-
Title (Dublin Core)
-
A plan for Germany disarmament
-
Article Title and/or Image Caption (Dublin Core)
-
Title: Strip Germany of machine tools!
-
extracted text (Extract Text)
-
DE-INDUSTRIALIZE Germany. Strip her
of the tools and machines that are the
basis of all war production. That is the pro-
posal offered by POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY
as the only way to make sure that 80,000,-
000 Germans will never again spread the dis-
ease of war throughout the world.
Disarmament of Germany is a funda-
mental of any plan for securing the peace
of Europe. But this time we must do the
job right. We must not repeat the almost
fatal mistake that gave the Nazis their
head start on the road to world conquest
in 1939.
That mistake was the assumption that
rearmament begins with the actual produc-
tion of guns, tanks, and planes. In modern,
mechanized warfare, that is only the final
step of a long and complicated process. The
groundwork is the building up of a vast
supply of machine tools and of the skilled
labor to operate them, with the foundries,
blast furnaces, mines, and other installations
needed to feed them with materials.
To manufacture a 25-pounder field gun
requires about 7,000 tools, ranging from a
2,000-ton press to 1 1/2-foot grinders. It
calls for thousands of jigs, tools, and
gauges, with some 40 traveling cranes and
equipment for tempering. Making the 45,
000-odd parts of a bomber, or the 40,000
parts of a tank, is likewise a job only for *
organized industry.
The insidious thing about machine tools
is that they can serve as well to make the
implements of peace as to forge the weap-
ons of war. Lathes, presses, and mil'.ng
machines can be turned in a moment from
manufacturing vacuum cleaners and wash-
ing machines to producing bombers and
cannon. Furthermore, they are the only
creations of man that are self-regenerative.
Machine tools can breed more machine
tools, pyramiding productive capacity at an
almost unbelievable rate.
These facts served the Nazis well in their
carefully planned preparations for the pres-
ent war. Long before they made the first
move in defiance of the Versailles Treaty,
they had multiplied their machine-tool pro-
duction enormously. When M-day came, it
was necessary only to switch over these
machines to war production with the aid of
secretly prepared gauges, jigs, fixtures, and
tools. While the British and French were
trying frantically to create a large-scale
armament industry overnight, the Germans
poured forth a flood of war materials that
nearly gave them world domination. |
The same thing will happen again if Ger- |
many is allowed to retain her heavy indus-
try and her machine tools. It is too easy to
change over from peacetime manufacture
to war production. Disarmament must go
down to the roots.
How would this be done? To get the an-
swer, POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY canvassed |
engineers and manufacturers of machine |
tools and heavy machinery—men who know |
how to forge the weapons of war and how
to convert plants from peacetime produc- |
tion to the building of guns, tanks, and |
planes. Many of them had dealings with |
German industrialists during the period |
when Hitler was rearming the Reich. One
is a former German engineer who witnessed
the mockery of the “disarmament” that fol- |
lowed the last war. All know how futile |
it is to try to win a modern war without
complete leadership in industrial production.
These men say that the only way to dis-
arm Germany effectively is to strip her
factories of everything they contain, even
to the steel girders. Much of the machinery
will be worn out after years of forced war-
time use without proper replacements.
What is still usable would be divided among
the countries the Nazis have despoiled, to
help them in the big job of reconstruction.
Foundries, blast furnaces, and mines would
be dismantled.
The plan would have to be carried out by
men who know machines and what they
can do for peace and war. An inter-Allied
commission of engineers and industrialists
would go through Germany's factories and
mills, checking all equipment that was fit
for salvage. Distribution would be governed
by the needs of the various countries to be
reconstructed and the amount they have
suffered. Equipment for mines and blast
furnaces would be shipped to cities like
Lille and Kharkov, where they could be used.
As for the future, strict supervision of
German industrial life would make certain
that no new start was made toward build-
ing up a potential war production. Machine
tools and heavy industry would be taboo,
until the German people have given proof
that they have lost their inveterate urge for
conquest.
Is the plan feasible? Yes—if it is admin-
istered conscientiously by statesmen and
technicians, with full co-operation and sup-
port by all the United Nations. It isn't easy
to hide the growth of a war machine. Be-
fore the present war, it was no secret that
Germany was rearming. Even after the
preliminary period of planning and experi-
mentation, it took the Nazis six years of
intensive work to get ready for the test of
battle. It needn't have happened—and it
must not happen again!
If this proposal sounds ruthless, it has
ample precedent from the Germans them-
selves. Almost their first act of aggression
was aimed at Czechoslovakia, with the pri-
mary object of grabbing her highly devel-
oped industries. As the Luftwaffe and the
armored divisions swept over Europe, their
engineers went through the factories and
carted off anything they wanted. When it
was not expedient to carry away the equip-
ment, they moved in and exercised control
for their own purposes.
‘What would become of German economy
if this plan were put into effect? It is no
light matter to turn back the clock 50 years
in a highly industrialized country. Germans
would have to learn to live under an agrar-
ian and handicraft economy, at least until
the virus of war was definitely eliminated
from the national mind. Their industrial
genius might be employed, under strict
control, in the rebuilding of the countries
they have ruined. But, at worst, their con-
dition would be no harder than it was dur-
ing the years of “guns or butter,” and civili-
zation would be saved from the catastrophe
of another world war. If this is the price of
permanent peace, it is a bargain.
-
Language (Dublin Core)
-
eng
-
Date Issued (Dublin Core)
-
1943-09
-
pages (Bibliographic Ontology)
-
73-75
-
Rights (Dublin Core)
-
Public Domain (Google Digitized)
-
Archived by (Dublin Core)
-
Matteo Ridolfi
-
Marco Bortolami (editor)
Popular Science Monthly, v. 143, n. 3, 1943
