Postscript to Collier’s World War III

Postscript to Collier’s World War III

Postscript to Collier’s World War III

 Walter P. Reuther points out the shortcomings of Collier’s World War III.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

Comments By the Contributors

I wrote the article for the Collier’s issue, "Preview of the War We Do Not Want," after a conversation with the editor in charge of the project and after having read a precis of the editorial setting forth the purposes of the issue and the attitude of the editors I did not read any of the other contributions except Stuart Chase’s article until the magazine was published.

I was reluctant at first to do the article and raised specific questions as to the tone and effect of the whole issue. These questions were answered satisfactorily, both by the precis of the editorial and by the editor to whom I talked. I still believe that the aims and approach states in the editorial are sound ones, particularly its emphasis on the point that war is not inevitable and its firm opposition to a preventative war.

However, I must say in all honestly that the issue did not do what I expected it to, and I am forced to agree with many of the criticisms brought against it, including most of the points raised by Dr. Fleming in The Nation. The failure of Collier’s to achieve what I believe would have been a worthy purpose was due in part to the tone and content of some of the articles and in great measure to the terrifying and horrible scenes depicted in the art work accompanying the articles.

I hope that such criticisms of this issue of the magazine as those voiced by Dr. Fleming may stimulate enough discussion and clarification that some good may yet come from the project.

I believe the editors of Colliers had the best of intentions, and certainly it was my intention to contribute to the cause of world peace by participating in this special issue. I believe, however, that the issue fails of that objective and I sincerely regret that it does.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x