282 ]
W I L H E L M
TO
R O GE R
R E I C H
N.
B ALDW IN*
♌ 16 May 1945 Dear Mr. Baldwin: I am in agreement with your statements in your answer to my letter to such an extent that the apparent disagreement serves as an excellent example of democratic ventilation of opinion: Of course, we cannot entrust the power to suppress the evils of free speech to anybody. In my publications I have again and again stressed the point that power and truth are mutually exclusive. But the point is this: The existence of a Civil Liberties Union which fights bravely and strenuously against political irrationalism proves that the truth has not the same right as the lie. I would like to see things reversed; there should exist a "Lie and Racial Hatreds Liberties Union," with the plight to defend itself against well-established and unshakable civil liberties. Truth should not have a lesser but a greater chance than the lie. There are untold numbers of democratic committees on this and that; why not establish a committee for the investigation of objective differences between rationalism and irrationalism, mechanisms of lie and mechanisms of truth? During the past forty years science has provided many tools of knowledge to distinguish irrationalism from rationalism. The possibility to incorporate this new knowledge into the total framework of democratic endeavors is thus given. I would like to mention only one great distinction between rationalism and irrationalism, the life positive and the life negative functions within our society. I did not mean to say that "Europe went fascist because of free speech," but that Europe went fascist because of the lack of such distinctions in social thinking. I also firmly believe in the democratic instincts of the people to decide what is right and what is wrong; but these democratic instincts will not become effective unless the power of organized irrationalism is matched by unrestricted and protected freedom of truth all over the world.
*Official of the American Civil Liberties Union.