The Path to Public Service at SEAS


Should Supreme Court Justices Have Term Limits? That ‘Would Be Fine,’ Breyer Says at Harvard IOP Forum


Harvard Right to Life Hosts Anti-Abortion Event With Students For Life President


Harvard Researchers Debunk Popular Sleep Myths in New Study


Journalists Discuss Trump’s Effect on the GOP at Harvard IOP Forum



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 on account of space limitations.)

To the Editor of the Crimson:

I am dismayed to see in this morning's editorial entitled Colonies and Peace, that the "Crimson" has accepted so blindly and unquestioningly the inexcusable oversimplifications of Mr. Frank Simonds. In the interests of the peace for which you yearn so eagerly, I beg a few inches of your space in which to expose another, more factual view of international relations....

"The problem of the 'have' and 'have-not' countries...." you say glibly, "is fundamental." Fundamental to what, if you please? To war, to peace, to understanding, or to confusion?-I suspect the latter...."

No matter who produces raw materials, they must be sold in the open, capitalist market-in other words, they must be sold for profit. If they are priced too high, they cannot be sold, and the price will have to drop. What good will it do Italy, Japan and Germany to control colonies and supplies of raw materials? Japan excepted, none of them has sufficient capital to develop colonial industries. Yet each is prepared to squander millions on colonial wars, to obtain goods they can already get, from countries with years of experience in producing them.

The problem of the 'haves' and 'have-nots' has been exaggerated beyond all reason. There would be no problem at all if international trade were stabilized, so that Italy could obtain raw materials at a decent price, and exchange for them her finished goods, so that Germany and Japan could do the same. Mr. Lansbury's motion in the House of Commons last week would have been more realistic had he emphasized the importance, not of a transfer of colonies, but of a stabilization of international trade. It is incompatible with the principle of sovereignity, and self-determination, that peoples, whether living in colonies, mandates, or protectorates, be handed over to another power. But it is essential that international trade be restored to a normal basis. Its existing chaotic state is causing continual friction to all nations of whatever size or wealth, and is a potent factor in the armament race now so smoothly under way. It is the easing and ultimate solution of this friction, and not any vague problem based on an artificial and unjustified division between two groups of powers, which is fundamental to world peace. H. S. Fletcher '35

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.