Heinlein, Robert A – Expanded Universe

explode would need to be orders of magnitude more powerful in order to volatilize a

house-size chunk of Luna. For further details see my THE MOON IS A HARSH MISTRESS.

4. 1950 It is utterly impossible that the United States will start a

“preventive war.” We will fight when attacked, either directly or in a territory we

have guaranteed to defend.

1965 Since 1950 we have done so in several theaters and are doing so in Viet

Nam as this is written. “Preventive” or “pre-emptive” war seems as unlikely as ever,

no matter who is in the White House. Here is a new prediction: World War III (as a

major, all-out war) will not take place at least until 1980 and could easily hold

off until 2000. This is a very happy prediction compared with the situation in 1950,

as those years of grace may turn up basic factors which (I hope!) may postpone

disaster still longer. We were much closer to ultimate disaster around 1955 than we

are today-much closer indeed than we were at the time of the Cuban Confrontation in

1962. But the public never knew it. All in all, things look pretty good for

Page 138

survival, for the time being-and that is as good a

break as our ancestors ever had. It was far more dangerous to live in London in

1664-5 than it is to live in a city threatened by H-bombs today.

1980 lam forced to revise the 1950 prediction to this extent: It is no

longer certain that we will fight to repel attack on territory we have guaranteed to

defend; our behavior both with respect to Viet Nam and to Taiwan is a clear warning

to our NATO allies. The question is not whether we should ever have been in Viet Nam

or whether we should ever have allied ourselves to the Nationalist Chinese. I do not

know of any professional military man who favored ever getting into combat on the

continent of Asia; such war for us is a logistic and strategic disaster.

But to break a commitment to an ally once it has been made is to destroy our

credibility.

5. 1950 In fifteen years the housing shortage will be solved by a

“breakthrough” into new technology which will make every house now standing as

obsolete as privies.

1965 Here I fell flat on my face. There has been no breakthrough in housing,

nor is any now in prospect- instead the ancient, wasteful methods of building are

now being confirmed by public subsidies. The degree of our backwardness in the field

is hard to grasp; we have never seen a modern house. Think what an automobile would

be if each one were custom-built from materials fetched to your home-what would it

look like, what would it do, and how much would it cost. But don’t set the cost

lower than $100,000 or the speed higher than 10 rn/h, if you want to be realistic

about the centuries of difference between the housing industry and the automotive

industry.

I underestimated (through wishful thinking) the power of human stupidity-a

fault fatal to prophecy.

1980 I’m still flat on my face with my nose rubbed in the mud; the situation

is worse than ever. See A BATHROOM OF HER OWN on page 244. And that figure of

$100,000 just above was with gold at $35 per troy ounce-so change it to one million

dollars-or call it 2700 troy ounces of gold. Or forget it. The point is that it

would be very nearly impossible to build even a clunker automobile at any price if

we built them the way we build houses.

We have the technology to build cheap, beautiful, efficient, flexible

(modular method) houses, extremely comfortable and with the durability of a Rolls

Royce. But I cannot guess when (if ever) the powers that be (local bureaucrats,

unions, building materials suppliers, county and state officials) will permit us

poor serfs to have modern housing.

6. 1950 We’ll all be getting a little hungry by and by.

1965 No new comment.

1980 Not necessarily. In 1950 I was too pessimistic concerning population.

Now I suspect that the controlling parameter is oil. In modern agriculture oil is