News

Harvard College Will Ignore Student Magazine Article Echoing Hitler Unless It Faces Complaints, Deming Says

News

Hoekstra Says Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences Is ‘On Stronger Footing’ After Cost-Cutting

News

Housing Day To Be Held Friday After Spring Recess in Break From Tradition

News

Eversource Proposes 13% Increase in Gas Rates This Winter

News

Student Employees Left Out of Work and In the Dark After Harvard’s Diversity Office Closures

The Fallacies Of Preparedness

Communications

NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED

To the Editor of the CRIMSON:

There is an objection to limiting the term, Pacifist, to those who refuse to go to war and those who favor them. There are many who are just as extreme in their hostility to war, but whose conception of the State and her prerogatives forbids them to disobey her decrees. The very fact of his living in an organization such as the State makes, a man liable to her laws. Though these laws be against his conscience, he must obey them as he would his parents. The Draft Law was against the conscience of many people, but it is as much a law of the land as the most fundamental provision in our Constitution.

Yet, certainly there is no religion or philosophy of life which permits a man to kill his fellow. So does war violate a man's ethical principles. Combine these two concepts, of the State and of the Conscience, and you have the Pacifist. Consequently, a vote condemning those who refuse to go to war is not a defeat for Pacifism. PHILIP C. JOHNSON '27.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags