Ptashne Calls Faculty Approval Of Viet Resolution An Accident

Mark Ptashne, lecturer in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology and a proponent of the anti-war resolution passed at Tuesday's Faculty meeting, said last night that the resolution never would have passed "if everyone knew what they were voting for."

"The Faculty meeting was very bizarre," Ptashne told members of the student Mobilization Committee (SMC). "It looks like a victory, but we came very close to losing. Most Faculty members simply do not want to overthrow the ordinary niceties and express political opinion on the floor of a Faculty meeting."

Ptashne accused the Faculty-which passed his resolution condemning the Vietnam war but did not pass a milder resolution supporting the Moratorium until it was considerably modified-of having no understanding of the meaning of the two proposals.

Amazing

"The amazing thing is how they could accept our statement and reject a moderate statement supporting the day of protest," Ptashne said. (The Faculty amended the original Moratorium resolution-proposed by Everett I. Mendelsohn, professor of the History of Science-to say that the Faculty "recognizes that October 15 is a day of protest" rather than "affirms its support of the day of protest.")

"You have no idea how many people want to be the first to say that they're against the war." Ptashne said. "The problem is that they have trouble saying it on the floor of the Faculty. Their solution was to hold a convocation instead."

Ptashne outlined to the crowd of about 100 what he understood to be the basic strategy of the Faculty meeting. "It firstseemed logical that they would either let the Mendelsohn motion through since it was so weak and then recess or else recess immediately," he said. "Instead they amended Mendelsohn's motion so that it was apolitical.

"Then it seemed that they would either amend Mendelsohn's motion and recess or, if the amendment failed, recess immediately," Ptashne continued. "That would have been rational. But what actually happened was that Mendelsohn gave a strong speech, stressing that the Moratorium was a political and moral matter that should be discussed at the meeting. Our opposition panicked.

"Because that amendment passed we thought we were lost," Ptashne said. But at 5:45 p.m., when Seymour Martin Lipset, professor of Government and Social Relations, moved for a 15-minute recess, "no one understood the strategy." By 6 p.m. at a Faculty meeting, Ptashne said, no one is really concentrating- "you have to keep mainlining dexedrine to keep awake."

The recess lost by a vote of 214-215. "There's at most 10 per cent accuracy in such a count." Ptashne said. "If anyone on their side had called for a recount we probably couldn't have voted on the war. But President Pusey called the question. The final effect was just what we wanted, a ringing declaration."

Ptashne called the arguments of those favoring a convocation "ridiculous and amazing." "But people are not going to risk what they perceive to be the protective situation they find themselves in," he said.

"I must admit that I find much more clear thinking and commitment among students than among the Faculty," he added.