HOW ABOUT THE BIRCHERS?

The reader will wish to study Ralph Graham’s essay in this issue entitled The Demonic Spirit of Anti-Communism, which is a scathing denunciation of the John Birch Society. It may well be that Ralph Graham is saying some things that need to be said. In any event there can be no question as to where he stands!

Much is being said about the Birchers, pro and con, but mostly con. It is hardly popular these days to be a Bircher. The few that dare to say a cautious word in their behalf are seldom Birchers themselves. Even on college campuses where one finds more conservatism than in most cultural circles it is seldom that one hears an enthusiastic word for the John Birch Society. The Birchers are much too far to the right is the view of most conservative young people. Recently this editor attended a college fraternity-sorority bull session on the John Birch Society. Some forty or fifty students showed intense interest in the subject and discussed it as objectively and dispassionately as one could expect. While the Birchers were described factually (as best I could discern), and in the case of a few sympathetically, there was no one who made an enthusiastic stand for them.

I might add that those attending this college bull session recognized Harding College as the headquarters of the Birchers. A recent cover story in Newsweek, which included a picture of Harding’s president George Benson, also suggested a leading role for Harding College in “Thunder on the Right.” I trust that the appearance of brother Graham’s essay in this journal, which has a way of making the rounds on the Harding campus, will not deny him a place on some forthcoming lectureship.

While I can vouch for the fact that some Church of Christ college presidents are as vicious and unscrupulous in their methods and tactics as Ralph Graham describes the Birchers as being, I am still not sure that brother Graham is sufficiently objective in his treatment. He may overstate his case.

The following letter will illustrate why I suggest a little more caution in our evaluation of the Birchers. The man who wrote this letter is one of the very finest Christians I know, deeply devoted to God and country and highly intelligent. The letter was written in reply to a letter I wrote to him in which I was not at all friendly or sympathetic with the Birchers. The letter is as follows, but I will of course withhold his name and address, save to say that he is a Texan.

I also want to say a word or two about Communism and the John Birch Society. I want to acknowledge my appreciation for your deep and profound reasoning, objectivity in approach, determination to pursue truth, dedication to study and increasing your knowledge, sacrificial living in general, but most of all what appears to me a deep and abiding love toward all mankind. These are not just words; they are expressions of my impression of you. I recognize that your wisdom is several higher than mine is now or ever will be.

I value your opinion very highly and would dearly love to sit in one of your classes. I am sure “The Search for America” is a wonderful course. It is therefore with some restraint that I set forth my observations on this subject of the John Birch Society.

I was a member of the John Birch Society for four or five months. I left it in July of 1961. It was not exactly what I thought it would be. There were some opinions expressed which I disagreed with, but the majority of the criticism which 1 saw and heard in the papers and on radio and TV were gross misrepresentations of the Birchers. They were half truths and unjustified attacks. Nevertheless I had opportunity to attend meetings, read literature and find out something about it. Although I will not defend it, preferably not discuss it with others, because the preconceived ideas, false impressions of others could easily damage my influence as a disciple, prevent their listening to me talk about Christ.

But I will convey to you my observations. Name-calling and communist-branding is not a part of the objective of the Birchers even though some in the group do this. There are undesirable events in American history which are revealed in the Blue Book, which you may have read. Unfortunately it will probably never be possible to substantiate it beyond question.

You are probably right that some of the Birchers are trigger-happy and irrational. However, some are extremely reasonable. What they say about our history may not necessarily concern us now, but we need to be alerted to such dangers as a present threat. It is possible that Birch and similar groups do more harm than good, but they are trying to alert us. Maybe they are doing it in the wrong way with intolerable methods and obnoxious attitudes, but their concern is for their country and they are trying to do something.

Someone wrote: “The men who try to do something and fail are infinitely better than those, who try to do nothing and succeed at it.

I may be wrong, but I do not believe that the John Birch Society is a totalitarian movement. Citizens must become more concerned about how their country is run, and they ought to ask the question where will this sort of thing lead us?

This Texas brother who was himself a Bircher is much more sympathetic toward the society than is brother Graham, even though he concedes that it is weakened by untoward methods and attitudes. Christians are very interested in the Birchers as well as all anti-communistic activity, and of course they should be. During a recent sojourn in the south I learned that many of our people, including some of my own kinfolk, were reading Welch’s Blue Book, distributing blazing anti-communistic tracts, and in some cases attending cell meetings.

What should be said about all this? Richard Nixon is telling the Republicans to stay out of the John Birch Society. Other national leaders, including the two Kennedys in Washington, insist that the Birchers are as bad and perhaps even worse than Communism itself. Brother Graham is telling Christians to repudiate the society and all that it stands for.

My plea is a different one. While I urge all our people to be calm, responsible, just and dignified, I do not believe that any dissenting segment of our society should go unheard, regardless of how negative or vitriolic it may be.

As I explained to the college bull-session, a republic like ours is in constant need of “a devil’s advocate.” Extremes tend to serve as balance wheels. Opinions that move far to the left and to the right help to make positions that are toward center more cautious and responsible. In any event truth has nothing to fear. Even if a man calls Eisenhower a Communist I am willing to listen, and I shall endeavor to discern between reckless, irresponsible charges and sane, sober reasoning. Every reformer overstates himself, and sometimes he speaks recklessly in order to attract attention to his message.

I am willing to bear with the Birchers in some of their extremities. Even the great David called all men liars in his haste. But I am looking for substance in the philosophy of the Birchers, which I have not yet found. Perhaps I have not looked diligently enough; perhaps it is not there. But with or without substance I think it is an unhappy day for America when our people assume that they have sufficient truth that they can afford to turn a deaf ear to, yea even crucify, a dissenting voice.

I am reminded of that old apostle of freedom, John Stuart Mill, who in his Essay on Liberty wrote as follows: “The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those that hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lost what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.”

Further Mill says: “To refuse a hearing to an opinion, because they are sure that it is false, is to assume that their certainty is the same thing as absolute certainty. All silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility:”

Let us honor and encourage the voice of dissent. Let us also insist upon reasonable and honorable controversy. Let us indeed exercise our minds to discern between good and evil and to appreciate a confrontation between truth and error. Truth is like a torch; the more you shake it the brighter it shines.