Thoughtful sober workers in the Advent Movement have continually guarded against irresponsible and sensational quotations regarding the seriousness of the hour in relationship to the signs of the times and to the atom and hydrogen bombs. Yet recently there has been cause for concern over David Lilienthal's lulling pronouncements which, if true, would discredit the sober pronouncements of the distinguished physical scientists who declare plainly that these weapons, if used by the nations, would hasten the end. It is, therefore, refreshing to read the editorial challenge in the Christian Century of March 22 entitled "The Lilienthal Lullaby." Speaking of Mr. Lilienthal's recent lecture tour, the editor says that "if he continues to give the sort of lecture he is reported to have given in New York early this month, it may be doubted whether Mr. Lilienthal will help his fellow Americans much in coming to terms with the issues involved in atomic control."
"Mr. Lilienthal's Town Hall lecture, if the New York Times reported it accurately, was more of a lullaby than a lecture—an effort to soothe the fears of the public and to spread the idea that scientists who have been telling of the horrors being prepared for, mankind by the hydrogen bomb are simply trying, in Mr. Lilienthal's own words, 'to scare the dopes.'
"Mr. Lilienthal chose as particular targets for attack in his New York lecture the four distinguished physical scientists who took part in the University of Chicago's Round Table broadcast on February 26. (See 'Senator McMahon Returns to the Attack' in last week's Century.) He charged them with creating 'a growing sense of hopelessness and helplessness among our own people,' and claimed that this is playing into the hands of the communists. He was particularly scornful of the scientists' proposal for decentralizing American cities as a security measure against atomic attack. 'These fine minds he said, 'came up with this fine "contribution—to transplant thirty to sixty million people. With all due respect to them, I want to state that this is a lot of high intellectual nonsense. It can't be done. It won't be done.'
"About that, Mr. Lilienthal is undoubtedly right. But his scorn scarcely disposes of the claim made by the scientists which was, not that dispersal of city. Populations could or would be carried out, but that if security against A-bomb and H-bomb attacks is demanded, such a dispersal offers the only method worth considering. Moreover, the scientists hastened to add that even such dispersal would provide no protection against the lethal effects of the radioactive dust which would fill the atmosphere following a hydrogen blast. Mr. Lilienthal did not see fit to say anything about the post-explosion dust." The better side of Mr. Lilienthal came into view when he told his New York hearers that it is 'a mountainous error' to think hydrogen bombs can provide security. 'Our security,' he declared, 'rests not on material things at all but on the spirit of the people."
Though the editor is kindly disposed toward Mr. Lilienthal in his lecture program, he points out that if he continues his line of thought, there will be four questions asked by the American people everywhere.
"What Americans want to know right now is not whether the scientists were helping or hindering any propaganda or other causes, but — were they telling the truth? There's no point in discussing the future of atomic energy without beginning with that question and answering it candidly.
"Second, the American people want to know whether anything adequate is being done to stop the atomic arms race. That there is such a race, we take it Mr. Lilienthal will admit. That arms races have historically ended in conflict every informed person knows. That a conflict with plutonium and hydrogen bombs would plunge the world into madness — provided f je scientists are telling the truth about the nature of uie bombs now being contrived — no one so far has convincingly denied. . . .
"Third, the American people want to know how they can understand the issues involved in atomic developments, so that they can act with the 'courage and resolution and patience' to which Mr. Lilienthal exhorts them. . . .
"Finally, when the former chairman of the AEC talks about breaking the government monopoly on nuclear developments and switching research and. production to constructive purposes, the listening citizen simply asks again how_ that is to be done. The trend today is in the opposite direction — toward a tighter government monopoly, with greater provisions for secrecy and with an increasing stress on production for destruction. The hydrogen bomb, which is now the great goal toward which our energies are directed, is even more lethal in its nature than the uranium and plutonium bombs, for it can have no constructive by products whatever. It is totally destructive in nature and purpose, and every dollar that goes into building plants to make H-bombs goes for the preparation of destruction."
The editor concludes his remarks with this thought-provoking paragraph:
"Mr. Lilienthal, in leaving his official position and going to the public, sees it as his first responsibility to try to head off national hysteria in dealing with atomic issues. That is a worthy purpose, and we fully agree that nothing but evil is to be expected if this issue is handled in an emotionally supercharged atmosphere. (Such an atmosphere, it may be noted, is as likely to develop in Congress as in the press or among our citizens.) But Mr. Lilienthal cannot achieve his purpose by singing lullabies to a public already filled with apprehension. The American people are scared over this atomic arms race and where it is coming out. So are all other informed people on earth. The only reassurance which has meant anything to common folk so far has come from a few of the scientists Mr. Lilienthal chastises, when they have said that perhaps hydrogen bombs cannot be built. And that's not much re assurance. But while ultimate power remains in the Pentagon and the Kremlin, and while ultimate decisions continue to be made in secret by Mr. Truman and Marshal Stalin (neither of whom creates even an illusion of infallibility), the people will continue to be scared. . . . Those are the questions we want answered, and never mind the lullabies." (Reprinted by permission of The Christian Century, from the issue of March 22, 1950.)
