Mathematician extraordinary [Principia Mathematica], philosopher
[The History of Western Philosophy], Nobel Laureate for Literature, lifetime peace-activist,
he was co-architect with Albert Einstein of the Russell-Einstein Manifesto signed by ten
Nobel Laureates which sparked the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.
Einstein knew each other as pacifists from W.W.I. Both had long histories of compassionate concern
for humanityI. Russell visited Einstein 10 years after W.W.I.I in the USA as the H-Bomb race solidified to
discuss the problems and horrors of nuclear weapons. Shortly after, on a plane between
conferences in Rome and Paris, Russell heard that Einstein had died. He had no corroboration
of the important talks, but Einstein had graciously sent what must have been his last signed letter in a way
his last will and testimony concerning his lifetime passion for peace, and his unique role in nuclear science.
Russell's hand written speech "Man'sPeril" is lovingly preserved in the Wren Library, Trinity College, Cambridge not far from where the atom was first split.
Russell would go on to speak on the BBC and campaign for the cause of Nuclear Disarmament.
Unfortunately, our politicians are not accustomed to such a choice. However hard they try, their minds slide back to the courtroom and the criminal world. If, out of kindness, the last man foresees the murder of the last man but one, the whole law-enforcement campaign imagines all the apparatus of police, Scotland Yard, judges and wigs ready to catch and punish him. But this is not how the scene will be. There will first be the death of nearly all the inhabitants of New York, London, or Peking or Tokyo, then a gradual extension of deaths to the country, then famine due to failure of trade, and at a last gasping horrifying lonely death in the mountains, and then eternal silence.
If the Great Powers continue in their present policies, some such end is inevitable. When two or more Powers disagree, what can they do? A can yield to B, or B can yield to A, or they can reach a compromise, or they can fight. If neither yields, it is thought pusillanimous: if either loses caste, or, next time, it must fight; or it must secure an ally. Since the number of States is finite, this process must soon come to an end. We have seen all the steps in this development since the end of the Second War. Consider what happened in the Cuba crisis. Both sides were willing to fight, but at the last possible moment, Khruschev's nerve failed and he allowed the world to live till the next crisis. But it turned out that Russia would have preferred death, and Khrushchev fell.
Can we count on this always happening?
What is the present system?
When there is a quarrel, a conference is summoned, each side debates, they reach two compromises, one favored by one side, and the other by the other. If each contains disarmament clauses, each is aware that they maybe infringed. Each considers the tiniest chance of infringement a greater misfortune than the end of the human race. And so, nothing is done. The powers must learn that Peace is the paramount interest of everybody. To cause this to be realized by governments should be the supreme aim.
What has been achieved towards this end, and what have I personally contributed?
Publicly, in the relations between states, very little, but still something. Russia has expressed willingness to transform NATO by joining it; but China is a new threat. The Vietnam war seems likely to end in negotiation. Generally, the powers (except the U.S.) show a reluctance to go to war. France is uncertain, but leaves room for hope. At any rate, the stark opposition of Communist and non-Communist is breaking down. If peace can be preserved for the next 10 years, it will be possible to hope.
What can private persons do meanwhile?
They can agitate by pointing out the effects of modern war and the danger of the extinction of Man. They can teach men not to hate peoples other than their own, or to cause themselves to be hated. They can value, and cause others to value what Man has achieved in art and science. They can emphasis the superiority of cooperation to competition.
Finally, have I done anything to further such ends?
Something perhaps, but sadly little in view of the magnitude of the evil. Some few people in England and the U.S.A. I have encouraged in the expression of liberal views, or have terrified with knowledge of what modern weapons can do. It is not much, b ut if everybody did as much, this Earth would soon be a paradise. Consider for a moment what our planet is, and what it might be. At present, for most there is toil and hunger, constant danger, more hatred than love. There could be a more happy world, wh ere cooperation was more in evidence than competition, and monotonous work is done by machines, where what is lovely in nature is not destroyed to make room for hideous machines whose sole business is to kill, and where to promote joy is more respected t han to produce mountains of corpses. Do not say this is impossible: it is not. It waits only for men to desire in more than the infliction of torture.
There is an artist imprisoned in each one of us. Let him loose to spread joy everywhere.