Is Militarism Consistent with Limited Government

[Griff]

So I kinda snapped at Matt on another thread. Sorry Bro. Here's the problem: Many of us here pay lip service to limited government. We lament the passing of the Republic, while at the same time we believe the American military can solve the problems of culture and economics planet-wide. I don't believe the huge redistribution of income to military contractors can occur without preventing the dream of limited government. There is much more to be said but... What do you believe?

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by Griff

I don't believe the huge redistribution of income to military contractors can occur

OK. I remember when that was called "privatization" and it was felt to be a really, really good and libertarian thing. In fact Ls were taking credit for it when it saved the inner cities. Interesting to see how the agenda turns and now they are evil contractors.

[iamthewalrus109]

Theory: Since the end of WWII this country has had some leaders that have dared to limit the size of the military and the flowing rivers of profit to the coffers of war profiteers. One of the most striking examples is Richard Nixon's attempt at detente with the Soviets. Like Kennedy before him Richard Nixon was flanked, in his case by a political assasination, ie. Watergate. For Jimmy Carter it was the crisis in Tehran that draped a dark cloud over his managing the Camp David sessions with Begin and Sadat, which was set up in fact by Kissenger and Nixon. Enter Ronald Reagan, a true actor and a great front man. Play the cold war out to the public with strong rhetoric of the evil empire, and fuel a war in Afganistan, then when it's discovered that the Soviets can no longer maintain the race, claim it as a victory, of course that's not what the MIC wanted to happen, but it made for good PR once spinned correctly.

So ferment and kindle the remnants of the Cold war, to form a new war, one that will be just as prolonged as the the Cold war. More weapon systems, larger deployments, reconstruction contracts, and oil rights, a cabalist's dream come true. Install a figure head puppet, such as GW Bush, pump the rhetoric and the faith based zeal to an all time high and maintain a global military presence that maintains profits for a system that evolved in the early 50's. Does this system make money, of course, but for whom and for how long? This type of paradigm can only persist for only so long before total destruction is assurred.

Profiteering and corruption is the only way left for indviduals to make money, this cycle needs to end, the appetites need to be wetted by a new frontier, not war, and not corporate malfiesance. It is easier for the powers at be to stir patriotic fervor designed to cloud the citizenry's world view and lead them to believing that it is for their safety that war is waged.

-Walrus

[xoxoxoBruce]

President Eisenhower

Before he left office in January 1961, for his farm in Gettysburg, he urged the necessity of maintaining an adequate military strength, but cautioned that vast, long-continued military expenditures could breed potential dangers to our way of life. He concluded with a prayer for peace "in the goodness of time." Both themes remained timely and urgent when he died, after a long illness, on March 28, 1969.

[Mr. Kreeck]

No, militarism is not consistent with limited government. You cannot have a small government and a large military without the military gaining through, economic resources and the media undo influence over the people.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

OK. I remember when that was called "privatization" and it was felt to be a really, really good and libertarian thing. In fact Ls were taking credit for it when it saved the inner cities. Interesting to see how the agenda turns and now they are evil contractors.

You are talking about privatizing services which should have never existed in the first place. I think its important that we recognize that while it may be cheaper to have Brown and Root making the pancakes in Iraq, it wouldn't cost us a dime (ignoring domestic subsidies) if those pancakes were being served back home in their kitchens. This is the chump change part however. We have entire industries devoted to making tools to break people and their things. Our economy is so distorted by this that our elected Representatives constantly troll for contracts for their districts. They vote for each others deals and our economy gets more nationalized with every contract.

Case in point. Once upon a time Ike rode around in a little helicopter. The next President Hillary or Pataki or whoever will have birds more fitting to imperial power and an entire upstate NY town will continue to base its economy on Federal contracts. Because I live in a small place I can see very clearly the distortion caused by defense plants. Its much like the old company towns where dependence on one big employer makes folks less and less creative. Unfortunately, todays company towns are dependent on an over-reaching government for their existence not on legitamit commerce.