Transcribe
Translate
Science Fiction Collector, v. 4, issue 3, whole no. 21, August 1938
Page 8
More information
digital collection
archival collection guide
transcription tips
Page Eight --- S - F Collector --- _____________________________________ not exercise every bit of influences they possessed to do so? As a matter of fact, Mr. Speer, that is exactly what happened in the latest Convention in Newark; a small group successfully prohibited all speeches containing progressive ideas. You, yourself, Mr. Speer, seem to be on the side of that clique: to you, the action was justified: to us it was unfair. We could not but draw the conclusion that that group was and is afraid to allow progressive thoughts to filter in to stf or stf conventions. Our viewpoint against yours. But, how long has it been "unfair" to allow free presentation of ideas in this country; how long has it been "unfair" to let individuals, who would not hesitate to resort to the un-American act of suppression of free speech, know our plans so they can squelch us in advance? I think, Mr. Speer, that you, yourself, would not resort to such cowardly tactics; you have shown yourself to be one who is not afraid to let the other side have its say; because, essentially, you have the mental equipment to give, in your own way, as well as we: you do not run out of ideas. But, I ask you, does the (implied) fact that certain individuals have run out of ideas and do not dare allow further discussion on certain subjects make it "unfair" to take steps against their tactics of censorship and suppression? Would you, Mr. Speer, not scorn to use such tactics? Would you not protest against such action? Again, why should we not bombard fan magazines with our side of the question. Would you write articles in favour of Communism when you believe it to be false; would you write against "evolutionary socialism," as you term it, when you believe it to be true? But one thing I should like to attempt to make clear. Of course, I realize that there are certain individuals who will not listen, however: Michelism is not an attempt to regiment
Saving...
prev
next
Page Eight --- S - F Collector --- _____________________________________ not exercise every bit of influences they possessed to do so? As a matter of fact, Mr. Speer, that is exactly what happened in the latest Convention in Newark; a small group successfully prohibited all speeches containing progressive ideas. You, yourself, Mr. Speer, seem to be on the side of that clique: to you, the action was justified: to us it was unfair. We could not but draw the conclusion that that group was and is afraid to allow progressive thoughts to filter in to stf or stf conventions. Our viewpoint against yours. But, how long has it been "unfair" to allow free presentation of ideas in this country; how long has it been "unfair" to let individuals, who would not hesitate to resort to the un-American act of suppression of free speech, know our plans so they can squelch us in advance? I think, Mr. Speer, that you, yourself, would not resort to such cowardly tactics; you have shown yourself to be one who is not afraid to let the other side have its say; because, essentially, you have the mental equipment to give, in your own way, as well as we: you do not run out of ideas. But, I ask you, does the (implied) fact that certain individuals have run out of ideas and do not dare allow further discussion on certain subjects make it "unfair" to take steps against their tactics of censorship and suppression? Would you, Mr. Speer, not scorn to use such tactics? Would you not protest against such action? Again, why should we not bombard fan magazines with our side of the question. Would you write articles in favour of Communism when you believe it to be false; would you write against "evolutionary socialism," as you term it, when you believe it to be true? But one thing I should like to attempt to make clear. Of course, I realize that there are certain individuals who will not listen, however: Michelism is not an attempt to regiment
Hevelin Fanzines
sidebar
