Nuclear Free Cambridge Con:

To the Editors of The Crimson:

The proposal for a "nuclear-free Cambridge," sounds moral and attractive, yet it legitimizes a dangerous political and constitutional change: the idea that a local action can override a national consensus. By the same logic, segregationists in the South could say that they did not like the integration policy of the Federal governments and would create a segregated city in the South. And if a majority in such a city voted that way, could you then deny their claim. If those who want to end nuclear armaments seek to be effective: they should aim their efforts, where they belong, in the national Congress. Otherwise they are instituting the dangerous idea which John C. Calboan put forward 150 years ago the country being ruled (and vessel) by "concurrent majorities." Adam Kadman