thumbnail of Harvard: Where do we go from here?, Part 1
Transcript
Hide -
Good evening. I'm Roger Fisher. Tonight Channel 2 will have an open-ended discussion regarding me among his my students, faculty and administrators, regardless of where we go from here at Harvard. This program is being shown on large screen in the Ames courtroom at the Harvard Law School. There will also be an opportunity for phoning in questions and for questions from our studio audience. But first, we will have a summary of today's news at Harvard. Here is Mr. Louis Lyons of the New York of Harvard. Excuse me. Go ahead, Louis. Well, to bring the news as close up to date as we can. The Harvard faculty met for more than four hours this afternoon, ending just less than an hour ago, on the issues of student demands. By an overwhelming vote, the faculty called on the cooperation to end ROTC contracts as soon as legally possible and to enter into no new ROTC contract or any privileging informal arrangement. This, voted 3.85 to 25, was clearly a move to meet the issue that
is spearheaded to militant student revolt. It goes beyond the earlier faculty vote to withdraw all academic credit from ROTC. It does not absolutely abolish ROTC as the militant SDS have demanded. This resolution by Professor Jerome Brunner states that any student who wishes to participate in ROTC do so independently in arrangement between the individual student and the ROTC. This seems to leave it an extra-curricular voluntary activity. Among the privileges withdrawn would clearly be free use of Harvard buildings. The faculty then heard the appeal of Afro-American student leaders to be given a share in the setting up of the new Afro-American graduate studies program. The Afro-student speakers said, we are not belligerent, we are not rigid, but they urge that to create such a program satisfying to Afro-students, they must have a share in the process. Well, this, the faculty finally tabled until Tuesday
after several had said they were confused as to the procedures being proposed. Professor Oscar Hanleyn said, the proposed changes in the program would make it very hard to get top scholars to join its faculty. He asked it to be held over for further consideration of the next meeting. President Pusy called Hanleyn's proposal eminently wise, and then by a vote of 239 to 150, this Afro studies issue was postponed until Tuesday. Now the prime and scheduled purpose of the faculty meeting today was to elect the faculty committee to deal with the seizure of University Hall last week to determine discipline over it and to recommend changes in the governing of the university. This proved a long involved process. At the more than four hours, only two of the seven tenure members had been elected. Professor Stanley Hoffman and Professor James Q. Wilson, that means these two got the most votes. Both have been active in presenting the issues of student demands, which indicates, somewhat at least, the way the vote is going. This committee of 15 is to have five students,
elected by students in the houses, to have two junior faculty members without tenure, and seven senior faculty members in one law professor. While the counting of ballots was incomplete when the faculty meeting adjourned. So, back to Roger Fisher. Thank you, Nui. The first segment of this program will be devoted to the expression of some views from radical members of the student body of views, which were excluded, or at least not included in last night's program on Harvard because of the number of other people involved because of the shortness of the program. Tonight, we're open-ended and we're going to start off, first period of time, to give some radical students a chance to speak to one of the fellows of Harvard, one of the members of the corporation who is here tonight to participate in this discussion. Due to the lateness of the faculty meeting, most of our faculty members have not shown up. We're difficult to reach during
the meeting. We hope that members of the faculty will come down and drop in and participate in this discussion during the evening. We're expecting Professor Bruner here shortly before eight o'clock. We hope others will follow shortly thereafter. Before we start off with our discussion, let's just identify ourselves around the table. Those of us who are here for this first part of the program, I'm Roger Fisher, a consulting public affairs editor at WGBH and on the faculty of the law school. I'm Jim Kieranon, I'm a consultant at WGBH and I'm at the law school. I'm very O'Connell and I'm a member of the Committee for Radical Structural Reform. I'm Richard Rubinoitz and I'm a teaching fellow in history and lit and representative of the Harvard New College. Hugh Calkins, one of the fellows who are members of the Harvard Corporation. Norman Daniels, I'm a member of the strike committee. He's striking on the eight demands. Thank you very much. Why don't we start
off and say that each of you can say almost what he wants to say about why he's here and what we're doing, what he'd like to be said. I did not want to limit the agenda, although the program itself is directed to where do we go from here. We hope during the course the evening to identify issues, areas of disagreement and who's supposed to be dealing with those disagreements and how they ought to be handled, at least what the disagreement is about that. But I don't want to limit what you can say. You have a chance, you have a captive member of the corporation here, and if you want to say something about the situation to Harvard, each of you can have four or five minutes to do it, Mr. O'Connell, why don't you start? Yeah, I'll do my best. I assume that most people watching tonight have some idea who we are at this point. The proposal which was passed at the stadium meeting was a proposal that a group of us had originally submitted should be stressed that our proposal is, I think, a very strong one. It
calls for the abolition of rotsy in very strong terms. It asks that there'd be no new contracts that all present contracts be terminated and that no non-contractual agreements or informal arrangements of any economy made regarding rotsy. We also request that the university, we demand the university, replace any scholarship aid, lost to Harvard students. Through the determination of these contracts, we support the demands of the Afro-American students. And then we also, on the question of discipline, feel the discipline should be administered by a faculty student committee. However, that that committee is bound to consider no punishment greater than probation and that means even if someone is presently on probation, who was involved in the seizure of the building, that they would not be asked to leave the university. They would remain members of this community. Then we have a very long and complicated
demand and expansion and I'll try to summarize it as quickly as I can. Essentially, what we want from the corporation is a very strong and binding commitment that there will be no further physical expansion of Harvard until the views of the surrounding community are represented adequately in the decision making process. Then it must also immediately commit its resources to the development of 3,000 housing units at least one half of which must be devoted to low-income families and the elderly of Cambridge. There are more of these housing demands. Harvard must not take any dwelling units out of the non-university housing stock until it's provided new relocation housing. Also, no relocation occur with the university road apartments at the medical school complex until such time as the university has provided nearby comparable housing, satisfactory to the residents and those areas. I go away from the proposal for a minute to
stress something about how I feel about the strike at this point and where I stand on a number of the issues that face this. These issues are difficult ones but it should be pointed out I think to the audience that a number of groups, the strike steering committee that Norm is here speaking for, our group and others have made very strong and very explicit demands to the administration of the corporation and in fact in a stadium meeting there was an explicit demand that the corporation and administration were appropriate respond to these demands within three days. We've had no direct response in any way in the corporation or the administration and I see this as yet one more son of at least the corporations having apparently decided that we are not members of this community since they have not listened to what has been asked of them and made any direct response at all and I think this is a very serious issue. A great many people who are out on strike now
and even people who have decided not to go out on strike seem to see the strike as an attack against the faculty. I think it should be stressed here that I at least do not see that as in any case what I stand for. The strike is against the corporation and against the administration and in fact I'd be very happy if the faculty would decide that the community here at Harvard is made up of the people who teach here and the students who are here and that they have a very serious and direct responsibility for the community around them and that we should join together and strike. I will stop at that for a minute. Thank you very much. I'll turn to Mr. Romanowitz and you want to make an opening statement. Excuse me Mr. Benowitz, would you identify your self please? Peter O'Grady, have a couple of minutes.
Now that comes down to a criticism that I have even of this meeting the way for instance you sir said that you represent a number of people and the way this body of people here seems to represent a number of people. I mean I think that at least all the people in this room should be equally engaged in this discussion. Mr. O'Grady, we have to we have to can't talk all the same time. I'm glad to have you here. Make a couple of minutes. We'll go around and give Mr. Benowitz was a chance. There'll be an opportunity before this station goes off the air for any person to say make a statement you want to make. Don't that clear. You go ahead now and you have a couple you want to take a talk later then? Go ahead. Do you want to participate now? I'll participate when I want to. Well not right now then all right back Mr. Benowitz would you go ahead please?
No I think perhaps it's since what I have to say is not directly related to Mr. O'Connell's statement which I actually support and don't see as in any way sort of impinging on this. I just assume how it's go to to hear the other side of the demand issue anyway. I mean my position is quite I'd like to have a chance to put my demands forward if I could. All right well just just I want to make sure Mr. O'Binowitz you're through right from the time being. All right. It's talking to do what going around the table. I'd simply like to say that I'd prefer to listen before I talk. I had my chance to talk last night and I'm sure many of the people who are watching tonight were watching last night. I would rather sit and listen to what others have to say and I'll be glad to comment later. Very fine. Thank you. Would you give us your name on identification plate? My name is Jesse and I'm from the Enrage Department. We have six demands. Fuck you President Pusey. Fuck student. I'm sorry.
Okay. I also have a statement to make about the media. You see this we have a requirement on that. All right we'll take take it back up on the air then
I do think if we're going to have some discussion Mr. Jesse I'm happy to hear you but once let Mr. Daniels have a chance to say so. Well I just wanted to finish my program here. You see I feel that I have as much control as program as you do and I'm challenging you know you're right to control it the way you are right now. Do you want to moderate for that? I'd like to yes. For a moment or two. I don't think you can moderate any more than issue. Are you raising a criticism of my manipulation? Yes I am. Be damned if he hasn't caught me at my tactic. All right thank you. I don't know what to say. I don't know if you don't have something to say. Jesse watch you let me say. We have something to say but you cut me off when I was trying to
say it. No go ahead and say it if you want Mr. Jesse. We would like an expression during this part of the program at least of the most radical views we have and your preference for the most radical views we have. I'd like to let Mr. Daniels speak very frankly and I think that this gentleman has had his minutes on the show and I very much want to hear Mr. Daniels. I'm trying as a matter of fact I don't particularly want to be on a show. I think the reason discussion is something that we should have. The problem is what's being presented to you is not a radical issue but a reformist proposal. We're trying to have some discussion. Mr. Daniels we take the floor. Yes I very much like your life. I can't pronounce in any stronger terms the presence of King Collins here at this table. I'm not Mr. Jesse. He doesn't even want to say his own name. It's not that he's ashamed. I think he's ashamed of his politics which hardly represents the serious. I think King Collins beyond a lot of things but one thing he is beyond is the seriousness of this struggle that we are having here at Harvard. I am here speaking not for the strike
committee. I am a member of the strike committee and we are striking on eight demands. The content of those demands expresses our orientation both towards Harvard and towards the world at large. The content of those demands is an intent to express our feeling that Harvard as a corporation and as an educational institution is not operating in the interests of students and working people all around the world and the content of our demands is an attempt to make that clear. I don't think King Collins has any content any of his demands except that he is not interested in fighting the real enemy and he has turned many of his attacks on students at Harvard in his attempts to disrupt Harvard classes. I would like to be able to finish what I'm saying because I think what I'm saying is a much more interest to the people of Cambridge and the people of Boston
and what King Collins has to say if he wants to say what he wants to say he can say it later but I don't want him to take away from the few minutes that the media does a lot to a radical strike committee to present its demands. We have singled out one enemy at Harvard and that enemy is the Harvard corporation, which Mr. Collins is here and formally representing, that enemy is facilitates content of Harvard courses that we find oppressive to people all around the world and that corporation embarks on a policy of expansion into Cambridge and Boston and our demands are an attempt to meet that expansion directly. Furthermore that corporation now has an invitation to the military to have contracts with Harvard which contracts do exist for the production of military officers. We are fighting the existence of those contracts. We are fighting for the
complete abolition of Ratsia at Harvard.
Program
Harvard: Where do we go from here?, Part 1
Contributing Organization
WGBH (Boston, Massachusetts)
AAPB ID
cpb-aacip/15-j678s4jx9p
If you have more information about this item than what is given here, or if you have concerns about this record, we want to know! Contact us, indicating the AAPB ID (cpb-aacip/15-j678s4jx9p).
Description
Description
This program covers a panel discussion by students and faculty on the issue of student demands at Harvard University on April 17th, 1969. To show their opposition to the Vietnam War, Harvard student groups began to heavily protest the University's continuing contracts with the Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) during 1969. Student activists demanded that Harvard terminate ROTC contracts, withdraw ROTC academic credits, and create a new Afro-American Graduate Study Program. On April 10th, these protest activities reached a peak when student activists occupying University Hall were forcibly removed by police. This caused a mass protest at the University. In the aftermath, Roger Fisher moderates discussion among students, administrators, faculty about student strike at Harvard over ROTC, Afro-American studies, and expansion into Boston and Cambridge. Louis Lyons starts by reading the news from Harvard. Participants include Jim Kiernan, a WGBH consultant; Brey O'Connell, a member of the Committee for Radica
Created Date
1969-04-17
Asset type
Program
Genres
Debate
Topics
Education
Public Affairs
Politics and Government
Subjects
Students for a Democratic Society (U.S.); African Americans -- Study and teaching; Strikes and lockouts; Harvard University; Universities and colleges; students; Student protesters
Rights
Rights Note:,Rights:,Rights Credit:WGBH Educational Foundation,Rights Type:All,Rights Coverage:,Rights Holder:WGBH Educational Foundation
Media type
Moving Image
Duration
00:19:03
Embed Code
Copy and paste this HTML to include AAPB content on your blog or webpage.
Credits
Publisher: WGBH Educational Foundation
AAPB Contributor Holdings
WGBH
Identifier: 11e3cd1b4cac1e6e1177bda34a60c495972a108d (ArtesiaDAM UOI_ID)
Format: video/quicktime
Color: Color
Duration: 00:00:00
If you have a copy of this asset and would like us to add it to our catalog, please contact us.
Citations
Chicago: “Harvard: Where do we go from here?, Part 1,” 1969-04-17, WGBH, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed July 21, 2024, http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-15-j678s4jx9p.
MLA: “Harvard: Where do we go from here?, Part 1.” 1969-04-17. WGBH, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. July 21, 2024. <http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-15-j678s4jx9p>.
APA: Harvard: Where do we go from here?, Part 1. Boston, MA: WGBH, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-15-j678s4jx9p