Shouldn't the government discuss its "need to survive"
with the citizens it was created to serve?
Raven Rock: The Story of the U.S. Government's Secret Plan to Save Itelf while the Rest of Us Die, a book I mentioned in a previous post, is still very much on my mind. We Americans need to become more aware of the critical issues it discusses and start having a voice in this aspect of our government.
As noted in my last post, there's no indication Garrett Graff, the book's author, or anyone in the goverment has ever considered this situation from a public relations perspective. They see it only in terms of national surival, -- which is the core issue -- but we supposedly have "government of the people, by the people, and for the people." That requires close-to full disclosure and public trust, neither of which has been evident in the extensive planning and massive spending on government continuity projects undertaken since World War II. Billions of dollars have been, and still are, spent annually, and countless lives are at stake.
Since the first atomic bomb, the world has faced recurring doomsday scenarios and tried to find ways to survive them. Some of those discussions were public and touted in the news media under the umbrella of Civilian Defense programs. Perhaps the best known, albeit most ill-conceived, of these was the "duck and cover" campaign that taught school children to crawl under their desks and wrap their arms around their heads for protection in case of a nuclear attack. Many more occurred behind closed doors where our government was working under the deepest cover and spending billions of dollars to create secret bunkers where key goverment officials could survive such attacks and maintain some semblance of an American government.
Did you know those places and plans -- updated, of course -- still exist and are still operational? The general public has only recently started to learn anything about them. Some very early plans have been declassified. Others have seeped out onto the Internet. And, Graff's recently published book is now a huge break-through. But this isn't enough. We need more public discussion of these facilities and associated survival plans.
I am not suggesting all these plans and the details for implementing them should be unclassified and published. That would be stupid. Some things -- e.g., the exact locations and sizes of bunkers, stockpiles, and lists of who will be admitted to them -- need to remain secret if they are to be of any use to us. But, we, the people, should at least know such things exist and be aware of the general policies that govern their creation and their use. We should have some say in determining who and what should be protected and saved for posterity, and at what cost? It would be good public relations for our government.
This site was on Northern Kentucky University servers while I taught there, and it remained there for quite a while after I retired.