|
Writers Articles And Opinions |
|
|
|
16 July 2010 By Stephen Lendman
In his 1966 book, "How the World
Really Works," Alan B. Jones included a chapter on the
"Report from Iron Mountain: On the Possibility and
Desirability of Peace," later published in 1967 by The
Dial Press. It became a bestseller, then disappeared.
Now few copies are available, but when circulating in
the 1960s, it was reported that concerned Johnson
administration officials ordered global US embassies
to downplay it, saying it had nothing to do with
policy. Later accounts doubted the material's
authenticity, suggesting it was a hoax. True or false,
its findings are reviewed below because they
accurately reflect longstanding US policy.
Prepared by unnamed 15-man
"Special Study Group, (SSG)" they were commissioned
"by some governmental entity which wished to remain
unknown" because of the sensitive nature of its
assignment, completed after two and a half years work,
from August 1963 - March 1966, at a secret Iron
Mountain, New York "underground nuclear hideout."
First surfacing in 1961, the idea
originated during the Kennedy administration, senior
officials Robert McNamara, McGeorge Bundy, Dean Rusk,
and others, knowing there was no serious plan for
peace at a time the president wanted to end the Cold
War. An SSG member only identified as "John Doe"
revealed it.
Secrecy wasn't mandated, but all
members except Doe wanted no public disclosure or
discussion of its:
-- "Letter of Transmittal (saying
Report conclusions and recommendations were
unanimous)
-- Introduction
-- Scope of the Study
-- Disarmament and the Economy
-- War & Peace as Social Systems
-- The Functions of War
-- Substitutes for the Functions
of War
-- Summary and Conclusions (and)
-- Recommendations"
Writer Leonard C. Lewin wrote a
foreward, referring to a SSG midwest social science
professor, identified only as "John Doe" for reasons
his task would clarify:
"to determine, accurately and
realistically, the nature of the problems that would
confront the United States if and when a condition of
'permanent peace' should arrive, and to draft a
program for dealing with this contingency."
The Report was suppressed, "both
by the Special Study Group itself and by the
government INTERAGENCY committee to which it had been
submitted. After months of agonizing, Doe" decided to
go public.
Group members were carefully
chosen for their physical and social sciences
expertise, as well as their years of academic,
government and/or business experience, qualifying them
for their assignment.
In releasing the material, "Doe"
said his:
"responsibility to the society
for which I am part supersedes any self-assumed
obligation on the part of the fifteen individual
men....What is needed now, and needed badly, is
widespread public discussion and debate about the
elements of war and the problems of peace."
Issues addressed included:
-- the notion that the "basic
authority of a modern state over its people resides in
its war powers;"
-- world peace would cause
"unparalleled and revolutionary" social structure
changes;
-- disarmament's economic
impact;
-- far-reaching "political,
sociological, cultural, and ecological changes," and
two broad questions pertaining to:
-- expectations if peace comes;
and
-- policies to follow if it
does.
Other issues included:
-- the "real functions of war in
modern societies" beyond defending the national
interest;
-- without war, "what other
institutions exist or might be devised to fulfill
these functions;"
-- the possibility of abolishing
war;
-- the desirability and
repercussions of doing it; and
-- possible social system
improvements from war-readiness.
Doe hoped for public discussions
about "the elements of war and the problems for
peace." None followed. Wars persist, and so do Report
notions like:
Wars are an economic, political
and ecological necessity, important to continue
indefinitely. Peace "would almost certainly not be in
the best interest of (a) stable society" and might be
"catastrophic."
General disarmament would require
"scrapping....a critical proportion of the most highly
developed occupational specialties in the economy."
Diverting an arms budget to a
"non-military system (is) remote (in a) market
economy." Replacing it with public works is "wishful
thinking (and) unrealistic."
War is "the basic social system,
within which other secondary modes of social
organization conflict or conspire. (It's) the system
(that's) governed most human societies of record, as
it (does) today."
No other control mechanism has
been devised even close to it in effectiveness.
War-making potential doesn't
result from threats. In fact, "threats against the
national interest are usually created or accelerated
to meet the changing needs of the war system."
Significant nonmilitary functions
and benefits of wars were claimed to exist, including
economic protections against depression, and stimulus
contributing to the rise of gross national product and
individual productivity. Nothing else devised "can
remotely compare to it in effectiveness." It's the
"essential economic stabilizer."
War's political importance is
crucial. It defines and enforces relations with other
nations. National sovereignty and the traditional
nation-state depend on it. The war system is essential
to internal political stability. "Without it, no
government has ever been able to obtain acquiescence
(to) its legitimacy, or right to rule its society."
A nation's authority over its
people "resides in its war powers," including local
police to deal with "internal enemies in a military
manner."
Military service has a patriotic
purpose "that must be maintained for its own sake."
Wars also serve an ecological
purpose - "to reduce the consuming population to a
level consistent with the survival of the species,"
but mass destruction is inefficient, and nuclear
weapons are indiscriminate, removing physically
stronger members important to save.
Because of medical and scientific
advances, pestilence no longer can control populations
effectively, balancing them with agriculture's
potential. As a result, other measures are needed to
control "undesirable genetic traits."
An effective political substitute
for war requires "alternate enemies....of credible
quality and magnitude, if a transition to peace is
ever to come about without social disintegration."
Most likely, "such a threat will have to be
invented."
Other extreme ideas included:
Poverty is necessary and
desirable, the same Orwellian social stability 1884
idea, about "keeping the Low's in poverty and the
High's in power, forever."
A modern, sophisticated form of
slavery serves the same social control purpose.
Government must optimize the
number of warfare deaths, never letting a good
opportunity go to waste.
"Intensified environment
pollution," including air and water is acceptable,
and, without war, a comprehensive eugenics program and
"universal test-tube procreation might have to
substitute."
SSG members rejected individual
freedom, opting for subservience to a ruling elite,
the system that governs world nations and America
since inception, instituted by the Founders so the
country's owners could run it, and wage wars to
solidify control.
The Report concluded that:
"The permanent possibility of war
is the foundation for stable government. It supplies
the basis for general acceptance of political
authority." It lets societies maintain class
distinctions, and ensures the subordination of
citizens to the state, run by elites with "residual
war powers."
As for policy measures in a world
at peace, SSG members stated "as strongly as we can,
that the war system cannot responsibly be allowed to
disappear," absent a credible alternative to ensure
social stability and societal control. Only then
should transitional measures be considered.
However:
"Such solutions, if indeed they
exist, will not be arrived at without a revolutionary
revision of the modes of thought heretofore considered
appropriate. Some observers....believe" the obstacles
can't be overcome "in our time, that the price of
peace is, simply, too high....It is
uncertain....whether peace will ever be possible. It
is far more questionable....that it would be desirable
even if it were demonstrably attainable."
Though repugnant to many, "The
war system....has demonstrated its effectiveness since
the beginning of recorded history." A viable peace
alternative would constitute a giant leap "into the
unknown" with its inevitable risks. Genuine peace will
be destabilizing until proved otherwise.
SSG recommendations included
establishing a "permanent WAR/PEACE Research Agency"
with unlimited funds to be used at its own
discretion.
It would be organized like the
National Security Council "responsible solely to the
President" or officials he designates - then operate
secretly for two purposes. First, to determine, from
what's known and can be learned, the statistical
probability for an eventual peace. Second, to conduct
"War Research" to ensure "the continuing viability of
the war system" as long as it's believed necessary
and/or desirable for society's stability and
survival.
The Iron Mountain Report "has
already created our present. It is now shaping our
future," one single-mindedly for war to the detriment
of all but imperial interests and profiteers that
benefit handsomely.
Stephen Lendman lives in
Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and
listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished
guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the
Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central
time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs
are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
EsinIslam.Com
|
Save
Add Comments To This Story