The Freeman:
A Progress Report
Frank Chodorov and Paul Peach
[A progress report from a survey of readers on the
editorial policy of The Freeman toward United States involvement in
the Second World War, and on the causes of war, generally. Reprinted
from The Freeman, January, 1942]
A month ago the minds of the editors of The Freeman were
clouded with doubt. Those clouds are dissipated now. You, our
readership, by your response to our request last month for reader
opinion -- a response which, in volume and in friendliness, far
exceeded our fondest hopes -- have swept the clouds away. Now we know
where we stand. We turn our faces to the future with new courage, with
new determination, buoyed up and strengthened by a new vision. "Nail
the flag to the masthead!" says a Detroit reader. Indeed we will.
Nothing less than an utterly unswerving devotion to principle -- your
principles and ours -- will justify the vote of confidence you have
given us.
As this is written, we have received 146 communications -- over four
per cent of our readers have written to us. Of the 146, there are
three that must be classed as adverse, two that do not make themselves
sufficiently clear, sixteen that suggest making a change in The
Freeman's editorial policy, and ten that give a qualified
endorsement. The remaining 115 fully endorse The Freeman.
Rita Levine, Mount Vernon, N. Y., cancels her subscription. "I
have no time for fascist, un-American, Roosevelt-baiting propaganda."
Laura Ross (Mrs. Edwin Ross) Arlington, Va., has "watched
with apprehension and sorrow as The Freeman joined 'Social
Justice,' 'Scribner's Commentator,' and other such papers on the road
of bigotry and intolerance." Mrs. Ross thinks Mr. Chodorov and
Mr. Peach ought to leave the Henry George School of Social Science and
take The Freeman with them.
Edward Marchese, Brooklyn, writes, "It is too late to
limit ourselves to reiterating that 'war is a social evil resulting
from a bad economy' . . . This is a sterile, blind-alley liberalism
that The Freeman makes of the hopeful creed of Henry George."
Five of our readers recommend dodging the war issue. Says Mrs. Sara
King of Chicago, "War in The Freeman is as out of
place as it would be in a cookbook or a seed catalog." Two New
York and two Massachusetts readers agree with her.
Six readers suggest giving both points of view. Says Dorothy Sara
of New York, "I want The Freeman continued if (1)
editorials remain impersonal (2) differing viewpoints be given
reasonable expression and interpretation."
Julian Hickok, director of the Philadelphia Extension,
advises, "Let The Freeman be an open forum for all honest
opinion treating all sides with impartiality." One reader from
Texas, two from Massachusetts, one more from New York add their votes.
Five readers express a view well summarized by Jos. S. Thompson
of San Francisco: "It is the duty of all right thinking nations
to arrange an international police to jump on any aggressor nation the
instant it breaks a moral law. So my idea is that The Freeman
should come out strong for our old-fashioned friend, 'law and order,'
and whenever things are legal and orderly we can turn to the next
important matter." Readers from Towaco, N. J., from Boston,
Brooklyn, and Yonkers endorse this point of view.
Most interesting are the ten letters which give a qualified
endorsement.
Bernard Weiner of New York writes, "Keep on yelling your
head off until a technical declaration of war makes it impossible, for
the duration." (Mr. Weiner's letter is dated November 29th.) "I
do not agree with you," he continues, "but as a true
democrat and scientist, which I humbly hope I am, I say, keep on
talking. You may be right and I may be wrong. It is your right, nay,
your duty, to say it if you have something to say. Right or wrong, say
it, whatever the cost -- such is the price and the reward of
democracy."
In this group we place also Dr. Robert Hutchins, President of
Chicago University, who writes, "Though I do not hold with the
economic determinism which I detect in your article, I hope you will
not play safe, suspend publication, or weaken in your effort to
analyze and criticize the status quo from the viewpoint of the
Philosophy of Freedom."
Dr. Hutchins' letter, like that of Mr. Weiner, is dated November
29th. Other letters in this vein come from Pennsylvania (2), Brooklyn,
New Jersey, Maryland, Michigan, Cincinnati, and Chicago.
As for the 115 who say, "Go to it! Never give up!" -- what
can we say to these? There are so many of them; merely listing their
names would take over a page. But the thought of these sturdy, loyal
friends brings a great warmth to our hearts. With our tiny clerical
staff and the mailing for the Spring classes under way, it isn't
possible to answer these letters by more than the very briefest note
-- so please accept instead this assurance of our appreciation and
gratitude.
Of the 115, there were 114 letters and post cards. The 115th
communication was, in a way, unique.
PROCLAMATION
We, the undersigned, hereby give thanks
for that "feast of wisdom and flow of good sense" that
emanates from THE FREEMAN and express our gratitude to Mr.
Chodorov for the knowledge he has imparted to us thru the medium
of his able editorials. [signed by over forty persons]
|
What of the future? The question we raised a month ago is decided for
us. This does not mean that our crusade is lost, or that we must sit
with hands folded until the restoration of peace sets us free once
again to undertake constructive work. On the contrary, our task is
greater than before, and time presses. Hideous as the thought may be,
it is yet true that if the war ends before our mission is
accomplished, there will be no true peace; rather, there will be an
intermission while the world prepares to resume the war.
The editors of The Freeman now dedicate themselves to the
task of educating for an enduring peace. Though it is silly to say
that our enemies are inherently different from ourselves, in mind, in
morals, in capacity, yet it is true that through false education and
conditioning, acting in accordance with a false philosophy, they have
lost much of their capability for taking part in the ordering of a
peaceful, progressive, cooperative world. We have undertaken to
vanquish their arms. It would be a shocking tragedy if, when we have
won a victory against force, we forget to carry on the battle against
ignorance and superstition -- for it is only by waging a successful
war against these last that we shall establish a real peace. Not
bayonets, but books; not troops, but teachers; not marines, but
missionaries; not vindictiveness and hate, but kindness and love, must
win the ultimate victory for us. And before we can be fit to lead our
present enemies into the light of a new day, we must ourselves uncover
the light, that it may shine first of all among our own people.
Thus we may not merely bring gain to others, but may largely profit
ourselves. In the preparation for the economic community which can
never stop until it has embraced the whole world in its boundaries we
may bring about the practical realization of the City of God on earth.
The conquest of ourselves will teach us what we can learn in no other
way: that of one blood, God has created all races of men.
|