Amid Boston Overdose Crisis, a Pair of Harvard Students Are Bringing Narcan to the Red Line
At First Cambridge City Council Election Forum, Candidates Clash Over Building Emissions
Harvard’s Updated Sustainability Plan Garners Optimistic Responses from Student Climate Activists
‘Sunroof’ Singer Nicky Youre Lights Up Harvard Yard at Crimson Jam
‘The Architect of the Whole Plan’: Harvard Law Graduate Ken Chesebro’s Path to Jan. 6
The body also endorsed overwhelmingly a motion affirming "the right of those who wish to attend classes to attend them without disruption."
For Strike Continuance
Before specific proposals were heard, several speakers urged continuance of the strike. "When we are in a political struggle we are in it for victory," Leslie F. Griffin Jr. '70, president of the Association of African and Afro-American Students, said. "Afro is no strike whatever this meeting decides, and will remain on strike until we get a satisfactory answer to our demands."
Myles V. Lynk '70, also of Afro, added, "If the strike is discontinued by the majority, it forces minority groups into actions less moderate and less effective."
"We will continue to act until our eight demands are met," Jared K. Ross-man '71, a member of the SDS strike steering committee, said at the meeting. "The Corporation would like us to believe that we have won, but we have not won. It's clear that the Corporation has every intention of keeping ROTC here--and extracurricular genocide is still genocide. Paine Hall scholarships have not been restored. Afro's demands are not yet met. The Wilson Report says nothing about low-cost housing; Harvard will continue to expand, continue to demolish homes."
Barry F. O'Connell, a teaching fellow in History and Literature and acting chairman of the CRSR, urged that the strike continue until Tuesday, adding taht an understanding of the Faculty's difficulties "must not blind us to how much they must yet do."
On the expansion demands, O'Connell said, "Do not think that Calkin's statement to the Corporation is any response at all. The Wilson Report itself is not an adequate response--it doesn't do anything, it just talks. The people of the city must have full participation and veto power over their own lives.
The CRSR proposal, defeated yesterday by a voice vote, resolved that the strike be extended until Tuesday because Afro's demands were not yet answered, because of "grave reservation about the adequacy of the Wilson ROTC demands will not be met. The motion added that the decision of whether or not to strike must be left to individual consciences.
"To the question of whether the Corporation's new statement is adequate to meet the strikers' demands, the answer is a resounding no," Chester W. Hartman, assistant professor of City Planning, said, speaking of the CRSR proposal. "Harvard assumes no direct responsibility; the Report talks vaguely about adequate relocation, but people wind up in poor housing paying high rent. Harvard has adopted a policy of pushing out the people of Cambridge."
Ending the Strike
Bruce Chalmers, Gordon McKay Professor of Metallurgy and Master of Winthrop House, spoke in favor of ending the strike. "The Faculty takes your demands seriously, but as a definition of problems that must be faced rather that as specific demands that must be met," he said. "The most recent statement of the Corporation convinces me that the Corporation is fully determined to adopt a more humane policy in the future and correct the damage done."
"ROTC has been reduced in status to an extracurricular activity, with no more and no less privilege that SDS," Chalmers added, to the cheers from the crowd. "If the strike ends we will not return to normal--we are moving into an era of change. But change must be made not with haste."
"The objectives behind your demands are impossible to achieve quickly," Jerome S. Bruner, professor of Psychology, said early in the meeting. "The great issue is whether we are moving in the direction set up by the extraordinary series of events of the past week," said Bruner, who introduced the resolution ending ROTC contracts which the Faculty of Arts and Sciences passed Thursday.
In addition to the motions introduced yesterday by Kaplan, Frankel, and the CRSR, two more resolutions urged termination of the strike. A proposal by the Coalition for a Democratic University declared dissatisfaction on many points of the Faculty action, but expressed confidence that "substantive questions will be end to the strike "in favor of cooperative action toward a fully democratic University." The motion was later withdrawn in favor of Kaplan's.
The fifth proposal, not presented until near the end of the meeting, resolved that the "strike be ended today," as the beneficial discussion raised by it would continue in any case. This motion was eventually tabled.
Kalpan argued his proposal as a show of support for the Faculty. "Now is the time for a positive response in view of the Faculty commitment to progress," he said. "We urge the Corporation to respond favorably to resolutions of the Faculty, and we urge Faculty to continue cooperating with Afro."
The proposal was voted on in three sections, with body of the resolution and each of the two amendments taken separately. The no-confidence vote was taken first--carrying 1873 to 1568 by standing vote after a voice vote.
While the votes were being tabulated Alan E. Heimert, Master of Eliot House, urged the crowd to listen to the demands of the black students. "There is a great deal more to be heard, a great deal more to be understood," he said. "The blacks have presented specific concerns that are extraordinary and that require an extraordinary response from the University."
Heimert's speech was made after debate had officially been closed, and James T. Kilbreth '69 sent the chair three separate objections on this point which were not recognized.
"It was an act of courtesy by the chair," explained Charles A. Stevenson, teaching fellow in Government and the meeting's parliamentarian. "We were tabulating the votes, and there was nothing else to do." Stevenson said that Kilbreth's objections had been overruled because Heimert was not actually participation in the debate.
Kilbreath also made three motions to open debate, which were ignored. "At the time we were in the process of voting, so such a motion wouldn't be in order," Stevenson said. "It was clear the meeting wanted to have debate closed."
The vote on the body of the proposal as written by Kaplan was taken next and carried 2411 to 1129. The last amendment was passed by a voice vote.
A motion to adjourn was first defeated by voice vote, the retaken in a standing vote which carried 1467 to 182.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.