Opposing civil defence and preparedness is such an odd thing. Especially if you're worried about nuclear weapons and the possibilty of war, I'd expect people to push for shelters in every new building, massive government stockpiles of food and such things. Instead, they are going like "Hey, there's this huge threat that might kill most o…
Opposing civil defence and preparedness is such an odd thing. Especially if you're worried about nuclear weapons and the possibilty of war, I'd expect people to push for shelters in every new building, massive government stockpiles of food and such things. Instead, they are going like "Hey, there's this huge threat that might kill most of us. Let's make ourselves even more vulnerable to show we don't like this!"
Based on what I've read, it was pretty similar in the UK and West Germany, so it's not just a US thing.
On the other hand, in Finland where I live every building over 400 m^2 must have a fallout shelter with a protection factor of at least 40. There's enough shelter space to fit 70% of the population. I've never seen anyone in Finland criticize or even comment that policy, it's just a fact of life like having to wear a seatbelt when you drive or a helmet when you ride a bike.
Sweden and Swizerland have even more extensive civil defence programs, so it might be a difference between countries that were neutral in the cold war vs. those in the NATO. I don't know a lot about Soviet or Chinese civil defence, but I think they fall somewhere in between.
Those countries did not have nuclear arsenals. If they had nukes at all, it wasn't like the US or UK or Germany (where US nuke bombers, etc were based).
The protests were in the countries who might be *engaging* in nuclear war, and the protest were against that - against somthing they believed to be so destructive, horrific, and immoral, that all efforts should be made to ensure it never occurs.
I think the protestors were saying "we believe a nuclear war would be so inherently horrific that all efforts must be made to avoid one in the first place."
So not " 'Hey, there's this huge threat that might kill most of us. Let's make ourselves even more vulnerable to show we don't like this!'" but rather ...
... "Hey, there's this huge threat that might kill most of us. Let's make sure it doesn't happen."
Opposing civil defence and preparedness is such an odd thing. Especially if you're worried about nuclear weapons and the possibilty of war, I'd expect people to push for shelters in every new building, massive government stockpiles of food and such things. Instead, they are going like "Hey, there's this huge threat that might kill most of us. Let's make ourselves even more vulnerable to show we don't like this!"
I wonder if countries outside the US saw the same kinds of protests, or if it was just Americans being hyper-individualistic again.
Based on what I've read, it was pretty similar in the UK and West Germany, so it's not just a US thing.
On the other hand, in Finland where I live every building over 400 m^2 must have a fallout shelter with a protection factor of at least 40. There's enough shelter space to fit 70% of the population. I've never seen anyone in Finland criticize or even comment that policy, it's just a fact of life like having to wear a seatbelt when you drive or a helmet when you ride a bike.
Sweden and Swizerland have even more extensive civil defence programs, so it might be a difference between countries that were neutral in the cold war vs. those in the NATO. I don't know a lot about Soviet or Chinese civil defence, but I think they fall somewhere in between.
Those countries did not have nuclear arsenals. If they had nukes at all, it wasn't like the US or UK or Germany (where US nuke bombers, etc were based).
The protests were in the countries who might be *engaging* in nuclear war, and the protest were against that - against somthing they believed to be so destructive, horrific, and immoral, that all efforts should be made to ensure it never occurs.
the 60's were incredibly "hyper-- "**** whatever the word is, it is way beyond my typing skill...
man, I am trying to thank someone and now my minor "radiation Sickness" has me befuddled ..
but baby, it was forced compliance with "the Man. "-- **** and J Edgar Hoover was watching !! GROOVY baby ..
I think the protestors were saying "we believe a nuclear war would be so inherently horrific that all efforts must be made to avoid one in the first place."
So not " 'Hey, there's this huge threat that might kill most of us. Let's make ourselves even more vulnerable to show we don't like this!'" but rather ...
... "Hey, there's this huge threat that might kill most of us. Let's make sure it doesn't happen."