To the Editors of the Crimson:
Regarding the recent "Life on the Bench" editorial concerning Peter J. Howe's reading graffiti ("Liber Als Suck," to beprecise) on a subway bench, I would like to suggest that if the basic American conservative philosophy can be summarized as "men must be free" then the basic liberal argument can be simplified to "all men must be equal."
Just as liberalism "involves a large number of complex postulates about the proper role of government in society," likewise does conservatism. Indeed, prolific conservatives like George F. Will and William F. Buckley Jr. don't waste their intelligence and industry refuting complex liberal notions. Rather, they devote their considerable intellects to the definition and explanation of the even more complex conservative philosophy--a much more significant pursuit than simple nay-saying.
Calling these constructive thinkers "anti-liberals" requires the self-absorbtion of a thorough ideological brainwash. A real intellect can appreciate (or at least recognize) a complexity of an opponent's argument and can accept the simple assertions of his own.
But I suppose this is not to be expected from someone who gets his political insight from places where other people sit. Richard A. Bennett '85-6