A recent post by Peter Duke "Report
from Iron Mountain Explainer" brings the Iron Mountain report
to our attention once again. It was a
mental exercise, like a satire sans humour, not an actual
government report, although it was structured like one. But the
questions it brings up are still without answers, and any answers
deeply shake society to its roots.
Here's some of Duke's summary:
War as Social System
The group [of writers] claims that war serves as more than a tool of policy or diplomacy; it operates as a primary organizing system, structuring the legal, economic, and psychological foundation of modern society. Political authority, economic allocation, and social discipline coalesce around the apparatus of war-readiness.
The persistent prioritization of military spending, the exemption of armed forces from normative legal and economic standards, and the centrality of threat management all converge in a social order calibrated for the production and management of conflict. The group's analysis contends that political and economic systems subordinate themselves to this underlying structure, rather than shaping war as a secondary phenomenon.
Functions of War Beyond Defense
The report catalogues nonmilitary functions war provides. Military organization absorbs surplus production and labor, acting as an economic "flywheel" to prevent collapse into depression or stagnation. War mobilizes populations, fosters social cohesion, and generates collective identity in service of national objectives. It legitimizes government authority and provides outlets for aggression, dissent, and the energies of potentially disruptive segments of society.
War's impact extends to cultural, psychological, and even ecological domains. The existence of a credible external threat sustains internal order and compliance, while military service and preparation function as mechanisms of socialization and discipline. These effects cannot be dismissed as incidental; they constitute structural necessities for societal stability, as defined by the authors.
Peace Games and Scenario Analysis
To model the consequences of disarmament, the Special Study Group develops what it calls "peace games," an analytical methodology using computer simulations to explore cascading effects across social systems. These simulations expose interdependencies linking military expenditure, employment, urban development, and international relations, allowing the group to test hypotheses about the viability of various peace strategies.
The group evaluates scenarios that propose redirecting military spending to space exploration, environmental programs, or vast public works. While such projects offer partial substitution, the analysis concludes that no existing civilian initiative replicates the stabilizing effects, scale, or central control characteristic of the war system.
Challenges of Disarmament and Economic Conversion
The report examines proposals for converting the arms economy to civilian purposes. Economic models suggesting tax rebates, public works, or expanded social services struggle to match the absorptive power of military spending. Attempts to envision massive peacetime programs—such as interplanetary exploration or engineered environmental challenges—raise questions of political acceptability, resource allocation, and technological feasibility. The transition from a war economy to a peace economy, the authors argue, cannot rely on incremental adaptation. The scale and complexity of modern military production require systemic transformation, not piecemeal adjustment. Without a credible replacement for the centralizing, demand-creating power of military spending, the risk of economic instability and political fragmentation increases.
Social and Political Implications of Permanent Peace
The group considers the implications for social discipline and political authority. War, through the constant presence of threat and the mobilization of collective energies, legitimizes centralized power and sustains social order. The transition to peace would demand new institutions capable of fulfilling these functions.
The report explores the idea of creating alternative threats—genuine or manufactured—that might substitute for the unifying effects of war. These could include staged environmental crises, orchestrated extraterrestrial events, or vast technological undertakings. The discussion extends to population control, universal military service redirected toward nonmilitary tasks, and the deliberate construction of large-scale social projects. The feasibility and desirability of these alternatives remain unresolved within the group's analysis, underscoring the magnitude of the challenge.
Controversial Proposals and Public Reaction
The group's willingness to consider radical, even disturbing, solutions exemplifies its commitment to structural analysis over conventional morality. Suggestions such as planned "economic waste," the possibility of organized repression, or the deliberate intensification of environmental problems, appear in the report as hypothetical substitutes for war's functions.
The report acknowledges the likelihood of public shock and outrage upon encountering these arguments. The group's recommendation to suppress the document and limit its circulation arises from a concern over misinterpretation and the political instability that could follow its disclosure. Nonetheless, dissent within the group leads to the eventual release of the report, with the stated goal of provoking open debate and rigorous scrutiny of the underlying issues.
Conclusion and Recommendations
The group concludes that, in the absence of robust and fully developed alternatives, the functions of war remain indispensable to the stability and cohesion of modern society. The report recommends maintaining—and even enhancing—the war system until such substitutes can be identified, tested, and implemented at scale. The authors express skepticism regarding the prospects for near-term solutions, while urging policymakers to initiate further research and public discussion of these structural imperatives.
The report's narrative arc closes on a note of unresolved tension. Its publication, facilitated by Leonard C. Lewin, stands as an invitation to public inquiry into the foundations of social order, the demands of economic stability, and the potential costs of genuine peace. The questions it raises remain acute: What structures can take the place of war in modern civilization? What institutional innovations can ensure stability, discipline, and cohesion in a disarmed world? The analysis insists that solutions must match the scale and complexity of the challenges they address.
Legacy and Relevance
Report from Iron Mountain by Leonard C. Lewin endures as a touchstone for debate on the role of war in society, the true costs of peace, and the architecture of political authority. The report's methods, arguments, and recommendations have provoked controversy, conspiracy, and critical reflection since their first publication. As societies confront new forms of global crisis, from climate change to technological upheaval, the report's core insight—that the structural functions of war demand careful, innovative replacement—continues to inform policy, scholarship, and public debate. In the era of global interdependence and existential risk, the vision of permanent peace entails more than the end of violence; it calls for the deliberate construction of new systems equal to the stabilizing power of the war system itself. The path toward such transformation remains open, contingent on the willingness of leaders, thinkers, and communities to grapple with the complexity and gravity of the questions raised by this extraordinary document.
Regardless of who wrote this brain exercise, not one concept in it is false, they all still apply and have not been answered. This is literally a pot of boiling water without handles. So how can you pick this up? How can these issues be answered (if at all)? If I can still supposedly think, I should be able to crack this nut (to waste yet another metaphor).
Perhaps the first concern is the constant need to imagine the
next "threat" to mobilize the population to accept the coming war
effort, allowing the propaganda to distract people from their
other genuine needs. This propaganda aspect is discussed in Glenn
Diesen's book "Russophobia:
Propaganda in International Politics". Glenn Diesen is a
professor in political economy and sociology at the University of
South-Eastern Norway and an editor at the Russia in Global
Affairs journal. He has published eight books about Russian
foreign policy, conservatism, and political economy. University
of South-Eastern Norway (USN), Vestfold, Norway. He is on YouTube
and Substack
From the Overview of his book:
"While propaganda has the positive effect of promoting unity and mobilizing resources toward rational and strategic objectives, it can also have the negative effect of creating irrational decision-making and obstructing a workable peace."
There's that "peace" word again – how can you balance both hate and peace? How can the Othering of other peoples enable dialog and cooperation? But how can you replace the unifying power of this propaganda? Yes, nations need to be prepared to defend their homeland from the rogue states which still plunder the planet, such as USA. But hardly any nations build genuine civil defence strategy. For example, the major threat to Canada is from their southern neighbour, yet they intend to blow billions of dollars on F-35 fighter planes which are 1) obsolete due to new drone warfare and 2) useless against the coming threat from the south.
First, I must go back to a previously mentioned video by James Hargreaves regarding Leonard Cohen's song "Hallelujah." One commentor mentions that Cohen lists the chords "the fourth, the fifth, the minor fall, the major lift" So what is the secret chord that David played that pleased the Lord, if they are already listed? But there is a secret chord, and another clue is the previous line "But you don't really care about music, do you (usually rendered "do ya," in song and that's a shortened version of "yah" or "jah." If you actually care about music and play the music, yes, you go through those four chord changes, but the secret chord comes when you get to the "jah" in Hallelujah, it resolves on that one syllable to E major, the 3rd chord, the 3-cord.
I could explain this better by writing seven or more sentences to be read concurrently instead of this linear flow of one word at a time. Understanding this thread of propaganda running through society necessitates taking a couple steps back and looking at it with a wider lens. This propaganda belongs to a thread of hate, fear and anger running through society, like a spider's thread, "Their twisted threads will not make clothing, and their works will give them nothing for covering themselves: their works are works of sin."1 It has been said that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun (Chairman Mao), but really, what comes out of a gun is a terminal form of hate and anger, as was projected into the face of Renne Nicole Good in Minneapolis by an ICE thug.
But the Report from Iron Mountain is looking at war as a problem within an economy and in terms of political control – this perspective is too narrow. A wider view may open a crack that lets the light in (Leonard Cohen's "Anthem"). War is actually a third thread in the yarn running through the entire fabric of human civilization, from the beginning, from a human's first steps and picking up the first stone or club. Pulling out that thread is more complicated than reworking the economy and governance. The yarn must be untwined, the evil thread pulled out, the remaining two threads re-carded and spun into new threads which are twisted into new skein of yarn, with a new third cord twisted in, replacing the evil thread which was removed. That third cord, the chord that pleases the Lord, is Trust. "A threefold cord is not quickly broken."2
Without trust, civility is impossible. Enabling trust requires that the evil thread be completely pulled from human nature, simply creating and enforcing laws against behaviour will always remain inadequate if the evil thread remains, pulling us back into fear, hate and hostility. Humans are given the brainpower to reason instead of merely reacting. Use it!
To resist the tendency to turn to hate, distrust, Othering and holding anger, listen for propaganda promoting war and arming for war from your "leaders" and dismiss it and consider those leaders as enemies of their own people. The only type of war preparation acceptable is true civil defence, while making it clear that anyone not respecting your sovereign borders can expect serious consequences.
It may take many more words to fully satisfy the conundrums in
the Iron Mountain Report, but those will have to come in future
articles, this one is getting rather long.
And that report doesn't cover all the issues of the necessity of
war, apparently having only male contributors – there is no
mention of the beneficial reduction in cannon-fodder –
reducing the surplus males in the population by war. In
industrial economies, the heavy work in agriculture, construction
and mining is now all done by machines (energy slaves).
Throughout history, men, being free of the pain and constant
nurturing required to bring another human into existence, can
feel less remorse in the killing of others in war. Thus, in these
times, I must admonish men: use your brains. Figure out what use
you have other than war, remember your origins, the pain and
nurturing: Break not what women have borne.
References:
1 – Spider threads "Their twisted threads will not make clothing, and their works will give them nothing for covering themselves: their works are works of sin" (Isaiah 59:6)
2 – And though one might prevail against another, two will withstand one. A threefold cord is not quickly broken. (Ecclesiastes 4:12)
"Russophobia: Propaganda in International Politics" Palgrave
Macmillan, Singapore, 2022
Author: Glenn Diesen, https://glenndiesen.substack.com
https://www.gale.com/products/9789811914683/
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-19-1468-3
Leave a comment! This is a re-direct to my Substack page.
Return to Limits to Progress Main Page
If you would like to send a donation, please send an Interac eTransfer to email address below. Thank you!
©2025 Kathleen McCroskey
Send your e-mail comments and questions to: