Amerikai Magyar Szó, 1979. július-december (33. évfolyam, 27-49. szám)
1979-08-30 / 32. szám
Thursday, Aug. 30. 1979. Amerikai magyar szó NUCLEAR OMNICIDE It Is Now Everyone’s Responsibility to Prevent the Holocaust By JOHN SOMERVILLE I T IS ALREADY objectively clear that the nuclear weapons which now exist in the arsenals of the opposing “superpowers” are capable, if used, of annihilating all forms of life and all vestiges of civilization in a new kind of holocaust for which a new term had to be invented: omnicide, This is abundantlv confirmed in the overkill statistics of weapons technology. It is already objectively clear that the political leaders of one contemporary nuclear “superpower” have been capable of deliberately deciding to use these omnicidal weapons even when they themselves consciously expected that the result would be annihilation of all humankind. This was proved by the documented admissions of the highest American leaders during and subsequent to the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. It is already objectively clear that the present American political leaders have given notice to the world that they will be the first to use nuclear weapons in case of anything they judge to be an “attack,” even if it is made onlv with conventional weapons, against any of the 400 U.S. bases or the 60 U.S. “allies” around the globe. This is confirmed bv the explicit statement of President Carter in his 1977 U.N. speech. That speech was also his completely negative answer to the 1976 proposal of the U.S.S.R. that the Warsaw Pact states and the NATO states sign a mutual declaration that neither side would be the first to use nuclear weapons. It is therefore objectively clear that the prevention of nuclear omnicide has become the most urgent problem that confronts the world today. But all this is not yet subjectively clear to the great majority of human beings. That is, there are many who are only partly aware of these facts. More important, many of thöse who say they know these facts exist do not really believe they exist. Actions speak louder than words. The facts referred to are of such a nature that a genuine belief in their reality would immediately result in a radical "Those who take no action against these weapons will, in effect, be casting their votes for omnicide." change of outward behavior, a change that has not vet taken place. Concretely defined, the central problem is therefore to make the known truth believed bv the people who will be exterminated unless they believe it and act in the light of it, in time. Is it possible for us to solve this problem? Do human beings at present have enough of the kind of knowledge and skill required to deal with it successfully? There can be no doubt about the knowledge and skill; the only doubt is about whether the knowledge and skill that exist will be applied to the problem in sufficient measure, in time. For this is not a problem like the prevention of cancer or the safe disposal of radioactive waste products, the solution of which depends on knowledge we have not vet discovered and skills we have not vet attained. It is more like the problem of preventing mass starvation, environmental pollution and urban slums, wherein the required knowledge and skills do actually exist, but are not applied in sufficient measure. This was the reason for the formation of the Union of American and Japanese Professionals Against Nuclear Omnicide. Why American and Japanese? Because one of these two countries was the first to produce and use the earliest form of nuclear weapons, and the other was the first to suffer their terrible effects. A union of peace workers of these two countries symbolizes recognition of the tragic historical facts, and implements the unique moral bond created by these facts. Why professionals? Because this term emphasizes what is functionally necessary to solve the contemporary problem—the application of knowledge and skill. This application is understood in the broadest sense: not onlv the knowledge and skill of universitv-trained specialists, but the knowledge and skill of all people who are willing to apply what thev know and what they can do in the many-sided efforts that are necessary if nuclear omnicide is to be prevented. For the first time in the history of life, even living thing is now confronted bv a common enemv more powerful than death. What we have always called death is, after all, a natural transition to other forms of life, to new living units of one kind or another. But nuclear omnicide destroys living things in a wav that ren- ders impossible anv transition to new living units. Bv killing the cell itself, it stops the cycle and destroys the natural relation of death to life. It is therefore the common enemy of both life and life-giving death. If this is not absolute evil, what is? Beside it, every other evil is dwarfed into insignificance. This is a fact of profound religious and philosophical significance. That a few living human beings, the top leaders of the nuclear states, now hold in their hands the arsenals of physical power which can actually bring about nuclear omnicide is a fact more staggering in its dramatic, empirical, and moral significance than anything that has happened in all previous human history, perhaps in all previous cosmic history. One of the consequences of this fact is that our historical moment has become charged with utterly unprecedented tensions and values. Living as we do within the purview of the empirical possibility of nuclear omnicide, we have the opportunity to communicate directly with the few human leaders who have the power to bring about this end of all human ends. We can and must exert influence upon the persons and conditions now determining whether this is to be brought about or not. In fact, there is a sense in which even person who remains alive while the omnicidal weapons, yet unused, continue to exist in stockpiled arsenals becomes, willy nilly, a participant in the making of the most fateful of all human decisions: to use or not to use those weapons. Should those arsenals continue to exist or should life continue to exist? The relatively few governing leaders who hold the kevs to the arsenals could not bv themselves fight out an omnicidal conflict. Thev are national leaders bv virtue of political office. They need the cooperation of their people in order to remain national leaders, and to fight out anv international conflict. To the extent, and onlv to the extent that people manifest their total rejection of omnicidal weapons, their total rejection of anv cooperation in the production and use of omnicidal weapons, their total rejection of anv policies involving the production or use of omnicidal weapons, will it become clear to all national leaders that omnicidal weapons must never be produced and must never be used. In a sense, the human race is right now engaged in a worldwide referendum on the question whether omnicidal weapons shall continue to exist. Those who take no action against these weapons will, in effect, be casting their votes for omnicide. We must help them understand this, persuade them that it is necessary to take action against it. The situation is such that the action or inaction of anv one person might mean the difference between omnicide and eternal continuation of life. It might therefore be more important to humanity as a whole than anything previously done, for good or ill, bv the best benefactors or the worst criminals who ever lived before this shadow of omnicide clouded the human horizon. But we must also bear in mind that tensions and issues of such magnitude cannot long endure without being resolved one way or the other. Robert C. Aldridge, who resigned his post as nuclear weapons designer for the Lockheed corporation in order to work for peace, said in a 1978 speech in Tokyo: “I feel we have, at the most, four or five years to change the direction that the world is going, especially in mv country, the United States. I feel that nuclear weapons will be used in a first-strike strategy.” The eminent nuclear scientist, Dr. Bernard Feld, Secretary-General of the Pugwash Conference, in a radio broadcast August 1, 1977, predicted that a nuclear war would break out before the end of the 20th century if people did not increase their activity to prevent it. Whatever we are capable of doing must be done now.________________ Dr. Somerville is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, City University of New York. One of his books, The Philosophy of Peace, has an introduction by Albert Einstein. He lives in El Cajon, Cal. 9 A Fairy Tale world of the Székely people The spirit of Dante, Bartók and of the great Hungarian poet, Endre Ady seems to hover over the graphics of a brooding, remote and unique Hungarian artist, Lajos Ferenc. The form is that of the above giants, the substance is that of the imaginary world of thousands of old Szekely fairy tales of the artists’ native Transylvania. A limited edition of 18 of Ferenc’s litographs, originally published in the now collectors’ item “Fata Morgana”, is now available in a set, moderately priced /$ 15.-/ It is an imcomparable conversation piece and a matchless Christmas gift. Orders may be sent to Denes Gall, 90 Homestead Lane, Brookfield, Conn. 06804. The flowering of culture Between 1945 and 1978 some 21.000 volumes of fiction and poetry appeared in Hungary, of which 10.000 were by foreign authors. Of the fiction, the classical authors have achieved the highest sales - 2.5 million copies of Gorky’s work, 2.2 million copies of Tolstoy’s and 1.8 million copies of Hemingway’s. Balzac and Stendhal have each topped the 2 million mark while Dickens, Thackeray and the Bront'é sisters have sold more than a million. Thomas Mann has been the bestselling German writer since 1945, with 800.000 copies of 83 editions. iFeature films from Hungary won 15 prizes at 12 festivals in 1978. Income from sales to foreign countries reached 38 million forints -10 million forints more than in 1977. The Federal Republic of Germany was the biggest customer. At this years’ Belgrade festival the two Hungarian entries were A Very Moral Night /Károly Makk/ and Electric Shock /Peter Bacsó/.
