Cherished Traditions

The barring of the Harvard Summer Socialist Club from the University has caused the Summer School considerable embarrassment, since it has left the impression that the Administration wishes to suppress a minority point of view. The real issue, however, is not discrimination against any particular group; it is the Administration's announced intention to exclude all political organizations from the campus. Such a policy of suppression is clearly antithetical to the purposes of a university.

Briefly stated, the main Administration argument runs this way: Because the summer student body is so transient, School officials have little chance to know and evaluate individuals, and the students themselves probably have little sense of "continuing responsibility" to Harvard. A permissive attitude toward undergraduate organizations, therefore, could lead to situations that would discredit the University. In order to prevent the "wrong kind" of person from gaining access to the Halls of Harvard, the School has thus ruled that no one can enter. The Socialist Club is just an incidental victim of a broad rule insuring a lack of opportunity for everyone.

In other words, the Administration has wrongly decided that all summer students are guilty of irresponsibility and deceit until proven innocent. And since practically the only way to establish innocence is to prove a "continuing responsibility" to Harvard, an impossible feat in two months, all students must suffer the punishment for their "guilt." They are required to live in blissful non-involvement, their education limited to the confines of the class-room, and their approved extra-curricular life restricted almost entirely to the dance floor and the tennis court. The continual flow of ideas and viewpoints cherished by the Harvard man is denied by decree.

The Administration is correct in observing that it takes extraordinary initiative and concern to organize a temporary program for July and August, and that not all viewpoints would be represented at all times. Outlawing all activity by non-Harvard students, however, is hardly an intelligent way to resolve this difficulty. Nor does the discouragement of Harvard organizations help matters. Rather the Administration should actively encourage regular Harvard and Radcliffe organizations to carry out summer operations involving the participation and occasionally the leadership of summer students.

Such a program answers most of the Administration's objections to political activities in the summer. If the organizations are led by Harvard students they should display the responsibility that so concerns Holyoke Center. With experienced people in charge, the groups will be able to operate from the beginning of the summer and make the best use of the Harvard environment. And if the encouragement from the Administration is strong, not passive, a wide variety of views will be represented.

But while urging Harvard organizations to continue past the summer stolstice, the School should have the courage to welcome the existence of groups formed entirely by summer students which have fulfilled the requirements for recognition imposed on any undergraduate activity. Only an Administration attempting to dictate doctrine could be seriously hurt by such organizations.

To be successful, however, the organizations will have to be allowed the nearly complete freedom they enjoy during the winter. The Dean's office might require that they sketch their programs in advance, but the School should in no way try to restrict their operations. During the past three years Harvard has refused to permit only one program, and that was because it would have led to religious discrimination. Only one speaker, Pete Seeger, has been barred in recent years, and that ill-considered action was reversed after heavy protest. Last spring the University even permitted one of its rooms to be used for a meeting protesting the dismissal of Dr. Richard Alpert from the Faculty for violating a University rule in his psilocybin research.

At no time has this permissive attitude of the Harvard Administration resulted in embarrassment for the University. A liberal academic community profits from a great deal of activity, both controversial and conventional, and suffers only from its exclusion. In its effort to shield the University from "discredit," the Summer School has damaged its own intellectual potential, and discredited the name of Harvard far more effectively than could any of the speeches it so fears.