Salient: Victoria University Students' Paper. Vol. 25. No. 12. 1962
Sir,—Those readers who strongly objected to your We Protest editorial obviously missed the main point i.e. you were protesting against the taking of all human life. Undoubtedly if it was ethically wrong to take the life of Herr Eichmann. if is equally wrong to terminate the life of the humblest individual, irrespective of his race creed or colour.
When people become emotionally unbalanced through reading accounts of crimes such as Herr Eichmann was accused of, they automatically jump to the conclusion that two wrongs make a right Individuals and nations have been following this line of thought for centuries—with disastrous results. When World War I came along it was going to be the war to end all wars: exactly the some was said of World War II. People killed on masse because negative feeling rather than reason. told them that humanity as a whole would benefit. How negative feeling was not called upon to specify In both wars soldiers and politicians wore blind to the fact that people and ideas are separate entitles and that. Killing the former does not change the latter. Such conduct is like putting an axe through a radio set because one does not approve of the programme.
If we are ever to grow up and get away from the childish belief that two wrongs make a right, it seems that universities at least must teach their students the proper relationship applied psychology and ethics. In no great world religion is the taking of life justified. Our greatest psychologists agrees that giving free rein to negative thoughts and emotions produces a world where fear and psycho-somatic complaints increase as happiness fades.
When University students can rationally appreciate that the taking of life does much more harm to the community at large than to the miserable victim then there will be hope that the man-in-the-street will one day reach a similar conclusion Until that day arrives the world must continue to be run by bomb-happy emotional nit-wits—and you, Sir, must bravely endure the continuing attacks of spiritually immature students as they openly display their unhappy thirst for revenge. Yours etc.
D. M. Woodford