MASTERS OF OUR DESTINY

America lives today in a twilight zone that is neither peace nor war, and the light is fading fast. Though the words still pass current, yesterday's sharp distinctions between "peace and war," "neutrality and belligerency," "interventionist and isolationist" no longer hold any meaning. While the recognition of this fact eliminates the old clear-cut opposites as a framework for debate, it opens up a host of new and subtler choices, centering about the nature and extent of our participation in the war.

Last year many of us sympathized with the Allied cause, but believed that we had no stake in a long imperialistic war. Today few of us can doubt that we have a very real stake in the war that rages across the sea. If Germany wins, we are told by alarmists, we will be threatened with invasion; yet most military observers say such invasion is virtually impossible. If Germany wins, we are warned by the heralds of doom, we shall be forced to gear our economy to totalitarian requirements and Nazify ourselves; yet this has a hollow ring in view of our relative self-sufficiency.

Where then is the threat? It is in South America, where the Nazi legions, wielding the double-edged sword of economic pressure and propaganda, may slowly close in on the Panama Canal, undermining our military security. We may be required for a decade, for a generation, to maintain a gigantic defense establishment. And a nation heavily armed and primed for total war is ripe for fascism, not necessarily an imported German brand, but a home-grown product sold us under the label of "national defense."

To avoid this meaning future we are willing to go far in helping England to win this war. Our national policy today may be summed up as "all aid to England short of war." Yet this is a meaningless slogan, because "aid" can merge imperceptibly into "war." Many of us opposed helping England in the belief that once you set foot on that dangerous path there is no turning back. Already we have progressed from planes and guns to destroyers. Next will be army planes, then the repeal of the embargo on loans to belligerents, then the lifting of the ban on volunteering for service with the English army. Each step breaks down the determination to "draw the line" and inexorably we shall move into total war. Inexorably? Let us hope not. Remember that in aiding England, essentially we are seeking to purchase security from a Nazi menace, and to purchase it at the best price. Call this a base and mercenary interpretation of a crusade for enduring peace and freedom, but do not forget that we may be asked to pay in the currency of blood.

The danger today is that patriotic fervor seeking a release in action may lead us to pay a disastrously and unnecessarily high price. Today we are asked to aid England with supplies, and that is right. Tomorrow the German attack may shift to the outposts of Britain's Empire, and many will feel that the time has come to send men and ships. But it is there that we must steel ourselves to say no. If lives are to be lost in defense of our nation, we must not meet the enemy on his own terms and send our men to futile slaughter. Between the certainty of losing countless lives abroad and the possibility that we may have to police this hemisphere at a tremendous cost, we must choose the latter course.

Our two main defense problems are to prevent German penetration of South America--and this is primarily all economic, not a military, task; and to guard against fascism from within. There can be good and bad national defense. There are many sincere persons who in the name of national defense are seeking to prepare us emotionally and psychologically for military intervention. In resisting with all our might blind emotionalism and unthinking adherence to empty slogans and symbols lies the only hope that we may remain the masters of our destiny.