NUKES: What New Can Scientists Do?
What can scientists do about nuclear weapons that they're not already doing?
This article is speaking to those readers who generally agree with the following:
CLAIM: There is no credible reason to believe that humanity can possess thousands of massive hydrogen bombs and these weapons will never be used.
If that sounds about right to you, then the next question would seem to be, what are we going to do about it? This article offers one answer to that question.
Who Can Make A Difference?
In recent centuries in the West, the science community has inherited the vast cultural authority that once belonged exclusively to the Catholic Church. There are good reasons for this, given the many wondrous miracles scientists have provided to the human experience.
While not everyone takes the advice offered by scientists, and apparently some people would rather die than do so (???), in the big picture scheme of things scientists are generally considered more credible than many or most other leaders of our society.
In addition, scientists have a unique relationship with nuclear weapons given that they are these weapon's creators.
The point here is that the science community is well positioned by intelligence, education and cultural credibility to take a leading role in directing our attention to the existential threat presented by nuclear weapons.
Scientists Care About Nuclear Weapons
It's great to know that some scientists are already speaking out against nuclear weapons.
As one example, you can meet some of these scientists on the Scientists for Global Responsibility Facebook page.
A history of the activism of scientists can be found on the ArmsControl.org website.
There's the well known Union of Concerned Scientists.
The Federation of American Scientists addresses the nuclear weapons threat.
The Physicists Coalition for Nuclear Threat Reduction works on this issue too.
And this is only a partial list, a brief sampling, of scientists who have organized against the nuclear threat. If you know of more science groups who are doing this work, please mention them below in the comments.
But there is a problem...
Nothing Is Working
While many scientists, and others too, are making earnest good faith efforts to raise the alarm about nuclear weapons, none of these well intended efforts are working. The nuclear weapons situation has not meaningfully changed for the better since the day I was born in 1952. In fact, it's arguably gotten worse as more nations now possess these weapons, and some of the newer nuclear weapons states are inherently unstable, and worse.
I've heard that Einstein once said that doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results is the definition of insanity. Or maybe he said stupidity. I don't know that Einstein actually said any of this really, but nonetheless the statement is correct.
So if we are to be people of reason, as scientists try to teach us to be, we have to face the overwhelming evidence that what the science community and the rest of us are doing...
Is...
Not...
Working.
Something else is needed.
Like what? What to do? What can we try next?
What New Can Scientists Do?
Scientists can recognize that logic, facts, reason and well intended speeches and writings have not been successful in impacting the nuclear weapons threat. It’s just not working. And the clock is still ticking. If they're serious, as I believe at least some of them to be, they can see this, and say this, and they can try something else.
And the something else that scientists can do is to leverage their power as scientists. Scientists can make it so we stop taking them for granted. They can make us sit up and take notice of what science does for us. They can give us a lesson in what reason is really all about. They can remind us that on this planet the stupid don’t survive.
What scientists who wish to be leaders and saviors of this civilization can do is...
Scientists Go Out On Strike
It is within the power of the scientific community to deny us their skills. Imagine some critical mass of the scientific community coming together to say something like this to the rest of the public:
If you want a cure for cancer, get rid of nuclear weapons.
If you want vaccines for pandemics, get rid of nuclear weapons.
If you want colonies on Mars, get rid of nuclear weapons.
If you want better anything from us, get rid of nuclear weapons.
We're taking a break from our work until we see whether you hear us.
The scientists don't have to go out on strike forever. They only need to convince us that they are serious, and that there is a real possibility that we could lose the many benefits that only they can provide. What scientists can do as cultural leaders is rock their comfortable status quo, and then rock ours too.
Hard Bargaining
In any negotiation there can come a point when the talking isn't working, and we just have to stop talking and lay our bottom line on the table.
Meet my conditions, or we don't have a deal.
If we don’t have a deal, I’m walking away.
That's what scientists can do. They can stop talking. And start hard bargaining.
They look us in the eye and tell us that we'd better put up, or they're going to give up.
Scientists can make clear to us that they see no point in spending their lives busting their ass to make everything better for everybody if the rest of us are just going to watch Justin Beaver videos while we drift blindly towards the moment when all the great work the scientists have done for us is destroyed.
Is This Unrealistic?
If a reader finds the above to be unrealistic that's because they don't believe the claim I made at the top of this article. Here it is again.
CLAIM: There is no credible reason to believe that humanity can possess thousands of massive hydrogen bombs and these weapons will never be used.
What's unrealistic is assuming that we can keep these weapons around forever and they will never be used.
What's unrealistic is assuming that we can ignore this threat and still pass the many great accomplishments of science on to our children and their children.
What's unrealistic is assuming that what we're currently doing to rid the world of nuclear weapons is working.
What’s unrealistic is assuming there is nothing more the scientific community can do to save us from ourselves.