Shallow Liberalism

(Ed. Note--The Crimson does not necessarily endorse opinions expressed in printed communications. No attention will be paid to anonymous letters and only under special conditions, at the request of the writer, will names be withheld.)

To the Editor of the CRIMSON:

We are tempted to echo a recent CRIMSON editorial by saying, "What the CRIMSON needs more than anything else is to go on a sustained bat," but it is obvious that the need has long since been fulfilled. Now that the CRIMSON has won the goodwill of Benito Mussolini and the Harvard Corporation, it might be well for the National Student League to point out some fallacies, intentional or otherwise, in your editorials of Feb. 15 and 19 on our opposition to Professor Gini.

The allusion to glass houses is invalid. Had we been living in a glass house it would have been shattered long ago, though not, we may be sure, by the feeble, muddle-headed editorials in the CRIMSON.

The fact is that we are well aware of the true nature of the liberalism which the CRIMSON claims to represent. It masks its partiality to fascism under the false appearance of hearing both sides of the question." For example, to the CRIMSON, Professor Gini has acquired "the added distinction of service" in the foremost fascist state. And while to the CRIMSON "it should be worth while to bear what Professor Gini may tell of the experiment," we are convinced that the university has nothing to gain from it.

The National Student League, instead of "shouting for liberalism," condemns this type of it as a class weapon for the furthering of fascism. We favor freedom of speech for those who further the interests of the students and the working class. Professor Gini does not come under this category, as the condition of the universities and the working class in Italy and Germany proves.

The CRIMSON cannot excuse its "liberalism" with the absurd statement that Fascism is foreign to the United States. For Fascism is really the use of brute force by the ruling class to preserve capitalism. In the United States we see such examples of it as Vigilante terror on the West Coast and vicious strike-breaking and anti-union activities throughout the country.

Monday's editorial proclaims itself in favor of toleration for both Fascism and Communism. Unfortunately it never works out that way. We have yet to see the CRIMSON defending a radical, as it did Professor Gini and Ernst Hanfstaengl, merely because it wished to preserve Harvard's liberalism. We notice that there are no faculty members giving the Communist position, as there are ones defending Fascism. The best case in point was the expulsion of Professor Laski from the faculty some time ago because he was too radical.

Our opposition to Professor Gini, then, is based upon a full realization of both the shallowness of Harvard's "liberalism," and also the harm that Professor Gini and the type of government he represents can do in the long run to Harvard and the nation. National Student League.

Ed. Note--The National Student League's program of restricted free speech is interesting but a trifle selfish.