On the Other Hand

(The following is a minority view of the editorial board. The CRIMSON'S view appears above.)

The harsh lessons of the past summer should have demonstrated once and for all that the legislative action Harvard hoped to promulgate by refusing $250,000 annually in NDEA funds is not forthcoming. The complete indifference of Congress to the issue, even though mighty Harvard thought it important, carried implications about the College's importance that may be hard for some officials and faculty to swallow, although renewed discussion of the NDEA indicates that many are willing to try a bite.

Basically, the University's 1959 decision to withdraw from the NDEA program has proved only that this is no longer the dramatic era of the McCarthy inquisitions, and that all eyes are not focused on pompous old Harvard. True, Kennedy et al. went to Harvard, and all sorts of people, from a candy maker in Belmont to a small-time landlady in New Jersey, have exclaimed over that. But the harsh truth seems to be that, in the halls of Congress where laws are hammered out, nobody cares what Harvard thinks.

Harvard pictured itself in 1959 as a glorious leader, showing other, less powerful, less enlightened schools the way out of the wilderness of federal control. President Pusey testified several times in Washington as part of a massive effort on the part of the enlightened schools to prod Congress into repealing the disclaimer affidavit provision. Last summer was supposed to be the climax of the great crusade, but nothing happened. President Kennedy, once a strong foe of the affidavit, evidently had more pressing concerns on his mind and had forgotten. Congress never gave the matter a second thought as it renewed the entire NDEA package for two years. And it is sheer wishful thinking to hope that something will happen next time. For the issues that obscured the NDEA last summer--aid to parochial schools, aid to segregated schools, and international uneasiness--are very likely to crop up again two years hence.

And anyway, why should anything have happened? Why should anyone care whether or not Harvard is in the NDEA program? Congress doesn't need Harvard to lead other colleges and universities to the till; there are plenty of takers. Harvard, which has always had a hard time identifying itself as a leader in the anti-NDEA movement (since 11 schools left the program before the University made up its mind), is accomplishing nothing by its quixotic stance.

The University could, however, do a great deal. It could show other rich, powerful institutions with qualms about the NDEA a way to use Federal funds while still making their point. With its ample resources, Harvard could accept the NDEA funds for the great majority of scholarship applicants who would have no second thoughts about signing the affidavit, and still promise to subsidize from its own coffers those students who morally object.

Of course, there is an ideological side to this debate, and it cannot be denied that the affidavit is a violation of academic freedom. But it is a rare issue in which one and only one principle is involved. It is right for the University to state as loudly as possible its objections to the affidavit. But is it right for the University to impose its principles on others? Is it right, at a time when the inadequacy of aid funds is threatening to turn Harvard into an upper middle-class college, to contribute to the trend? Is not the principle of a Harvard available to boys from all income classes as much worth preserving as any other?

Besides, the affidavit provision only discriminates against students when a university acts as Harvard has. No one who is really subversive would balk at signing the affidavit, and most other students would not let it deter them from the chance for a Harvard education. Thus, only a very few, with exceptionally heightened moral sensitivities, would be discriminated against if the NDEA were operative. But when it is not, it discriminates against all who would use it, in perfect conscience, for the advancement of their education.

In short, it would take a great amount of courage for the University to reverse itself at this juncture--much more than it would require to stand pat. It is never easy to lose face. But those now in power have an obligation to the Harvard of the future to change their minds before it is too late.