THE NEW INQUISITORS
SIR,—By misquoting from a speech I made at the University of Edin- burgh, Mr. Cooper has impugned the sincerity of my support for academic freedom.. I did not condone the imprisonment of Cardinal Mindszenty ; at the debate in question -(in which I was opposing the Communist speaker) I pointed out that we must be cautious in applying the principles of free speech to questions involving treason or espionage.
I would uphold the right of any Roman Catholic or Communist to express his views. Although both viewpoints are contrary to what I believe, who am I to declare which of the three of us is right ? Time has undermined many faitlo and ideologies, in spite of all the blood that has been shed by men who never doubted their own infallibility. I am prepared to argue my views in free and open competition, without the support of any repressive measures. I am not unaware of the risks involved ; many of those with whom I argue do not share my basic belief in tolerance. But democracy—like life—is an experiment. It is not a static conception ; it represents the groping of fallible human beings to evolve a social system which best translates popular opinion into effective political action. If we are intent on pursuing our experiment, we must resist all temptations to silence opposing opinions. It is our duty to answer them, and let our fellow men decide.
But clearly there is a difference between the free expression of opinion within a country and ative espionage. For all her tolerance, Queen Elizabeth had to lay sown certain well-defined limits to the freedom of action of Jesuits. Similarly there is a difference between the man who merely expresses Communist views, and the agent who sells military secrets. We should be as unflinching in our defence of the rights of the former as in our condemnation of the latter.—Youris faithfully,
Cowan House, George Square, Edinburgh. ALAN E. Tnowirsom.
Previous page
