Evening star., 1954-04-16
On Judging oppenheimer

vi NSuu9tH9 OPPSHHetmeI
The question we're facing is whether
a democracy is justified. to survive. in
becoming something other than de-
mocracy. When we are told. in effect,
that we must compromise our liberties,
let's remember that workable democ-
racy is already compromise between
the individual and the common good.
The tone of these days is tenSely
conformist. like the last days Of ancient
Rome's power. In 1776 we succeeded
in overthrowing a tyrant's power be-
cause we were forward looking, rebel
lious. scornful Of overbearing author
ity. In order to keep the leadership
we have thus earned we must always
be creative and forward-looking, not
tradition-bound and unthinkingly con-
forming.
Now a brilliant man is subjected to
this atmosphere. 1t is true that the
group must protect itself. but tyranny
can do that; a democracy must also
protect the individual. That DR.. OPP
penheimer is of superior capability we
know: that he has helped our scien-
military structure we also know.
However, it is asserted that he has
tried to damage us. and he is SuS-
pended from his job because Of this
assertion. It is true that a country
must sometimes act fast to protect
itself, but what is it we are protecting?
One of the things we're protecting is
the right of each to be adjudged inno-
cent until he's proven guilty.
So Mccarthy charges that somebody
delayed the H bomb development.
Well, this sounds pretty bad .. and
a person. doing this to damage the
security structure of the country would
be bad But if a brilliant scientist.
who ought to know, thought it wasn't
scientifically feasible to try to build
the H-bomb. perhaps because such an
effort might in his opinion detract
from an all-out A-bomb effort in order
to accomplish what might have been
an impossible goal, such a man has a
right to his opinion. If. too, good
human being, in possession Of ability
to destroy much of humanity, after
moral debate, thinks the use Of such
ability is inhumane and unethical
he has a right to his opinion.
We must beware of overgeneralizing,
thinking that anybody labeled Com
munist or friend of a Communist
fits into only one pigeonhole, "The
Bad Guy"
So let's not judge all these people
in one barrel, as we're urged to do by
some politicians. If we consider this.
we see that under certain conditions
even to have been Communist is not
necessarily bad At one time the Com
munists were the good guys, fighting
the Hitler backed FaScists in Spain.
At this time many bright people OF
liberal and democratic mind felt that
it was good to fight the Fascists. That
is, when we were fighting the NazlS
the Commies were the good guys.
Let's remember that many moral
judgments are relative. not absolute.
before we are stampeded into stereo-
tipping and condemning anybody, es-
pecially a scientist. philosopher and
humanitarian of j. Robert Oppenhei-
mer'S caliber.
Newton Bowdan.
/ think that the developing Open
heimer case is going to be of supreme
Importance. feel that you have done
a great public service in printing in
full, both the charges and the reply.
Alice McA. Lee.
Why don't certain universities do
something to educate their innocent,
misunderstood geniuses so that before
they are turned loose with batch of
degrees they will have read and un-
derstood the Declaration of Independ-
ence and the Constitution? Then, if
these intellectuals decide to become
citizens of the world, they will be bet
ter able to decide which world to be-
come citizens of: The Communist World
or the Free World.
Horace p. Hobbs, Jr.