The Press: Aye or Nay?

• Share

Every leader knows that to fight a war, whether for conquest or in self-defense, he must give the young men of his nation a cause so good and just that they are willing to be ripped apart by shrapnel, choked by gas, gored by bayonets without losing the will to fight.

German youth was long ago convinced that Nazi destiny is more important than death; French and British youth have found their cause in Hitler's aggressions. But last week as 1,250,000 U. S. students of military age assembled peaceably on the grounds of 1,500 colleges and universities (see p. 46), they were still quite sure they had nothing to fight for, and some of them doubted whether any cause was worth the unpleasantness of dying".

Like their elders, whose passions and opinions they reflected, the young men of the U. S. were bewildered by war, undecided how they should react to it. In their campus newspapers they brooded on such problems as encirclement and invasion, debated how the U. S. might be kept neutral. One thing only they agreed on unanimously: they did not want to take up arms in Europe.

Most emphatic undergraduate journal in the East was The Dartmouth, only daily newspaper in the town of Hanover, N. H., and a member of the Associated Press. Wrote Editor Thomas Wardell Braden Jr.: "In the last great war men of our age died:1) for democracy, 2) to crush German Imperialism. These words don't always mean what they say. We need to remember that there are ideals of truth and realism stronger than the fake ideals which are battering at us from Europe."

"We hardly feel justified," said Editor Braden, "in terming Mr. Roosevelt's party a peace bloc."

Other student papers were more restrained, contented themselves with warnings and prayers. Said the Yale Daily News: "Secure from a military and economic standpoint, America will only become involved in the present war if she again heeds propagandist pleas to preserve democracy and stamp out Hitlerism. Let us be on guard against being persuaded to fight for the economic interests of England and France."

The Harvard Crimson, under Blair Clark's supervision took its stand with one leg solidly behind the Allies: "The best chance of our remaining neutral is the success of Allied arms." But in the next breath the Crimson added: "Americans wishing to remain neutral must make a new resolve to stay out of this war at any price —Allies win or lose."

Ralph Hinchman Cutler Jr., returning as a senior to Harvard after a summer abroad, wrote in the Crimson: "In the present European war there is only one thing at stake: the supremacy and preponderance of the British Empire. The war appears to be merely a clash of rival imperialisms."

The Daily Princetonian had nothing to say editorially about war. But Editor Robert P. Hazlehurst admitted: "There's not much doubt as to how Princeton men feel about the war: we are naturally biased in favor of the Allies." Meanwhile at Vassar College, in the Miscellany, Editor Nancy Mclnerney of South Bend, Ind., spoke for young womanhood: "We don't want our husbands shot. We favor the cash-and-carry act because it is more neutral."