원문/전문 보기 - Russell–Einstein Manifesto (러셀-아인슈타인 선언)

IN thetragic situation which confronts humanity, we feel thatscientists should assemble in conference to appraise theperils that have arisen as a result of the development ofweapons of mass destruction, and to discuss a resolution inthe spirit of the appended draft.

We are speaking on this occasion, not as members of thisor that nation, continent, or creed, but as human beings,members of the species Man, whose continued existence is indoubt. The world is full of conflicts; and, overshadowingall minor conflicts, the titanic struggle between Communismand anti-Communism.

Almost everybody who is politically conscious has strongfeelings about one or more of these issues; but we want you,if you can, to set aside such feelings and consideryourselves only as members of a biological species which hashad a remarkable history, and whose disappearance none of uscan desire.

We shall try to say no single word which should appeal toone group rather than to another. All, equally, are inperil, and, if the peril is understood, there is hope thatthey may collectively avert it.

We have to learn to think in a new way. We have to learnto ask ourselves, not what steps can be taken to givemilitary victory to whatever group we prefer, for there nolonger are such steps; the question we have to ask ourselvesis: what steps can be taken to prevent a military contest ofwhich the issue must be disastrous to all parties?

The general public, and even many men in positions ofauthority, have not realized what would be involved in a warwith nuclear bombs. The general public still thinks in termsof the obliteration of cities. It is understood that the newbombs are more powerful than the old, and that, while one A-bomb could obliterate Hiroshima, one H-bomb could obliteratethe largest cities, such as London, New York, and Moscow.

No doubt in an H-bomb war great cities would beobliterated. But this is one of the minor disasters thatwould have to be faced. If everybody in London, New York,and Moscow were exterminated, the world might, in the courseof a few centuries, recover from the blow. But we now know,especially since the Bikini test, that nuclear bombs cangradually spread destruction over a very much wider areathan had been supposed.

It is stated on very good authority that a bomb can nowbe manufactured which will be 2,500 times as powerful asthat which destroyed Hiroshima. Such a bomb, if explodednear the ground or under water, sends radio-active particlesinto the upper air. They sink gradually and reach thesurface of the earth in the form of a deadly dust or rain.It was this dust which infected the Japanese fishermen andtheir catch of fish. No one knows how widely such lethalradio-active particles might be diffused, but the bestauthorities are unanimous in saying that a war with H-bombsmight possibly put an end to the human race. It is fearedthat if many H-bombs are used there will be universal death,sudden only for a minority, but for the majority a slowtorture of disease and disintegration.

Many warnings have been uttered by eminent men of scienceand by authorities in military strategy. None of them willsay that the worst results are certain. What they do say isthat these results are possible, and no one can be sure thatthey will not be realized. We have not yet found that theviews of experts on this question depend in any degree upontheir politics or prejudices. They depend only, so far asour researches have revealed, upon the extent of theparticular expert's knowledge. We have found that the menwho know most are the most gloomy.

Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, starkand dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to thehuman race; or shall mankind renounce war? People will notface this alternative because it is so difficult to abolishwar.

The abolition of war will demand distasteful limitationsof national sovereignty. But what perhaps impedesunderstanding of the situation more than anything else isthat the term "mankind" feels vague and abstract. Peoplescarcely realize in imagination that the danger is tothemselves and their children and their grandchildren, andnot only to a dimly apprehended humanity. They can scarcelybring themselves to grasp that they, individually, and thosewhom they love are in imminent danger of perishingagonizingly. And so they hope that perhaps war may beallowed to continue provided modern weapons are prohibited.

This hope is illusory. Whatever agreements not to useH-bombs had been reached in time of peace, they would nolonger be considered binding in time of war, and both sideswould set to work to manufacture H-bombs as soon as warbroke out, for, if one side manufactured the bombs and theother did not, the side that manufactured them wouldinevitably be victorious.

Although an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons as partof a general reduction of armaments would not afford anultimate solution, it would serve certain importantpurposes. First, any agreement between East and West is tothe good in so far as it tends to diminish tension. Second,the abolition of thermo-nuclear weapons, if each sidebelieved that the other had carried it out sincerely, wouldlessen the fear of a sudden attack in the style of PearlHarbour, which at present keeps both sides in a state ofnervous apprehension. We should, therefore, welcome such anagreement though only as a first step.

Most of us are not neutral in feeling, but, as humanbeings, we have to remember that, if the issues between Eastand West are to be decided in any manner that can give anypossible satisfaction to anybody, whether Communist oranti-Communist, whether Asian or European or American,whether White or Black, then these issues must not bedecided by war. We should wish this to be understood, bothin the East and in the West.

There lies before us, if we choose, continual progress inhappiness, knowledge, and wisdom. Shall we, instead, choosedeath, because we cannot forget our quarrels? We appeal ashuman beings to human beings: Remember your humanity, andforget the rest. If you can do so, the way lies open to anew Paradise; if you cannot, there lies before you the riskof universal death.

"In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclearweapons will certainly be employed, and that such weaponsthreaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge thegovernments of the world to realize, and to acknowledgepublicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a worldwar, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful meansfor the settlement of all matters of dispute between them."

◈ Russell–Einstein Manifesto (러셀-아인슈타인 선언) ◈

◈ Russell–Einstein Manifesto (러셀-아인슈타인 선언) ◈


지식놀이터 :: 원문/전문 > 기록물 > 공공기록물	영문

◈ Russell–Einstein Manifesto (러셀-아인슈타인 선언) ◈
《해설》 본문	9 July 1955 Russell, Einstein