They were called the "Special Study Group". Fifteen anonymous men, experts of diverse disciplines; social and natural sciences, humanities, law, business, communications theory, systems analysis, international relations, war planning....
The Group was commissioned to study what might happen if we find ourselves in a state of peace...and to suggest how we should prepare to deal with no more war. They began their work in August of 1963. And after producing The Report thirty months later, they insisted that it not be released for publication. Public discussion of The Report's conclusions and recommendations threatened to provoke, as they said, "...clear and predictable danger of a crisis in public confidence."
The U.S. News and World Report claimed in their November 20, 1967 issue, that an unnamed government official told them President Johnson "hit the roof" after reading The Report, and ordered that it be suppressed for all time. The same government official also confirmed the Report's authenticity.
The book made the New York Times bestseller list, has been widely translated.
The government declared it a hoax, did all they could to suppress The Report. Then in 1972, Leonard Lewin (5) claimed that he was the author, and that The Report from Iron Mountain was a spoof.
The Guinness Book of World Records lists The Report from Iron Mountain as the "Most Successful Literary Hoax".
TopTenz.net (6) lists it as number five on it's list of most controversial books.
So what was in there that made LBJ hit the roof, and order The Report suppressed for all time?
The Report's first paragraph of SECTION 7 -- SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS, under the subheading THE NATURE OF WAR, reads:
"War is not, as is widely assumed, primarily an instrument of policy utilized by nations to extend or defend their expressed political values or their economic interests. On the contrary, it is itself the principal basis of organization on which all modern societies are constructed. The common proximate cause of war is the apparent interference of one nation with the aspirations of another. But at the root of all ostensible differences of national interest lie the dynamic requirements of the war system itself for periodic armed conflict. Readiness for war characterizes contemporary social systems more broadly than their economic and political structures, which it subsumes."
They are leading up to saying that before consideration of a peace scenario, it must be recognized that war is the foundation of our social systems. The nature of the war system, and the functions it performs for society must be explicitly understood, and replacements for those crucial functions must be ready before any abandonment of the war system is contemplated; before peace could ever work.
The Report breaks the functions of war down into five categories; economic, political, sociological, ecological, cultural and scientific.
Economically, war has throughout history stabilized and provided a system for controlling national ecomomies.
Politically, war, and the permanent possibility of war have been basic to stable government while propagating acceptance of political authority, maintaining "necessary" class distinctions, and subordinating citizens to the state. The Report claims that without sustaining credible threats of war, no modern rulers have been able to maintain proper control.
Sociologically, war, and presence of military institutions have throughout history helped control social dissidence and antisocial behaviors while promoting binding social allegiance and social cohesion.
Ecologically, war has been indispensable for balancing population with available supply of food and other essentials.
Culturally and Scientifically, war culture has shaped values in the creative arts, as well as motivating advances in science and technology.
Essentially, The Report insists that without war, modern civilization would fall apart--unless substitutes can be devised to replace the functions of war summarized above. Topping the list of general criteria these substitutes must meet are: political acceptability; technical feasibility; public credibility.
The Report breaks down into the same five categories certain characteristics of any acceptable surrogate for the war system.
Economic -- Expenditures of resources for "completely nonproductive purposes" must be at a level similar to that achieved by war, must remain independent of the existing supply-and-demand economy, and must be under arbitrary political control.
Political -- A "generalized external menace" must be maintained to promote acceptance of political authority.
Sociological -- Institutions must be developed to maintain public fear of "personal destruction" the war system provides; fear that promotes adherence to societal values, and acceptance of the transcendence of such values over individual lives.
Ecological -- Population control must be maintained to keep humans from threatening the species by reproducing beyond the carrying capacity of Earth's biosphere.
Cultural and Scientific -- Establishment of "a basis for sociomoral conflict" as powerful as war provides is important for determination of cultural values. Also, there must be a "sense of internal necessity" to motivate the quest for scientific knowledge.
Under SUBSTITUTES FOR THE FUNCTIONS OF WAR: MODELS, The Report effectively, if obliquely, fleshes out fundamentals of WHY we have perpetual war.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).