Call to Arms

Scientists, often suspicious of political advice from laymen, listen attentively when their colleague, tall, mild-mannered Dr. Frederick Seitz, 38, of the University of Illinois, has something to say. One of the most respected of U.S. physicists, he played a key part in the wartime development of the atom bomb. In an article in the current Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Dr. Seitz issues a call to arms which has caused an extraordinary stir in scientific circles.

U.S. physicists, says Seitz, must forget their "sense of sin" about the atomic bomb and their feelings of guilt. They must abandon their "one world" pacifism. They must pitch in and help at once, or the civilization they love will sink back into medieval darkness.

What is this civilization? "The awakening of Western Europe that is normally called the Renaissance,'1 says Seitz, "brought something into the lives of men that had never before existed . . . The basic idea was that the minds of men should not be bounded in the larger sense by any pattern of dogma or tradition, but should be free to explore all aspects of life in all fields without restraint . . ."

No Compromise. The Russia of Ivan the Terrible, Seitz points out, did not participate in the Renaissance. "The 1917 Revolution seemed at first to be a step which would greatly accelerate the process of Westernization . . . [But] the Soviet leaders have 'abandoned the idea of the Renaissance and are now in the process of developing a pattern of culture as burdened with dogma as . . . anything known in the past millennium . . ."

Dr. Seitz has little hope of reconciliation. The best that can be hoped for is a walled-off truce, but even this will be impossible, he points out, unless "the military strength of the Western nations [is maintained] at a level so great that Russia will not be willing to attack us ... I do not believe we can afford to refrain from accelerating our arms program beyond the present year. Even a delay of this length of time may be unwise."

Physicist Seitz knows that some of his colleagues hate to develop new means of mass slaughter. They distrust military men, cringe at the thought of exposing themselves to spy hunts. But Dr. Seitz is convinced that they must. Otherwise, they will endanger "the most important ideals which have been evolved by mankind since the dawn of civilization . . . Who among us will feel sinless if he has remained passively by while Western culture was being overwhelmed?

"I believe the time is ripe for physicists, and scientists in general, to devote a much larger fraction of their time to research of military interest . . ." At present, Dr. Seitz says, there is not much opportunity or encouragement for such high-type recruits. Government money is not lacking, but Government research agencies have not enough imagination, leadership or freedom to act. One trouble, of wide concern to scientists, is congressional sniping.

"It is evident," says Seitz, "that an appreciable component of Congress is not aware of the conditions which must be met if we are to obtain the most from our scientific fraternity. For example, the continued partisan attacks on the top administration of the Atomic Energy Commission, on issues that appear absurd to most scientists, has probably done as much to impede the progress of that organization as could a number of well-placed Russian agents." What is needed, says Physicist Seitz, is a hard-hitting, imaginative agency like the wartime Office of Scientific Research and Development.

No Delay. What is needed most of all among both scientists and public is a sense of desperate urgency like that which prevailed in wartime. "There is a general complacency in the public mind," Seitz says, "which arises from the fact that life in our land is exceedingly pleasant. It may prove necessary to contract our standard of living if we undertake military preparedness with anything like the serious ness that is prevalent in Russia." Dr. Seitz hopes that the public and his colleagues may both awake in time. American public opinion is due for an "abrupt change some time in the near future if the present crisis continues. Changes of this type have been instituted by disasters such as those which occurred at Lexington, Fort Sumter and Pearl Harbor." The U.S. must not wait. "If the impending change in public opinion hinges upon such a disaster," Seitz warns, "it is clear that events may have advanced to a point where defeat is certain."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.