeared and urged a protest march on the Affirmation: Viet nam rally. SGA President Marion Phil lips was chairman of the eve ning session, whose speakers were Tom Huston, National Chairman of Young Americans for Freedom, and David Mc- Reynolds, Field Secretary of the War Resisters League. The pre vious speakers opposing the Vietnam War returned to this session so that there were three speakers opposing the Vietnam War against one speaker sup porting the Vietnam War. —M. Banks tion of the Kennedy assassina tion. He was a combat correspond ent with the Marine Corps dur ing World War II and earlier served as Acting Chief of the News Bureau of the Office of War Information. In 1949 his book The Old Breed traced the history of the 1st Marine Di vision in World War II and was named one of the best 100 books of that year.