Book Review: Marxism
| Author | C. B. Macpherson |
| Published date | 01 March 1963 |
| Date | 01 March 1963 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/002070206301800115 |
| Subject Matter | Book Review |
BOOK
REvIEW
101
ability
of
a
bomb's
safety
devices.
In
one
incident,
he
writes
...
"a
B-52
bomber
had
to
jettison
a
24-megaton bomb
over
North
Carolina.
The bomb
fell
in
a
field
without
exploding
...In
this case
the
...
warhead
was
equipped
with
six
interlocking
safety
mechanisms
. . .
Air
Force
experts...
found
that
five
of
the
six
interlocks
had
been set
off
by
the
fall!
Only
a
single
switch
prevented
the
24-megaton
bomb
from
detonating.
.. ".
Are
we
not
to
be
alarmed?
The
publication
of
Kill
and
Overkill
on
October
22,
coincided
with
President
Kennedy's
speech
claiming
that
a
precarious
status
quo
had
been
upset
in
Cuba.
A
few days
later,
data
released
by
both
the
Pentagon
and
the
(U.K.)
Institute
for
Strategic
Studies,
showed
that
the
West
had a
considerable
nuclear
warfare
superiority
over
the
East,
in
addition
to
a
slight
superiority
in
mobilized
manpower.
If
a
"missile
gap"
existed
late
in
1962,
it
was
in
our favour.
In
the
words
of
the
author:
"We
already
have
enough
nuclear
explosives
to
overkill
the
Soviet
Union
at
least
25
times.
What
earthly
justifica-
tion
can
there
be
for
piling
up
any
such
deluge
of
destruction?"
Overkill
capacity
presumably
finds
a
weird
rationale
of
its
own in
the
simple belief
that
a
condition
of
nuclear
opulence,
in
terms
of
numbers
and dispersal
of weapons,
will
permit
the
United
States
to
sit
out
a
first
strike
by
the
East-against
Western
military
targets,
so one
reasons-and
to
retaliate
against
mainly
military
targets.
This
seems
a
laudable
and
almost humane
policy.
Nuclear
warfare
looks
feasible,
once
more.
Unfortunately
this
same
condition
of
surplus
killing
capacity,
combined
with
the
need
for
breaching
the
East's
security
in
order to
pinpoint
its
military
targets,
can
encourage
the
misguided
advocates
of
a
first
strike
against
the
East.
Moreover,
the
East
must,
as
we
do,
assume
the
worst
in
its
own
strategic
planning.
Having
maintained
a posture
of
minimum deterrence,
it
has
insufficient
weapons
to
cover
Western
military
bases
and
targets
Its
only
answer
is
to
consider
a
strike,
by
airbursts
of
multi-megaton
warheads,
against
the West's
population
centres.
At
what
point
would
it
be
provoked
to
strike
first?
Dr.
Lapp's argument
is
against
overkill,
and
he
makes
his
point
well.
If
anything
is
lacking
it
is
a
fearless
examination
of
the
effect
of
an
overkill
posture
on
the
very sincerity
of
Western
disarmament
proposals.
Equal
percentage
reductions
in
unequal
weaponries
lead
to
unacceptable
instability.
All
sincerity
is
subject
to proof.
One
regrets
this
omission,
in
an
otherwise very
satisfying
treatment.
Toronto
H.
PAUL
SIMON
MARXism.
An
Historical
and
Critical
Study.
By
George
Lichtheim.
1961.
(New
York:
Frederick
A.
Praeger.
Toronto:
Burns
&
Mac-
Eachern.
xx,
412pp.
$9.50)
Mix,
in
one
author,
a
high
regard
for
Marx
the intellectual,
a
low
view
of
the
quality
of
Marxism everywhere
in
the
last
few
decades,
a
remarkable
historical
grasp
of
nineteenth
century
Europe,
a
clear
To continue reading
Request your trial