"Civis Americanus Sum."

(The Crimson invites all men in the University to submit signed communications of timely interest. It assumes no responsibility, however, for sentiments expressed under this head and reserves the right to exclude any whose publication would be palpably inappropriate.)

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

In Wednesday's edition of the CRIMSON there appeared a communication literally effervescing with a most vaporous chauvinism. The gentleman displays a lively merriment over the treatment given the Reds rounded up by the Government. To him these creatures are a "collection of vermin," a "mass of scum," and, according to him, "it is not far wrong to say that the greater their anguish the greater the pleasure of all real Americans." But we must halt and reflect. Whom does he men by Americans? I feel certain that a large number who proudly bear that name and say "Civis Americanus sum," do not feel so disposed; for are not Americans human? Are they not to be included in the category of men who are sponsors of a twentieth century civilization? Or will my colleague interpose that we have such a phrase for mere aesthetic embellishment? And again, if by Americans he means the real indigenous Americans, the Indians, who wielded the tomahawk with a flendish delight, prancing about their scalpless victims about to be roasted at the stake, then we concur in chorus that "the greater their anguish the greater their pleasure"; but that age has passed. If men progress mentally, culturally, and spiritually, then I am convinced we have left far behind the stage when human pleasure increases directly with the increase of the anguish of his fellow.

I am neither Radical, Socialist, nor Sovietist, but just a plain American, and if I should "feel that the Reds are not getting a square deal," then, according to Mr. W's deduction, I am a "disloyal citizen and a spy, liable to be placed before a firing squad." This appears to be rather illogical logic; feeling about the manner in which humans are treated is not synonymous with enacting the role of a traitor. I beg to differ.

We live today in an era of political unrest and consequently political intolerance. The people of the Middle Ages lived in an epoch of religious intolerance. We now learn that they were wrong; let us take care lest posterity judge of us as we judge of the Age of Darkness. Then some humans were mentally favored beyond their contemporaries, and preached ideas realized only much later; whatever of folly was proposed by them lost its bearing and fell away, but whatever of good was championed by them has survived and has pushed man on in his development. If these Reds have aught to say let them speak, for if there is substance in their views, it will out anyway, but if their leaders are false prophets their curses will be transformed into blessings and their idle words will fall as rain from the duck's back and prove as barren as the seed in the sands of the Sahara. At all events, calling your opponent names, attributing to him harsh epithets, and gloating over his misery, any such action is not American and does not help to clear up the issue. JOSEP: S. SHUBOW '20.