The Russell-Einstein Manifesto [《罗素—爱因斯坦宣言》]

moonstar

The Russell-Einstein ManifestoIssued in London, 9 July 1955

In the tragic situation which confronts humanity, we feel that scientists should assemble in conferenceto appraise the perils that have arisen as a result of the development of weapons of mass destruction,and to discuss a resolution in the spirit of the appended draft.
We are speaking on this occasion, not as members of this or that nation, continent, or creed, but ashuman beings, members of the species Man, whose continued existence is in doubt. The world is full ofconflicts; and, overshadowing all minor conflicts, the titanic struggle between Communism and anti-Communism.
Almost everybody who is politically conscious has strong feelings about one or more of these issues; butwe want you, if you can, to set aside such feelings and consider yourselves only as members of abiological species which has had a remarkable history, and whose disappearance none of us can desire.
We shall try to say no single word which should appeal to one group rather than to another. All, equally,are in peril, and, if the peril is understood, there is hope that they may collectively avert it.
We have to learn to think in a new way. We have to learn to ask ourselves, not what steps can be takento give military victory to whatever group we prefer, for there no longer are such steps; the questionwe have to ask ourselves is: what steps can be taken to prevent a military contest of which the issuemust be disastrous to all parties?
The general public, and even many men in positions of authority,have not realized what would be involved in a war with nuclearbombs. The general public still thinks in terms of the obliteration ofcities. It is understood that the new bombs are more powerful thanthe old, and that, while one A-bomb could obliterate Hiroshima,one H-bomb could obliterate the largest cities, such as London, NewYork, and Moscow.
No doubt in an H-bomb war great cities would be obliterated. Butthis is one of the minor disasters that would have to be faced. Ifeverybody in London, New York, and Moscow were exterminated,the world might, in the course of a few centuries, recover fromthe blow. But we now know, especially since the Bikini test, that nuclear bombs can gradually spreaddestruction over a very much wider area than had been supposed.
It is stated on very good authority that a bomb can now be manufactured which will be 2,500 times aspowerful as that which destroyed Hiroshima. Such a bomb, if exploded near the ground or underwater, sends radio-active particles into the upper air. They sink gradually and reach the surface of theearth 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 lethal radioactive particles might be diffused, but the best authoritiesare unanimous in saying that a war with H-bombs might possibly put an end to the human race. It isfeared that if many H-bombs are used there will be universal death, sudden only for a minority, butfor the majority a slow torture of disease and disintegration.
Many warnings have been uttered by eminent men of science and by authorities in military strategy.None of them will say that the worst results are certain. What they do say is that these results arepossible, and no one can be sure that they will not be realized. We have not yet found that the views ofexperts on this question depend in any degree upon their politics or prejudices. They depend only, sofar as our researches have revealed, upon the extent of the particular expert's knowledge. We havefound that the men who know most are the most gloomy.
Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we putan end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war? People will not face this alternative becauseit is so difficult to abolish war.
The abolition of war will demand distasteful limitations of national sovereignty. But what perhapsimpedes understanding of the situation more than anything else is that the term "mankind" feels vagueand abstract. People scarcely realize in imagination that the danger is to themselves and their childrenand their grandchildren, and not only to a dimly apprehended humanity. They can scarcely bringthemselves to grasp that they, individually, and those whom they love are in imminent danger ofperishing agonizingly. And so they hope that perhaps war may be allowed to continue provided modernweapons are prohibited.
This hope is illusory. Whatever agreements not to use H-bombs had been reached in time of peace,they would no longer be considered binding in time of war, and both sides would set to work tomanufacture H-bombs as soon as war broke out, for, if one side manufactured the bombs and theother did not, the side that manufactured them would inevitably be victorious.
Although an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons as part of a general reduction of armaments wouldnot afford an ultimate solution, it would serve certain important purposes. First: any agreementbetween East and West is to the good in so far as it tends to diminish tension. Second: the abolition ofthermo-nuclear weapons, if each side believed that the other had carried it out sincerely, would lessenthe fear of a sudden attack in the style of Pearl Harbour, which at present keeps both sides in a stateof nervous apprehension. We should, therefore, welcome such an agreement though only as a first step.Most of us are not neutral in feeling, but, as human beings, we have to remember that, if the issues between East and West are to be decided in any manner that can give any possible satisfaction to anybody, whether Communist or anti-Communist, whether Asian or European or American, whether White or Black, then these issues must not be decided by war. We should wish this to be understood, both in the East andin the West.  There lies before us, if we choose, continual progress in happiness, knowledge, and wisdom. Shall we, instead, choose death, because we cannot forget our quarrels? We appeal, as human beings, to human beings: Remember your humanity, and forget the rest. If you can do so, the way lies open to a new Paradise; if you cannot, there lies before you the risk of universal death.

  Resolution We invite this Congress, and through it the scientists of the world and the general public, to subscribe to the following resolution:
"In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the Governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them."
Max Born
Perry W. Bridgman
Albert Einstein
Leopold Infeld
Frederic Joliot-Curie
Herman J. Muller
Linus Pauling
Cecil F. Powell
Joseph Rotblat
Bertrand Russell
Hideki Yukawa