The Midpeninsula Free University

MFU Articles Published by The Stanford Daily
1967

Disunity at Free University?

By Georgia Kelly and Paul Bundy

The Free University of Palo Alto is truly like the Holy Roman Empire. Neither Holy, Roman, Free, nor a University. This became apparent at a meeting a week ago at the Co-op Building where major decisions were definitively decided.

A vestige of former times, the Free University still defines itself: Bound to existing power structure and handicapped by modes of thought fostered by big business, by the military establishment, by consensus politics, and by the mass media, it (the American educational system) is unable to consider freely and objectively the cultural, economic and political forces so rapidly transforming the modern world… A revolution in American education is required to meet today's needs and a new type of university—a free university—must provide the impetus for change.

A motion made at the meeting that the name be changed from the Free University to the Open University would best characterize what became evident Sunday. Though this motion was voted down by a large majority, other motions which were passed seem to support the appropriateness of the suggested change, e.g., an open curriculum which might include Nazis, John Birchers, Psychopaths, etc.

Experimental

The Free University decided to subsidize an experiment in communal living but rejected a proposal to come out monolithically in favor of poly-sexual and poly-pervert free sex experiments to provide the backbone of the community. Vic Lovell, newly elected coordinator, commented that it would be wrong to impose this vision on others if it wasn't their thing.

A majority voted for the possibility of a political stand but added enough amendments to insure the decision's emptiness. No action was taken as to whether the "Free" University as a body would take political stands on such things as the International War Crimes Tribunal, the Anti-Draft Union, the recent coup in Greece, etc., and 3 specific motion to give $150.00 to the Anti-Draft Union was rejected though $100.00 had already been loaned for a Mother's Day Be-In.

The main issues seemed to revolve around the majority's total lack of understanding of the Present as History, the dialectics of Freedom and Liberty. Freedom was conceived of in a wholly procedural way and thus suggestions by some of the membership that stands be taken on issues involving substantive freedom were consistently avoided. At a time when some felt American Radicals should dedicate themselves to fighting American Imperialism, freedom's chief enemy in the contemporary world, the majority could only reiterate platitudes on the preeminence of the dark night of the soul.

The majority's response to the demands to support substantive issues was a legally incorporated experiment in communal living free of the onerous requirements of necessary labour. Since the political minority thought that the Free University should be more than a communal womb for some of its more insecure members, they withdrew from the organization.

Some observers seem to interpret the internal struggle in the "Free" University as more a matter of personalities than principles. In fact, one disenchanted member was heard muttering as he left that coordinator Vic Lovell is little more than the political arm of Robb Crist, Stanford's aging guru.

By Robb Crist

A week ago, at the conclusion of a marathon five hour general meeting of the Free University of Palo Alto, a small group of perhaps a dozen people, mostly of a Marxist-Maoist political persuasion, announced their withdrawal from the organization. Two of the dissidents, Anatole Anton and A. Videl-Madjer also said that they were withdrawing their course, The Theory of Political Struggle, from the Free U. It might be more accurate, however, to say that they were withdrawing from their course, since if the students request it, the Free U. will probably find someone else to teach the course.

This then is the most recent result of what is alleged to be a struggle between hippies and political radicals for control of the Free U. However, to regard the situation in this way, i.e., as hippies versus radicals, is to completely misunderstand what has been going on.

The real situation is this: a very small group of ultra-leftist political fanatics, people who for the most part have been unable to get along in any organization they have ever been in, are simply using the influx of new members in the Free U. to excuse away their own political and social ineptitude. They want to justify themselves and so they say, The Free U. has changed. Once it was a force for radical political action. Now, however, it has fallen into the hands of psychedelically entranced hippies who prefer Be-ins to Sit-ins, etc.

Still Political

But in fact there were and still are a great many politically active people in the Free U., people who are willing to participate in political protest but who wish to use their own judgment as to the activities in which they decide to become involved. Thus, for example, the newly elected Coordinator, Vic Lovell, as well as the two Assistant Coordinators, Kathy Kirby and Sotere Terregian, have endorsed the view that the Free U. take political stands, and at the last meeting the group voted to help raise funds for the Anti-Draft Union. It was, in fact, one of the so-called hippies that originally invited Anatole Anton to teach his course on political struggle.

There is always a danger that political activism may become a real cop-out, a way of avoiding looking at oneself. Thus the cry, Don't you know people are dying in Vietnam may become a way of distracting attention from the real personal responsibility of treating fairly the people right here in Palo Alto. We have a certain responsibility for what our country does, but a great deal more responsibility for what we ourselves do in our everyday dealings with one another. It is highly unlikely we can succeed in doing anything about the war in Vietnam if we can't even stop our warring factionalism in Palo Alto.

There is room in the Free U. for many kinds of activity and political persuasion. As it says in the preamble, The doors of the Free U. are open to all… Those doors are still open.