Heinlein, Robert A – Expanded Universe

million and Moscow at four million. Now they are claiming twenly-five million more

in the Union, and over a million increase in Moscow.” She thought a bit. “It’s a

lie. Unless they are breeding like flies everywhere outside Moscow, they have lost

population since the War-not gained. I haven’t found even one family with more than

three children. The average is less than two. And they marry late. Robert, they

aren’t even replacing themselves.”

She looked at that empty river. “Not quite as big as Copenhagen is my

guess.”

We stopped in many other cities-Alma Ata, Tashkent, Samarkand, Minsk, Vilno,

Kiev, Riga, Leningrad, etc.- and she continued her gentle questioning but never

found reason to change her opinion. Even out in the Muslim countries of Turkestan

the birthrate was low, or the answers seemed to show it. She did not write down her

figures (Well, I don’t think she did; I warned her not to) but she has a memory that

is effectively perfect as long as necessary.. . then she can wash out useless

details, which I can’t do.)

How was it possible for the Russians to claim that Moscow was seven times as

big as it actually was? How could I be right and the whole world wrong? The World

Almanac gave the same figures the Russians did, all news services seemed to accept

Russian population figures- how could a Big Lie that big not be noticed-and

denounced?

About a year later I had a chance to discuss it with an old shipmate, an

admiral now retired but then holding a

major command. I asked him how many people there were in Moscow.

He answered, “I don’t know. Why don’t you look it up?” (When a high brass

answers, “I don’t know,” he may mean, “Don’t be nosy and let’s change the subject.”

But I persisted.)

“Make a guess. You must have some idea.”

“Okay.” He closed his eyes and kept quiet for several minutes. “Seven

hundred and fifty thousand, not over that.”

(Jackpot!)

I said, “Mister Ought Ought Seven, have you made a special study of Russia?

Or shouldn’t I ask?”

“Not at all. is command] gives me all the trouble I need without worrying

about Russia. I simply worked it as a logistics problem, War College style. But I

had to stop and visualize the map first. Roads, rivers, railroads, size of

marshalling yards, and so forth. You know.” (I did, vaguely. But I wasn’t a War

College graduate. He is.) “That city just doesn’t have the transportation facilities

to be any bigger than that. Get much over three quarters of a million and they’d

starve. Until they double their tracks and increase their yards they can’t risk a

bigger population. You don’t do that over night. They can pick up some slack with

the river-but it doesn’t go where they need it most.”

And there it stands. Either all three of us are crazy despite the fact that

all three of us got the same answer to a numerical question using three entirely

different but logical methods. . . or for many, many years the Kremlin lie factory

has peddled their biggest and fanciest “Pravda” without ever being questioned.

Look-both the Pentagon and the State Department know exactly how big Moscow

is, and the Kremlin knows that they know. We were high-flying ’em with the U-2 for

four years; you can bet Moscow was carefully photographed many times. Our present

Eye-in-the-Sky satellites are so sharp-eyed that they can come close to reading the

license plate on your car; our top officials know precisely what the logistics

situation is for Moscow-and every economist knows that one of the parameters that

controls strictly the upper limit to the size of a city is how many tons of food it

can ship in, week in and week out, never failing. Most big cities are only a day or

two away from hunger, only a week or so away from beginning starvation and panic.

Moscow isn’t even a seaport; she’s a riverport and not a good one. Most food

must come overland by train or lorry.

Maybe she’s built enough more facilities since 1960

but in 1960 she just didn’t have what it takes. Since I can’t believe the