ForumReply To Liberty LeagueTo the editor,Barnard Bulletin.*Dear Madam:The Liberty League through its president, Marie Smith, has stated in the Bulletin of Marph 29, that it does not support the Anti-War Strike, “because it is not in sympathy with the method of procedure decided upon by the Strike Committee”I should like to ask the Liberty League through the, Bulletin just specifically to what method or methods of the committee it objects. It also withholds support of the strike because it “believes that under the guise of an ‘anti-war strike’, opportunity will be taken to strike at the fundamental principles of our American government/.,, Certainly the League is not objecting to those who are also fighting Fascism, since Fascism itself is opposed to the fundamental principles ofour government. This is not a demon-*stration solely of Communists or Socialists as the League will be convinced if it will glance over the list of organizations and clubs supporting the strike. Some of us on the committee do believe personally that capitalism itself breeds war and according to the -principle of free speech have a right in any discussion of the causes of war, to attack the capitalist system. However, the conservatives and liberals are well represented on the strike committee and will certainly be among the speakers on April12th.It is obivious desirable to get everyone opposed to war to join us on April 12. The Liberty League is for peace. We should like to get to the specific objec-tions of .the League before April 12 with the hope that any incorrect impression will be cleared up and that the club will join us. We do not at presentunderstand their objections.Sincerely,Sophia B. MurphyMember of the Barnard Strike Com.The fact, in his letter to the faculty, that Mr. Dunaway called the April V* Strike a demonstration against both War and fascism, seems to'have caused some confusion as to the real nature of the strike. You wonder if it is against both, because Student Council voted its approval of a strike against war alone. x Student Council was correct—it is a strike against War. In fighting War, however, one automatically fights the causes, results. and manifestitations of2War, such as militarism, violence, and,-in. .the opinion of many of us, fascism. I am of course aware that there are people who think there is no relation betweenkfascism and war, and, since I canot guess what their arguments ate, 1 am anxious to hear them (Adv.—Political Union meeting, April 10). ,To me it seems that war and fascism are linked inseperably. Fascism is the defense of capitalism by violence. It seeks to solve the economic and political 'difficulties within a nation by expansion. In order to expand it sets up doctrines of -aggressive nationalism and racial superiority which incite enmity against other peoples. Although nationalism per se does not necessarily lead to war, aggressive nationalism today cannot help but do so, because it is no longer possible for nations to expand except at the expense of each other. Ambitions conflict. And fascism, by definition, settles these conflicts with violent means, i.e. with warlike means. In this way,fascism breeds war.You say that a great deal of support will probably be withdrawn from the April 12 demonstration if it is made clear Hhat it is against fascism as well as war. It is against both of these only in the sense that many of us feel that it is impossible to be against one without the other. Those who are able to seperate the two are perfectly free to do so. The official name, of the demonstration is a strike against war—and waronly. We hope that you will not be perturbed if you find that, by helping to build the strike into an effective move agains war, you at the same time, unwittingly, cast a blow against fascism.^ . Sincerely,Joan GeddcsMore On The StrikeTo the Editor,Barnard Bulletin.Dear Madam:I would like to say a few words inanswer to your editorial of March 29th.Written By UndergradsTo the Editor,Barnard Bulletin. Dear Madam:several times sinceI have been asked