Letter from Samuel Bernstein to President Harry S. Truman

1773 Sterling Place, Brooklyn 33, N. Y., July 19, 1950, The President, you 7-19-50 12:00 midnight. The White House, Country Washington, D. C. B My dear Mr. President: I heard your radio speech tonight about the Korean and world situa- tions. I am therefore writing you my impressions of your speech, and I am taking the liberty of telling you what I think should be done. I do so, as always, as a citizen, tax-payer, voter and veteran. I want to tell you that, considering the good and the bad in your speech, I believe that the bad outweighed the good. I believe that the ultimate consequences of your speech and of the actions advocated by it, if everything you said is followed through to the end, will be the des- truction of all civilization and of the human race as well. I have two reasons for saying this. First, in spite of what you said in your speech, the United States (like the Soviet Union) has not done everything she ought to do and could do to insure a just and lasting peace for the world. I refer to such possible and necessary actions as refus- ing to furnish any war supplies or soldiers or give any training for war to any possible belligerent. The excuse that the other side is doing the wrong thing and that therefore our side is justified in doing the same thing is really no excuse at all. Two wrongs do not make a right. My second reason for saying that the ultimate consequences of your speech and the actions resulting from it may be total destruction of all civilization and of the human race is, that what you advocated is entire- ly opposed to the basic moral principles upon which rests life in the United States and in the Soviet Union and in the rest of the world. You advocated the use of force and violence in the form of soldiers and war materials to resolve the situation in Korea. The use of force and vio- lence is a crime, be it practiced by the Soviet Union or by the United States of America. Two wrongs do not make a right. Furthermore, America's policy of courtesy plus "firmness is wrong, when "firmness" (or refusal to "appease") means insistence upon doing or advocating what is forbidden by the basic moral principles I referred to previously, or when "firmness" means ignoring what is recommended by those basic teachings. Among the basic teachings to which I refer are these: "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. = (Matthew, 5:9). Is the United States (or the Soviet Union) mak- ing peace, in furnishing soldiers, supplies or military training to bel- ligerents or would-be belligerents? I think not. "No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. = (Matthew, 6:24). If by serving God" is meant dedicating oneself exclusively to living as morally perfect a life as possible, and if by "serving mammon" is meant devoting oneself solely to the acquisition of money, property and power, is the United States (or the Soviet Union) serving God? I think not.