Troubled by committeeTo the Editor:
I am deeply troubled by the continuing story of Prof. Kistiakowsky's proposed committee concerning the impact of the military at MIT. The MIT administration is just not the party to take action on this issue.
Chairman of the Faculty Arthur C. Smith claims in the April 12 issue of The Tech that the committee would "find the facts," not make policy. However, since almost all of us recognize the large influence of the military at MIT, the only "productive" contribution of the committee would be the proposal of policy changes.
The Institute should not enact any restrictions on military research or ROTC because this would supersede the rights of the two truly important parties. The federal government, through elected representatives, is the only group to decide how this na-<>
tion should conduct military research to protect itself. Equally important, it is solely the choice of the individual to become a part of military research or ROTC.
If MIT refused to conduct military research, other possibly less able groups would be found. Is it in any way MIT's right to thus thwart the wishes of American Democracy? And even if others joined me in my personal choice not to work for military interest, higher wages would be offered and researchers found.
Concerned faculty and students at MIT need to take this issue outside our campus. I was heartened to see that a group of MIT students recently went to Washington, and I'll bet those people were listened to. All of us who are a part of the Institute have clout, and we should more often correctly exercise the accompanying responsibility.
Kenneth Goodwill '88->