Publishing: Peace Games

It seems that back in 1963 a special study group was formed by a shadowy U.S. Government agency to determine "the nature of the problems that would confront the U.S. if and when a condition of 'permanent peace' should arrive." It seems that the 15-man group, including sociologists, scientists and a professional war planner, began meeting at a place called Iron Mountain, N.Y.* it seems that after three years and dozens of meetings, the group produced a report declaring that peace is undesirable and that war is not only here to stay but is vastly unappreciated. And it seems that the report was suppressed until one of its members became so upset that he released it to Freelance Writer Leonard C. Lewin for publication as a book and condensation in the December Esquire.

Or so it seems. At casual glance, the report is organized in proper bureaucratic fashion, and is written in proper sociological jargon. War is not simply an extension of diplomacy, it says, but a society's "principal political stabilizer." It functions as a "generational stabilizer" as well, enabling "the physically deteriorating, older generation to maintain its control of the younger, destroying it if necessary." Because war supplies all these benefits, it is not to be abandoned casually. There must be a "believable life-and-death threat" as a substitute.

Time to Pollute. The report suggests a few. For example, "a series of giant space-research programs with largely unattainable goals." Or an "Unarmed Forces" might be created out of the existing military establishment, a "giant Peace Corps engaged in social welfare activities on a global scale." Another possible war surrogate is "gross pollution of the environment. The poisoning of the air, and of the principal sources of food and water supply, is already well advanced, and at first glance would seem promising in this respect. But the pollution problem has been so widely publicized in recent years that it seems highly improbable that a program of deliberate environmental poisoning could be implemented in a politically acceptable manner."

If all else fails, the study group suggests the adoption of "blood games," something along the lines of the Spanish Inquisition or the witch trials. Or "reintroduction of slavery in some form consistent with modern technology and political processes. As a practical matter, conversion of the code of military discipline to a euphemized form of enslavement would entail surprisingly little revision; the logical first step would be the adoption of some form of universal military service."

It takes about 20 pages to realize that Report from Iron Mountain is a skillful hoax. Who wrote it? Likely candidates were canvassed. Richard Goodwin and Economist Kenneth E. Boulding both denied authorship. An even likelier candidate, John Kenneth Galbraith, hedged. Meanwhile, he wrote a tongue-in-cheek review of Iron Mountain for Book World under a pseudonym, as is his wont.