National Insecurity

NOT ALL threats to academic freedom and freedom of speech are overt, a la the rantings of Accuracy in Academia and other latter-day McCarthyites. In a report released last week, two Harvard officials make clear that the restrictions placed by the Reagan Administration on the free flow of information subtly have eroded "democratic values, freedom of speech, and the openness of U.S. society."

Vice President for Government and Community Affairs John Shattuck and Director of Policy Analysis Muriel Morisey Spence '69 show that administration policies over the last seven years have resulted in restricted exchange of ideas among scholars and the public. Controls on scientific information, expanded classification system and restrictions on foreign scholars created in the name of national security have served, the report's authors argue, to stifle innovation and academic discourse.

These restrictions bode ill for America's economy and national security. Both are dependent on scientific discovery and technological progress, and both suffer when scholars cannot freely exchange information and debate. With the stock market crash last week and the growing inefficiency of the economy, it is important that the federal government remove any restraints on the creativity of its citizenry.

Legitimate concerns of national security aside, Washington and Cambridge should not forget that the overarching concern of information policies should be the preservation of First Amendment rights. More than economic progress, our health as a society depends on free speech and academic freedom. If the Reagan Administration continues its short-sighted attempt to stop the free flow of information under the guise of national security, the result may well be a more stagnant, uncompetitive--and thus a less secure--America.