Quo Vadimus. “Where are we going?”. Senators, this is not just some obscure Latin phrase I pulled out of my ass to seem smart. Quo Vadimus is the name of a DiPhi newspaper that ran for around a year amid the turbulent 1960s, thus proving to be an intriguing snapshot into history and the state of DiPhi at the time.

         The first issue of Quo Vadimus went by the moniker, “A Voice in the Wilderness”, likely perpetuating the idea that the newspaper would provide accurate and relevant reporting amongst the “stream of left-wing brainwashing articles”, as they so elegantly stated in that first issue. At the time, “noted leftist and master of hyperbole” Hubert Hawkins was the DiPhi president and Senator William R. Bullard was placed in charge of writing articles on future senate activities. Senator Bullard was reportedly one of the last monarchists though such claims remain in contention. One aspect unique to the first issue of Quo Vadimus was an advice column, featuring cliché guidance on common issues amongst UNC-Chapel Hill students such as dating women and trying to properly eat at Lenoir (whatever that means). The first issue of Quo Vadimus also featured an open letter to senators where Joint Senate President Hawkins asserted that no lines should be drawn between personal and academic interests, believing the two spheres should coexist in one’s life. Thus, the implication is that members of DiPhi should live by Hawkin’s philosophy, with it also being made clear that DiPhi and similar organizations must be concerned with issues on their campus or else cause the destruction of humanity. While certainly an extreme statement, the open letter does provide an admirable argument for how embracing an academically curious lifestyle is important for the general welfare of the country.

         As the Quo Vadimus newspaper continued, it became more refined and developed its unique structure which remained fairly consistent between publications. For instance, many issues featured a plethora of DiPhi self-promotion, with the paper posting upcoming resolutions or the results of past debates. Some resolutions proved fascinating, such as the one conducted on April 21st, 1964, which posited the question of whether an omnipotent, omniscient God exists (very similar to a resolution proposed just a few weeks ago in these chambers). Other resolutions proved problematic, such as the one asking whether fraternities with clauses discriminating based on race should be permitted on UNC’s campus. While I understand 1960s standards are very different from 2020 standards, I would hope the right answer to this resolution would be abundantly obvious. Along with posting DiPhi events, the newspaper featured various articles which often tended to be jovial in nature aside from the relatively serious “Pearls in your path” articles introduced in the fifth issue. Going by the name “Trivia” originally, these articles provide commentary on relevant national issues of the times. For example, one “Pearls in your path” article discussed debates over gun control following the Kennedy assassination, concluding that gun control would prove ineffective since most guns are “stolen” and these regulations would supposedly only hinder honest Americans hoping to utilize guns to hunt. Resembling the opinion of many modern right-wing politicians, this article demonstrates how gun control has remained an issue far longer than many would have comprehended. Despite boasting to be an intellectual publication, the newspaper embraced various archaic notions such as in an article that asserted that since women are supposedly equipped with the purposes of sex and love, they should be great at it and thus the cases of unhappy marriages are vexing issues. Hopefully, I do not have to explain why this is problematic. Though not all of DiPhi’s opinions were inexorably awful at the time, one article provides a fascinating discussion on the issues with mass education and how it discourages retaining information and stifles passion in learning. Quo Vadimus also presented various poems and short stories. Additionally, advertisements from local companies such as Carolina Coffee Shop and Sutton’s started being featured in the eighth issue, proving that Quo Vadimus was garnering increased legitimacy as a publication. Quo Vadimus was finally becoming a worthy rival to the Daily Tar Heel and it seemed to only just be getting started.

         The cracks began to show in the Quo Vadimus publication when it stopped posting weekly papers, with the break between the eleventh and twelfth publication being a couple of months. Once the twelfth publication did eventually release it was in a sorry state, scrambled together and missing many features of the newspaper such as “Pearls in your Path”. In an open letter, the editor of the newspaper apologizes for the state of the newspaper while remaining hopeful about the future, claiming that Quo Vadimus was just getting started and they had “big plans” for the publication such as new articles, sections, etc. Yet these proved to be empty promises, as that very paper proved to be Quo Vadimus’s last issue. Overall, there were twelve issues, making Quo Vadimus’s run relatively short. Despite failing to maintain enough support to continue publications, Quo Vadimus does succeed at showing the state of DiPhi and the nation as a whole in the early 1960s. Thus, its historical significance cannot be understated. Luckily DiPhi learned from its mistakes with Quo Vadimus and recently revived their 1894 publication the White and Blue. Like Quo Vadimus, the White and Blue features political commentary, short stories, poetry, history, and reviews while also serving as a blog. It is clear from Diphi’s long history with journalism that the two go hand in hand, serving as an avenue for spreading their ideals and beliefs. Quo Vadimus failed to utilize its platform to promote the general welfare of UNC’s campus. Let’s hope the White and Blue can succeed in this endeavor.