Ed. Note--The Crimson does not necessarily endorse opinions expressed in printed communications. No attention will be paid to anonymous letters and only under special conditions, at the request of the writer, will names be withheld. Only letters under 400 words can be printed because of space limitations.

To the Editor of the Crimson:

In its recent editorial entitled "United we fall", the Crimson made several statements upon which the Executive Council of the Harvard Student Union would like to comment.

The Harvard Student Union has not "...committed the utter folly of intrusting the determination of its policies to a nation-wide organization over which it has no control whatsoever." The National Committee of the American Student Union has no more control over the Harvard Student Union than the Harvard Student Union enjoys over the National Committee. Probably it has very much less. The Chairman of the National Committee was once an officer of the Harvard Liberal Club, and of still more significance, the President of the Harvard Student Union is also a member of the National Committee. Far from being a cabal of malcontents from New York University and Sarah Lawrence, as the Crimson suggests, the National Committee appears on investigation to be a responsible and representative body of American students.

The function of the national organization is one of the coordinating where possible the groups on the different campuses rather than one of determining and imposing a policy from above. The tendency "to be all things to all men", which the Editor observed in the national program, indicates a democratic tolerance of the convictions of other members and member organizations in the loose intercollegiate federation rather than an acceptance of those convictions on the part of every individual member. To be a loyal citizen, one need not approve of every policy of the United States Government.

The National Committee, moreover, has no power to impose its will upon affiliated groups. The most severe disciplinary action it could take would be to relieve Harvard of the obligation to pay the annual membership dues. The chief argument for affiliation is not that it will give additional material services to Harvard, but that the problems we are studying are national in character, and need national and coordinated attention.

Contrary to the impression received by the Editor, all factions in our rapidly growing membership have shown a spirit of compromise consistent with the principles of rigid parliamentary procedure. To quote two phrases from the editorial, the Harvard Student Union is showing itself to be an organization in which the "the real political beliefs of Harvard students" can "find adequate means of expression." Bruce O. Bliven, Jr. '37   Robert J. Cumming '38   Lawrence S. Levy '39   Robert S. Chafee '36   G.B. Mayberry 1G   D. Boone Schirmer '37   Robert S. Brainerd '38