De-emphasizing Marx

In a recent report, the House Un-American Activities Committee expressed considerable consternation over the scope of academic freedom. The Committee singled out Geology professor Kirtley F. Mather and M.I.T. Mathematics professor Dirk Jan Struik as examples of what can happen to American education when teachers go beyond bounds that the House Committee believes proper. According to the Committee, Mather is a man "who exerts influence over thousands of students at Harvard University" and who possibly may be leading his charges along the ill-fated path of the Rosenbergs and the Hisses.

Similar charges were made against Struik who was suspended by M.I.T. following his indictment on conspiracy charges. The Committee described him as a "communist teacher of violent overthrow of the government." Both Struik and Mather the Committee contends, should have been dismissed by their respective colleges as soon as they were accused--no matter by whom--of sympathy with communism.

Because the Committee assumes that Struik, who is still only under indictment, it guilty, and that Mather has aided Communism by supporting Struik, the charges are irresponsible. And when the Committee notes "the concern voiced by leading universities over football and their plans to de-emphasize sports," and asks "when will our colleges display the same concern over the activities of Professor Struik and his kind and de-emphasize Marxism," the charges become ludicrous.

But despite this , the issue it raises is a serious one: does any group have the right to censor the teaching of others. The answer is that no one should have the right to prevent an individual from teaching what he thinks right. Indeed, the Committee's charges themselves are indicative of the growing attack directed against those in the teaching profession; it represents a profound mistrust and an unjustified fear that academic freedom will harm liberties. The Committee erroneously believe that by taking away some liberties, they are insuring others.