Evening star., 1962-01-14
SHELTER
SHELTER
Civil Defense Debate
Affects All Americans
Continued From Page Al

Continued From Page Al
shelters. Other civil defense
funds are spent for research,
medical Stockpiling and food
distribution plans.
Value Debated
Even as the program gets
under way, the debate over its
value continued. The partici-
pants agree that nuclear war
is at least possible-if not prob
able. But, given the danger,
what should this country do
about civil defense?
One faction-men like Nor
man Thomas and Scientist
Harrison Brown-says the So
luton can lie only in negotiated
disarmament and a workable
peace, rather than in further
preparations for war.
Those who disagree with this
position-administration lead
Hrs, for instance-Say disarma-
ment is indeed a first-priority
national goal, but that until a
reasonably safe, workable dis
armament can be achieved, this
country must plan to defend
itself.
Defense implies preparation
Tor a war involving nuclear
weapons. And if such a war
comes, THE experience would
pc terrible beyond imagination
nd description" according to
he new Pentagon shelter book
yet. Against this eventuality,
Ihe administration wants to
provide fallout shelters for as
many persons as is prudently
possible.
There is a third faction, led
IN spirit by Britain's Lord Rus
sell, that believes the West
should give up it's own nuclear
arms even if that means bowing
to Soviet rule. This better
Red-than-dead" group is small
IN thus country.
1t is the first and second
groups, plus the generally pro-
civil defense research organiza-
lions, which provide the view
points discussed N this series of
articles.
Social Cost Feared
The anti" group believes that
the expanded civil defense pro-
gram will bring a damaging
change in the fabric of Ameri-
can life. The social cost of
going underground would not
fall short of the total transfor-
nation of our way of life, the
suspension of our civil institu-
tions, the habituation of our
people to violence and the
ultimate militarization of our
society" said Gerard Piel, pub
Usher of the Scientific American
magazine.
Even without a war, this
argument goes. the new mole
society" will lose those things
worth fighting for and, particu-
!arly, will accustom the Nations
youth to a life in which nuclear
violence is a permanent art.
The pro" faction, including
the principal research groups
which have worked in this field,
agree that life will be changed.
But, this side says, the peace
time change will not be large
and in any case it is inevitable,
since the nuclear age has made
the world a different place to
live in.
They deny that life will be
"brutalized." Herman Kahn
physicist, mathematician and
director of the Hudson Institute
says, however, that the existence
of shelters will create socia,
problems; There will be CON-
mercial exploitation of human
fears; public shelters will have
to be policed; children will be-
come more aware of death; lot
of money will be spent.
But civil defense is a neces-
Sity, not a luxury" Mr.. Kahn
says. The bad sides does not
outweigh the potential bene-
fits"
Administration spokesmer
say the mole" picture is much
overdraWn. The shelter pro.
gram is a moderate one. Peo-
ple will not live underground;
they simply will have shelter
space if they need it. Individ.
uals will have instruction ir
emergency action, but most Of
the program will be carried Out
by the professionals, just a;
policemen, firemen and volun-
teer assistants handle violence
and disaster today.
War Seen More Likely
The second broad concern o.
the shelter critics is more
frightening. They say that thu
civil defense program will MAKE
war more likely. Instead O.
saving lives it may doom mil
lions to an unnecessary nuclea,
death.
Here is how they arrive a
this position:
First, shelters are "provoca
tive" They will convince al
enemy that we expect nuclea