Two University of Nebraska students hand out anti-Vietnam war materials at a booth in the Union. Nebraska was not unlike many other schools across the country with its large amount of active student voices during the war.

Soshnik speaks to student protesters in the ROTC building on May 6, 1970. Dan Ladely, a student protester whose former roommate fought and died in Vietnam, stands to his left. Courtesy the Daily Nebraskan.

 

Sam Laughlin, History 250: The Historian Craft

In an era full of controversy, contention, and discourse across all of American life, the figures who helped maintain chaos tend to stand out among the rest. In a period of rapid social change during the 1960s and 1970s, those who kept their heads down and worked towards a better, more prosperous future tend to be forgotten. When chancellors and presidents of universities around the country fought against student activism and stubbornly attempted to maintain control, there was a man who openly embraced the voice of the youth on a campus that was seemingly always on the brink. Joseph Soshnik set himself apart from many of the other authority figures of his era because of his open embrace of student activism and proactiveness in his duties, without ever seeking praise for doing so.

Soshnik was born in Omaha, Nebraska on February 14, 1920 and entered his role as chancellor on October 1, 1968. [1] He preceded Clifford M. Hardin who had served 13 years as chancellor and left during a time “marked with difficulty on a national level, and a wrenching transition within the university.” [2] At the time of arrival, Soshnik was immediately faced with the challenges of forming a university system with the then-called Municipal University of Omaha. Financial strains also were a large issue with the Municipal University of Omaha and these problems followed into the University’s merger. Parallel to the confusion of the transition, Soshnik bounced from the title of chancellor to president as his focus became solely on the Lincoln campus. Soshnik came into his administrative role in the middle of this tenuous process making for no time to settle in after Hardin was chosen to serve as Secretary of Agriculture for the Nixon Administration. [3]

In addition to the difficulties of expanding the University, a wave of student political activism began to crash on the University of Nebraska. At the basis of many protests and organized events was the topic of the Vietnam War. By 1968, the war was the center focus of national and local media as involvement in Southeast Asia was escalating with seemingly no end in sight. Lincoln’s campus was no different than many other schools around the country, except rather than facing constant efforts to suppress student voices, Nebraska students had a president that was willing to negotiate. [4]

Anti-war sentiments began at the latest in 1965 when the UNL chapter of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) was created by graduate student Carl Davidson. [5] This relatively small act at the time marked a significant moment when national issues became campus issues and it created the foundation for larger acts in future.

That larger act came in response to the announcement on April 30, 1970 that U.S. President Richard Nixon authorized American and South Vietnamese forces to enter the neighboring country of Cambodia. On the Monday following this announcement, the school’s newspaper the Daily Nebraskan published an editorial urging students to protest against this decision. [6] To add to the discontent of the student population, news hit campus about the shooting of unarmed students on the campus of Kent State. It quickly became clear that protests could have the potential of boiling over.

Students began a strike against classes, formed more rallies, marched on the local draft board, and occupied the ROTC building. [7] Demonstrators in the ROTC building began a sit-in, primarily in protest of the Kent State events, and created a list of demands. The demands consisted of asking for amnesty for those arrested at the draft board protest and those who might be arrested at the ROTC building, university backing for the National Student Association Strike, suspension of the ROTC program at the university until the U.S. was withdrawn from Southeast Asia, disarmament of campus police, and a public meeting of the Board of Regents. These demands were given to President Soshnik when he arrived at the protest.[8]

Soshnik negotiated with no intention of using force, but rather explain to the students the difficulty of their protests influencing U.S. decision-making in Southeast Asia. They struggled to come to a conclusion after hours of negotiating even though many accounts state that the students believed Soshnik was “negotiating in good faith.” [9] Another issue in the negotiations seemed to be the acts of Dr. Stephen Rozman who supposedly advised the student group to hinder negotiations when an agreement seemed near. Rozman’s involvement with student activism and Soshnik would not end here, but rather would be revisited at the end of the president’s tenure.

At around 3:30 A.M. on May 1, Soshnik was finally able to read a statement after consulting with other administrators. Almost all of the students demands would be met and Soshnik explained he would discuss the issue of campus police disarmament with the Board of Regents. Student representatives would be allowed to speak at multiple open meetings and the president requested that campus remain violence-free during this process. [10] As a result of Soshnik’s cooperation, no students involved in the sit-in were subject to university suspension.

Soshnik’s desire to hear students concerns put him in the minority. Nebraska Governor Nobert Tienmann claimed the actions of the students to be “lawlessness” and was not against implementing the National Guard as other universities had. [11] In the end, the National Guard was never used on the Lincoln campus and students were allowed to voice their opinions in various ways.

Soshnik’s handling of the events of the ROTC building occupation and rising student unrest portrayed how he was willing to let students voice their opinion if they did so nonviolently. He certainly did not think all of their protests were done in a conductive manner and even considered some to be “counterproductive,” but his willingness compared to other authority figures of the time shows how progressively he looked at this situation. [12]

Although outright praise was not always prevalent for the actions of Soshnik, many can now look back and understand how well he handled situations like the ROTC building’s occupation. Paul Olson was an English professor at the time who was involved in the anti-war movement and he spoke of his experiences in an NET article in 2017. He noted that Soshnik was a difference maker “because he stayed in communication with the students, and he stayed in communication with me [and] with the faculty.’” [13]

His actions were also met with his words of support for controlled student activism at places beyond just the University. In November of 1970, a semester after the ROTC occupation, Soshnik spoke to the Fairbury Education Association about the topic.

His speaker notes for the event clearly indicate his understanding of student concern and core argument. He notes the “frustration of our young people as they live in an atmosphere of controversy, violence and hostility [met] with resulting anguish, shattered confidence, anger, and bewilderment.” [14] He claimed this time period to be a “crisis of understanding” and noted that “many Americans have reacted to this emerging culture with an intolerance of their own.”

Perhaps the most notable quote from his notes for this speech is when he states that “a nation driven to use the weapons of war on its youth, is a nation on the edge of chaos… the whole object of a free government is to allow the nation to redefine its purposes in the light of new needs without sacrificing the accumulated wisdom of its living traditions.” [15]

Soshnik’s rhetoric was also seen beyond his time as UNL president as he even noted to a Doane College graduating class in August of 1971 that “much that is being asked [by students and young people] can be accomplished.” [16] Perhaps unsurprisingly, most young people took a liking to Soshnik’s open-mindedness and desire to maintain positive discourse. Reports even say that when he spoke at a two-hour “strike class” (hosted by the Union to focus on military and foreign policy) he was met with a standing ovation from students. [17]

It should be noted that not all parties involved with student activism during the time of Soshnik’s presidency went unpunished. A young professor (the aforementioned Steve Rozman) who helped with the occupation of the ROTC building faced the harshest and only punishment from the event. In an investigation following the 1970 academic school year, Rozman was dismissed by the Board of Regents for his involvement despite no other faculty or students facing similar punishment. In the same year an investigation was made further into the Rozman situation and “concluded that Rozman ‘was not guilty of inappropriate actions.’” [18] These actions taken by the higher administration certainly led many students and faculty members to believe that the University was not dissimilar to other schools around the country in their dealings with student activism.

The decision to remove Rozman clearly came from beyond Soshnik and thus it can be difficult to pin the dismissal on him. Nonetheless, this can be seen as another event that pushed Soshnik towards resignation. Although he would not admit to it, accounts by those like Gary Seacrest of the Daily Nebraskan suggest that “Soshnik’s sudden departure [was] bound to raise speculation” over its causes. [19] Rozman’s dismissal expectedly upset many students as he was one of the few faculty members that stood in clear support for their beliefs.

Rozman’s investigation by the Spelts Commission also saw some criticism towards Soshnik. According to the same Daily Nebraskan article by Seacrest, “the Commission noted that Soshnik’s conciliatory remark during the occupation that ‘there have been no rules or laws broken tonight…’ should not have been made.” [20] Although Soshnik is also commended for his cooperation with students in the report, most of his good-doings were overshadowed for many by his support in agreeing with the Regents decision to not rehire Rozman. Soshnik’s internal feelings about the events are impossible to prove or disprove at this point, but one can assume that even if the University’s president disagreed with the dismissal of the young professor, he would never release a statement contrary to the stance of the Board of Regents.

Regardless of when or what specifically led to Soshnik’s decision to step down, he did so at the Board of Regents meeting on Saturday March 13, 1971. After just over two years at the position of President, Soshnik emotionally announced that he would be accepting a position at Pettis, Smith, Polian, Inc. to work in investment banking.

His announcement was met with shock and sadness by students and administrators alike. Chancellor D. B. Varner stated “I am genuinely depressed at the prospect of having Joe Soshnik leave the University of Nebraska-- particularly at this difficult time. We are not likely to find a successor who possesses his unique combination of qualities—both human and professional.” Perhaps even more telling was the response of the ASUN president who was directly involved in many student protests, including the occupation of the ROTC building. He simply said, “the students are losing a friend.” [22] News of the resignation even went national to an extent as the New York Times claimed that “the resignation stunned the university community.” [23] In Prairie University, it is noted that Senator Terry Carpenter said Soshnik was “one of the finest men that I have ever met” and a heavy critic of the University, Val Peterson, claimed Soshnik was “one of the finest men that ever served the University of Nebraska.” [24]

Soshnik served as president until June of 1971 when he began to live the remainder of his life out of the public eye as Peter Magrath took over as interim president. He died in November of 2002 in St. Louis after never returning to an administrative role at the University of Nebraska.

With the incredible amount of discourse and dismay that littered the 1960s and 1970s, figures like Joseph Soshnik and their efforts to help sensibility prevail can easily be forgotten. In his short time as University President, Soshnik had to deal with a multitude of protests and controversies and did so with dignity. When other university’s administrators chose to assert their power over the student body and even in some cases put them in harm’s way, Soshnik chose to listen and try to find a middle ground. Although it may not have concluded in a way that was conflict-free, his efforts must be recognized as successful considering the many failures of those in positions similar to him. Soshnik’s leadership qualities during his time as president helped steer the University of Nebraska away from violence in a time of instability and opened avenues for student discourse well beyond his tenure.

Endnotes:

1. University of Nebraska-Lincoln, "Joseph Soshnik," Office of the Chancellor, February 24, 2017, accessed November 04, 2018, https://www.unl.edu/chancellor/joseph-soshnik.
2. University of Nebraska-Lincoln, “Joseph Soshnik”
3. University of Nebraska-Lincoln, “Joseph Soshnik”
4. Omaha World Herald. Nixon Presents the No. 1 College Plaque to Coach Bob Devaney and Captains Dan Schneiss and Jerry Murtaugh. January 14, 1971. Lincoln. Accessed November 11, 2018. https://dataomaha.com/documents/from-the-archives-nixons-visit-honored-1970-huskers.
5. Stephen Witte, “UNL Reaction to the Cambodian Incursion and the Kent State Shootings, May 1970,” Nebraska History 75 (1994): 261-271
6. Jim Pedersen, editorial, Daily Nebraskan, May 4, 1970, 1.
7. Pedersen, Daily Nebraskan
8. Ladely, interview by author. "ASUN Supports Strike," Daily Nebraskan, May 5, 1970, 2.
9. Witte, “UNL Reaction to the Cambodian Incursion and the Kent State Shootings, May 1970”
10. Witte, “UNL Reaction to the Cambodian Incursion and the Kent State Shootings, May 1970”
11. Tiemann Says Lawless Acts Undermine Dissent," North Platte Telegraph, May 5, 1970, I; "Tiemann: No Plan to Call Guard," 6.
12. "4500 Students at Nebraska Vote to Adopt 3-Day Boycott," Omaha World-Herald, May 6, 1970, 8.
13. Daily Nebraskan. UNL President Joe Soshnik Reads a Statement to Students Occupying the ROTC Building as Dan Ladely Looks On. May 6, 1970. Lincoln. In NET Nebraska. September 20, 2017. Accessed November 11, 2018. http://netnebraska.org/article/news/1095577/we-had-do-something-vietnam-protests-unl-and-one-tense-week-1970.
14. Mike Tobias. “We Had to Do Something": Vietnam Protests at UNL and One Tense Week in 1970." NET Nebraska. September 20, 2017. Accessed November 07, 2018. http://netnebraska.org/article/news/1095577/we-had-do-something-vietnam-protests-unl-and-one-tense-week-1970.
15. Joseph Soshnik. “Notes for Talk to Fairbury Education Association.” Speech, Fairbury Education Association, November 23, 1970. University of Nebraska Archives. RG 05-16-02.
16. Soshnik, “Notes for Talk to Fairbury Education Association”
17. "Lincoln Star Newspaper Archives, Aug 14, 1971, P. 5," NewspaperArchive.com, August 14, 1971. , accessed November 04, 2018, https://newspaperarchive.com/lincoln-star-aug-14-1971-p-5/.
18. Witte, “UNL Reaction to the Cambodian Incursion and the Kent State Shootings, May 1970”
19. Gus Anchondo, "A Three Part Analysis of the Antiwar Movement during the Vietnam War” (2016). Dissertations, Theses, & Student Research, Department of History. 88. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/historydiss/88
20. Gary, Seacrest, “Tearful, but with resolution Soshnik quits as President.” Daily Nebraskan. March 15, 1971. Accessed November 7, 2018. Daily Nebraskan Archives.
21. Seacrest, “Tearful, but with resolution Soshnik quits as President.” Daily Nebraskan
22. Seacrest, “Tearful, but with resolution Soshnik quits as President.” Daily Nebraskan
23. The New York Times Archives. "U. of Nebraska President Resigns for Investment Job." The New York Times. March 14, 1971. Accessed November 11, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/1971/03/14/archives/u-of-nebraska-president-resigns-for-investment-job.html.
24. Knoll, Robert E. Prairie University: A History of the University of Nebraska. Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska Press, 1995. Acquired through the University of Nebraska Libraries