To the Editors of The Crimson:

One can easily imagine Ronald Reagan's "inner circle" of advisors gloating over a busy fall schedule which mandates against his participation in Harvard University's 350th anniversary celebration.

To be sure, Harvard has evidenced errors in judgement through the years (most recent examples include the University's manifested attitude toward the homeless, its obtuse social responsibility policy toward South Africa and the misdirected and irresponsible recognition given by the Kennedy School to Edwin Meese as a so-called "distinguished public servant") yet as the oldest liberal learning institution in this nation, Harvard has also exemplified great traditions in scholarship, inquiry, creativity and leadership.

Mr. Reagan's smug, not-so-subtle denunciation of Harvard; its traditions, values and prestige, is a troublesome signal--one which I believe has characterized this Administration and which will be its historical legacy as well--that is, a mean-spirited, unstatesman-like response to those who are perceived to be antagonists. That Harvard University has determined that an honorary degree would not be an appropriate quid pro quo for the President's appearance is to be applauded. No other President has used a 50-year convocation for such personal aggrandizement.

It truly saddens me that during the past five years, we have collectively witnessed this "great communicator" utilize (and exploit) media technology to his advantage and to the nation's spiritual and ethical demise. Lebanon, Grenada, Nicaragua, favorable tax status to racist schools like Bob Jones University and a benign neglect for those social, medical and cultural programs which serve as the benchmark of a just, compassionate and enlightened society come to mind when I read of President Reagan's refusal to speak at the Harvard festivities. It is ironic that Charles, the Prince of Wales, should be appearing at this event--symbolic of America's self-determination to govern itself and create a principled, beacon of democracy in a new world; yet this President and his advisors cannot put aside their penchant for divisive, ideological game-playing to recognize an institution that predates the founding of this great republic. Andrew I. Wolf, MPA '85