I don’t watch “60 Minutes” often, but even so I don’t know how I missed their interview with Neil Armstrong last November. When I saw the promos this week, I thought it was something new, not a repeat of an earlier segment. The reclusive Armstrong — who refused all interviews for many years — talked to Ed Bradley in connection with the release of an authorized biography, “First Man.”

At one point, they talked about the premature end of the Apollo program. Armstrong agreed, as do I, with the conventional wisdom that once we were no longer competing with the Soviets, we lost the national will for such a costly and demanding project. I would probably add that cynicism of government which began with Watergate, along with increasing resentment of the tax burden in general, contributed.

Which is a shame, because I think that the space program has important benefits for America and for all humanity. How many useful spinoff technologies were developed between 1961 and 1970, initially for the use of the space program? Necessity is the mother of invention, and the Apollo program was very needy and very fertile, producing everything from integrated circuits to mylar.

Even more, the space program was something that gave us a national identity, a unifying spirit. It gave the children of that era (including Yours Truly) a sense of possibilities and a motivation to excel.

We are supposed to be planning for a return to the moon and a trip to Mars in the next two decades. I know people complain: “Why are they spending money on this science fiction stuff when we need to spend more on [name of project]?” But I think the space program is good for productivity and good for America, which eventually filters down to a whole bunch of different causes and efforts.