罗素自传（全本）-71

possible way.?????? ?? ????? ??????? ?? ??????? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ????????,???????? 13, 1966Allow me to express my appreciation to you for your willingness toparticipate in this Tribunal. It has been convened so that we may investigateand assess the character of the United States’ war in Vietnam.The Tribunal has no clear historical precedent. The Nuremberg Tribunal,although concerned with designated war crimes, was possible because thevictorious allied Powers compelled the vanquished to present their leaders fortrial. Inevitably, the Nuremberg trials, supported as they were by State power,contained a strong element of realpolitik. Despite these inhibiting factors,which call in question certain of the Nuremberg procedures, the NurembergTribunal expressed the sense of outrage, which was virtually universal, at thecrimes committed by the Nazis in Europe. Somehow, it was widely felt, therehad to be criteria against which such actions could be judged, and accordingto which Nazi crimes could be condemned. Many felt it was morally neces-sary to record the full horror. It was hoped that a legal method could bedevised, capable of coming to terms with the magnitude of Nazi crimes.These ill-de?ned but deeply-felt, sentiments surrounded the NurembergTribunal.Our own task is more di?cult, but the same responsibility obtains. Wedo not represent any State power, nor can we compel the policy-makersresponsible for crimes against the people of Vietnam to stand accused beforeus. We lack force majeure. The procedures of a trial are impossible to implement.I believe that these apparent limitations are, in fact, virtues. We are free toconduct a solemn and historic investigation, uncompelled by reasons of Stateor other such obligations. Why is this war being fought in Vietnam? Inwhose interest is it being waged? We have, I am certain, an obligation tostudy these questions and to pronounce on them, after thorough investiga-tion, for in doing so we can assist mankind in understanding why a smallagrarian people have endured for more than twelve years the assault of thelargest industrial power on earth, possessing the most developed and cruelmilitary capacity.I have prepared a paper, which I hope you will wish to read during yourdeliberations. It sets out a considerable number of reports from Westernnewspapers and such sources, giving an indication of the record of theUnited States in Vietnam. These reports should make it clear that we enter ourthe autobiography of bertrand russell 694enquiry with considerable prima facie evidence of crimes reported not bythe victims but by media favourable to the policies responsible. I believethat we are justi?ed in concluding that it is necessary to convene a solemnTribunal, composed of men eminent not through their power, but throughtheir intellectual and moral contribution to what we optimistically call‘human civilisation’.I feel certain that this Tribunal will perform an historic role if its investiga-tion is exhaustive. We must record the truth in Vietnam. We must pass judge-ment on what we ?nd to be the truth. We must warn of the consequences ofthis truth. We must, moreover, reject the view that only indi?erent men areimpartial men. We must repudiate the degenerate conception of individualintelligence, which confuses open minds with empty ones.I hope that this Tribunal will select men who respect the truth and whoselife’s work bears witness to that respect. Such men will have feelings aboutthe prima facie evidence of which I speak. No man unacquainted with thisevidence through indi?erence has any claim to judge it.I enjoin this Tribunal to select commissions for the purpose of dividing theareas of investigation and taking responsibility for their conduct, under theTribunal’s jurisdiction. I hope that teams of quali?ed investigators will bechosen to study in Vietnam the evidence of which we have witnessed only asmall part. I should like to see the United States Government requested topresent evidence in defence of its actions. The resistance of the NationalLiberation Front and of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam must alsobe assessed and placed in its true relation to the civilisation we chooseto uphold. We have about ?ve months of work before us, before the fullhearings, which have been planned for Paris.As I re?ect on this work, I cannot help thinking of the events of my life,because of the crimes I have seen and the hopes I have nurtured. I have livedthrough the Dreyfus Case and been party to the investigation of the crimescommitted by King Leopold in the Congo. I can recall many wars. Muchinjustice has been recorded quietly during these decades. In my own experi-ence I cannot discover a situation quite comparable. I cannot recall a peopleso tormented, yet so devoid of the failings of their tormentors. I do not knowany other con?ict in which the disparity in physical power was so vast. I haveno memory of any people so enduring, or of any nation with a spirit ofresistance so unquenchable.I will not conceal from you the profundity of my admiration and passionfor the people of Vietnam. I cannot relinquish the duty to judge what hasbeen done to them because I have such feelings. Our mandate is to uncoverand tell all. My conviction is that no greater tribute can be provided than ano?er of the truth, born of intense and unyielding enquiry.May this Tribunal prevent the crime of silence.the foundation 695??? ???? ??? ?????????? ?? ??? ???????? ???????? 1966The conscience of mankind is profoundly disturbed by the war beingwaged in Vietnam. It is a war in which the world’s wealthiest and mostpowerful State is opposed to a nation of poor peasants, who have been?ghting for their independence for a quarter of a century. It appears that thiswar is being waged in violation of international law and custom.Every day, the world Press and, particularly, that of the United States,publishes reports which, if proved, would represent an ever growing viola-tion of the principles established by the Nuremberg Tribunal and rules ?xedby international agreements.Moved and shocked by the su?ering endured by the Vietnamese peopleand convinced that humanity must know the truth in order to deliver aserious and impartial judgement on the events taking place in Vietnam andwhere the responsibility for them lies, we have accepted the invitation ofBertrand Russell to meet, in order to examine these facts scrupulously andconfront them with the rules of law which govern them.It has been alleged that in the ?rst nine months of 1966, the air force of theUnited States has dropped, in Vietnam, four million pounds of bombs daily.If it continues at this rate to the end of the year, the total will constitute agreater mass of explosives than it unloaded on the entire Paci?c theatreduring the whole of the Second World War. The area bombarded in this wayis no bigger than the states of New York and Pennsylvania. In the South,the ?? forces and their docile Saigon allies have herded eight million people,peasants and their families, into barbed wire encampments under the surveil-lance of the political police. Chemical poisons have been, and are being,used to defoliate and render barren tens of thousands of acres of farmland.Crops are being systematically destroyed – and this in a country where, evenin normal times, the average man or woman eats less than half the foodconsumed by the average American (and lives to less than one third of hisage).Irrigation systems are deliberately disrupted. Napalm, phosphorus bombsand a variety of other, sadistically designed and hitherto unknown weaponsare being used against the population of both North and South Vietnam.More than ?ve hundred thousand Vietnamese men, women and childrenhave perished under this onslaught, more than the number of soldiers theUnited States lost in both world wars, although the population of Vietnamhad already been decimated during the Japanese and French occupations andthe famine which followed the Second World War.Even though we have not been entrusted with this task by any organisedauthority, we have taken the responsibility in the interest of humanity andthe preservation of civilisation. We act on our own accord, in completethe autobiography of bertrand russell 696independence from any government and any o?cial or semi-o?cial organ-isation, in the ?rm belief that we express a deep anxiety and remorse felt bymany of our fellow humans in many countries. We trust that our action willhelp to arouse the conscience of the world.We, therefore, consider ourselves a Tribunal which, even if it has notthe power to impose sanctions, will have to answer, amongst others, thefollowing questions:1. Has the United States Government (and the Governments of Australia,New Zealand and South Korea) committed acts of aggression accordingto international law?2. Has the American Army made use of or experimented with newweapons or weapons forbidden by the laws of war (gas, special chemicalproducts, napalm, etc.)?3. Has there been bombardment of targets of a purely civilian character, forexample hospitals, schools, sanatoria, dams, etc., and on what scale hasthis occurred?4. Have Vietnamese prisoners been subjected to inhuman treatment for-bidden by the laws of war and, in particular, to torture or to mutilation?Have there been unjusti?ed reprisals against the civilian population, inparticular, the execution of hostages?5. Have forced labour camps been created, has there been deportation of thepopulation or other acts tending to the extermination of the populationand which can be characterised juridically as acts of genocide?If the Tribunal decides that one, or all, of these crimes have been commit-ted, it will be up to the Tribunal to decide who bears the responsibility forthem.This Tribunal will examine all the evidence that may be placed before it byany source or party. The evidence may be oral, or in the form of documents.No evidence relevant to our purposes will be refused attention. No witnesscompetent to testify about the events with which our enquiry is concernedwill be denied a hearing.The National Liberation Front of Vietnam and the Government of theDemocratic Republic of Vietnam have assured us of their willingness toco-operate, to provide the necessary information, and to help us in checkingthe accuracy and reliability of the information. The Cambodian Head of State,Prince Sihanouk, has similarly o?ered to help by the production of evidence.We trust that they will honour this pledge and we shall gratefully accept theirhelp, without prejudice to our own views or attitude. We renew, as a Tri-bunal, the appeal which Bertrand Russell has addressed in his name to theGovernment of the United States. We invite the Government of the Unitedthe foundation 697States to present evidence or cause it to be presented, and to instructtheir o?cials or representatives to appear and state their case. Our purposeis to establish, without fear or favour, the full truth about this war. Wesincerely hope that our e?orts will contribute to the world’s justice, to there-establishment of peace and the liberation of the oppressed peoples.***?????????? ?? ??? ????????We are grateful to the Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation for the work whichit has already done. We are sure that the preliminary steps already taken by itwill help us to complete our task within a reasonable time and with consider-able more e?ciency than it would have been possible if its preliminary workhad not helped our deliberations.?????? ??? ??????? ??? ??? ????????????? ??? ?????? ????????For several years Western news media have unwittingly documented therecord of crime committed by the United States in Vietnam, which com-prises an overwhelming prima facie indictment of the American war. Theterrible series of photographs, and accounts of torture, mutilation andexperimental war has impelled Bertrand Russell to call us together to con-duct an exhaustive inquiry into the war in all its aspects. Scientists, lawyers,doctors and world-renowned scholars will serve on commissions investigat-ing the evidence. Witnesses will be brought from Vietnam to give their ?rst-hand testimony. Investigating teams will travel throughout Vietnam andIndochina, gathering data on the spot. The documentation published in theWest and elsewhere will be relentlessly examined. This ?ve months’ inten-sive work, requiring travelling scienti?c inquiry, and the detailed research,will cost a vast amount of money. Twelve weeks of public hearings will beeven more expensive.The International War Crimes Tribunal is determined to be ?nanciallyindependent. This can only be accomplished through the contributions ofevery individual who supports the work of the Tribunal and recognises theprofound importance of the full realisation of its task.We command no state power; we do not represent the strong; we controlno armies or treasuries. We act out of the deepest moral concern and dependupon the conscience of ordinary people throughout the world for the realsupport – the material help, which will determine whether people ofVietnam are to be abandoned in silence or allowed the elementary right ofhaving their plight presented to the conscience of Mankind.the autobiography of bertrand russell 698POSTSCRIPT1The serious part of my life ever since boyhood has been devoted to twodi?erent objects which for a long time remained separate and have only inrecent years united into a single whole. I wanted, on the one hand, to ?nd outwhether anything could be known; and, on the other hand, to do whatevermight be possible toward creating a happier world. Up to the age of thirty-eight I gave most of my energies to the ?rst of these tasks. I was troubled byscepticism and unwillingly forced to the conclusion that most of what passesfor knowledge is open to reasonable doubt. I wanted certainty in the kindof way in which people want religious faith. I thought that certainty ismore likely to be found in mathematics than elsewhere. But I discovered thatmany mathematical demonstrations, which my teachers expected me toaccept, were full of fallacies, and that, if certainty were indeed discoverable inmathematics, it would be in a new kind of mathematics, with more solidfoundations than those that had hitherto been thought secure. But as thework proceeded, I was continually reminded of the fable about the elephantand the tortoise. Having constructed an elephant upon which the mathemat-ical world could rest, I found the elephant tottering, and proceeded toconstruct a tortoise to keep the elephant from falling. But the tortoise was nomore secure than the elephant, and after some twenty years of very arduoustoil, I came to the conclusion that there was nothing more that I could do inthe way of making mathematical knowledge indubitable. Then came the FirstWorld War, and my thoughts became concentrated on human misery andfolly. Neither misery nor folly seems to me any part of the inevitable lot ofman. And I am convinced that intelligence, patience, and eloquence can,sooner or later, lead the human race out of its self-imposed tortures providedit does not exterminate itself meanwhile.On the basis of this belief, I have had always a certain degree of optimism,although, as I have grown older, the optimism has grown more sober and thehappy issue more distant. But I remain completely incapable of agreeing withthose who accept fatalistically the view that man is born to trouble. Thecauses of unhappiness in the past and in the present are not di?cult toascertain. There have been poverty, pestilence, and famine, which were dueto man’s inadequate mastery of nature. There have been wars, oppressionsand tortures which have been due to men’s hostility to their fellow men. Andthere have been morbid miseries fostered by gloomy creeds, which haveled men into profound inner discords that made all outward prosperity ofno avail. All these are unnecessary. In regard to all of them, means are knownby which they can be overcome. In the modern world, if communitiesare unhappy, it is often because they have ignorances, habits, beliefs, andpassions, which are dearer to them than happiness or even life. I ?nd manymen in our dangerous age who seem to be in love with misery and death, andwho grow angry when hopes are suggested to them. They think hope isirrational and that, in sitting down to lazy despair, they are merely facingfacts. I cannot agree with these men. To preserve hope in our world makescalls upon our intelligence and our energy. In those who despair it isfrequently the energy that is lacking.The last half of my life has been lived in one of those painful epochs ofhuman history during which the world is getting worse, and past victorieswhich had seemed to be de?nitive have turned out to be only temporary.When I was young, Victorian optimism was taken for granted. It was thoughtthat freedom and prosperity would spread gradually throughout the world byan orderly process, and it was hoped that cruelty, tyranny, and injusticewould continually diminish. Hardly anyone was haunted by the fear of greatwars. Hardly anyone thought of the nineteenth century as a brief interludebetween past and future barbarism. For those who grew up in that atmos-phere, adjustment to the world of the present has been di?cult. It hasbeen di?cult not only emotionally but intellectually. Ideas that had beenthought adequate have proved inadequate. In some directions valuable free-doms have proved very hard to preserve. In other directions, especially asregards relations between nations, freedoms formerly valued have provedpotent sources of disaster. New thoughts, new hopes, new freedoms, and newrestrictions upon freedom are needed if the world is to emerge from itspresent perilous state.I cannot pretend that what I have done in regard to social and politicalproblems has had any great importance. It is comparatively easy to have animmense e?ect by means of a dogmatic and precise gospel, such as that ofCommunism. But for my part I cannot believe that what mankind needs is any-thing either precise or dogmatic. Nor can I believe with any wholeheartednessthe autobiography of bertrand russell 700in any partial doctrine which deals only with some part or aspect of humanlife. There are those who hold that everything depends upon institutions, andthat good institutions will inevitably bring the millennium. And, on the otherhand, there are those who believe that what is needed is a change of heart,and that, in comparison, institutions are of little account. I cannot accepteither view. Institutions mould character, and character transforms institu-tions. Reforms in both must march hand in hand. And if individuals are toretain that measure of initiative and ?exibility which they ought to have, theymust not be all forced into one rigid mould; or, to change the metaphor, alldrilled into one army. Diversity is essential in spite of the fact that it precludesuniversal acceptance of a single gospel. But to preach such a doctrine isdi?cult especially in arduous times. And perhaps it cannot be e?ective untilsome bitter lessons have been learned by tragic experience.My work is near its end, and the time has come when I can survey itas a whole. How far have I succeeded, and how far have I failed? From anearly age I thought of myself as dedicated to great and arduous tasks.Nearly three-quarters of a century ago, walking alone in the Tiergartenthrough melting snow under the coldly glittering March sun, I determinedto write two series of books: one abstract, growing gradually more con-crete; the other concrete, growing gradually more abstract. They were to becrowned by a synthesis, combining pure theory with a practical social phil-osophy. Except for the ?nal synthesis, which still eludes me, I have writtenthese books. They have been acclaimed and praised, and the thoughts ofmany men and women have been a?ected by them. To this extent I havesucceeded.But as against this must be set two kinds of failure, one outward, oneinward.To begin with the outward failure: the Tiergarten has become a desert; theBrandenburger Tor, through which I entered it on that March morning, hasbecome the boundary of two hostile empires, glaring at each other across abarrier, and grimly preparing the ruin of mankind. Communists, Fascists, andNazis have successfully challenged all that I thought good, and in defeatingthem much of what their opponents have sought to preserve is beinglost. Freedom has come to be thought weakness, and tolerance has beencompelled to wear the garb of treachery. Old ideals are judged irrelevant, andno doctrine free from harshness commands respect.The inner failure, though of little moment to the world, has made mymental life a perpetual battle. I set out with a more or less religious belief in aPlatonic eternal world, in which mathematics shone with a beauty like that ofthe last Cantos of the Paradiso. I came to the conclusion that the eternal world istrivial, and that mathematics is only the art of saying the same thing indi?erent words. I set out with a belief that love, free and courageous, couldpostscript 701conquer the world without ?ghting. I came to support a bitter and terriblewar. In these respects there was failure.But beneath all this load of failure I am still conscious of something thatI feel to be victory. I may have conceived theoretical truth wrongly, but I wasnot wrong in thinking that there is such a thing, and that it deserves ourallegiance. I may have thought the road to a world of free and happy humanbeings shorter than it is proving to be, but I was not wrong in thinking thatsuch a world is possible, and that it is worth while to live with a view tobringing it nearer. I have lived in the pursuit of a vision, both personal andsocial. Personal: to care for what is noble, for what is beautiful, for what isgentle: to allow moments of insight to give wisdom at more mundane times.Social: to see in imagination the society that is to be created, where indi-viduals grow freely, and where hate and greed and envy die because there isnothing to nourish them. These things I believe, and the world, for all itshorrors, has left me unshaken.the autobiography of bertrand russell 702NOTES1 CHILDHOOD1 See also J. B. S. Haldane, British Journal of Animal Behaviour, Vol. II, No. I, 1954.2 My grandfather on one occasion wrote to my father telling him not to take my brother’snaughtiness too seriously, in view of the fact that Charles James Fox had been a verynaughty boy, but had nevertheless turned out well.3 Completely destroyed in the Blitz.4 It was true. See The Ladies of Alderley, by Nancy Mitford, 1938.2 ADOLESCENCE1 Some portions of this book are included on pp. 36–45.2 It is now pulled down.3 I had met Robert Browning once before at the age of two when he came to lunch atPembroke Lodge and talked unceasingly although everybody wished to hear the actorSalvini whom he had brought with him. At last I exclaimed in a piercing voice, ‘I wishthat man would stop talking’. And he did.4 A former tutor.5 Where my brother was living.3 CAMBRIDGE1 See my letter to Lucy Donnelly, Appendix pp. 170–1; also Crompton Davies’s letteron p. 189.2 My mathematical coach.3 Our name for people we were thinking of electing.4 ENGAGEMENT1 I give the rules in the Appendix on p. 77–8, and these are followed by fragments of someof the letters received from L. P. S. during my years at Cambridge.2 In a letter to Alys, September 2, 1894, I wrote: ‘My Aunt Georgy [the Lady GeorgianaPeel, my grandmother’s step-daughter] yesterday was very kind, but too inquisitive (asindeed most women are); she said even in old times at the slightest thought of amarriage my grandmother used to get into a sort of fever and be fussy and worriedabout it.’3 Pembroke Lodge.4 Logan was the most malicious scandal-monger I have ever known.5 I don’t know who the Arch Prig was, or even whether he existed outside Logan’simagination.6 This was a cottage close to Friday’s Hill, inhabited by the family of Logan’s marriedsister Mrs Costelloe (afterwards Mrs Berenson).7 This was a high-brow undergraduate magazine, mainly promoted by Oswald Sickert(brother of the painter), who was a close friend of mine.8 In support of a miners’ strike.9 What a mistaken judgement!10 Afterwards Mrs Lowndes. She was a sister of Hilaire Belloc.11 I stayed a week-end at Vétheuil with three sisters named Kinsella, who were friends ofthe Pearsall Smiths. I there met Condor the painter, whose only remark was: ‘Wouldn’tit be odd if one were so poor that one had to give them shaving soap instead of creamwith their tea?’ It was there also that I made the acquaintance of Jonathan Sturges, whowas in love with one of the sisters.12 I ?nd myself shocked by the conceit and complacency of the above letter and of someof the others written about the same time. I wonder that Alys endured them.13 I went to Cambridge for the week-end, but did not see Alys as the three months had notexpired.14 Lion FitzPatrick – afterwards Mrs Phillimore.15 Oscar Browning.16 From Rome, where I had accompanied her.17 The Keynes in question was the father of Lord Keynes.18 George Trevelyan, Master of Trinity, om, etc., etc.19 Mayor and Theodore Davies were exact contemporaries, Mayor being the best andTheodore the second-best classical scholar of their year. To ‘take wings’ is to retirefrom habitual presence at meetings of The Society, which usually is done in the man’s?fth or sixth year.20 Miss Stawell became a very distinguished classicist.21 Uncle Rollo.22 On the ground that she was likely to die during the winter.23 Her sister, Lady Charlotte Portal.24 Aunt Agatha.25 My father’s birthday.5 FIRST MARRIAGE1 With us we took Bonté Amos, the sister of Maurice Sheldon Amos; see pp. 132 ff.2 He married Lady Edith Douglas, sister of Lord Alfred.3 Rollo’s second wife.4 My cousin Harold Russell and his wife.5 My grandmother had lately died.6 The Duke of Bedford.notes 7046 ‘PRINCIPIA MATHEMATICA’1 See letter to Gilbert Murray and his reply, pp. 146–7. Also the subsequent lettersrelating to the Bacchae.2 A Religious Rebel, by Logan Pearsall Smith, p. 8.3 See my letters to Lucy on pp. 154 ff.4 Later Lord Rhayader.5 This dinner is also described by Mrs Webb in Our Partnership, p. 300.