William Rivers Pitt has it nailed.
...We need wars.
Without wars, the economy flakes and falls apart. Without wars, the trillions of dollars spent on weapons systems, military preparedness and a planetary army would dry up, dealing a death blow to the economy as currently constituted. Without wars or the threat of wars, the populace is not so easily controlled and manipulated.
Let us be clear, however. When I say "we," I do not refer to your average working man and woman on the street. The man running the shoe store or the woman managing the bar does not need war to remain economically viable. The "we" I speak of is that overwhelmingly wealthy and powerful few who have wired their fortunes into the manufacture of weapons, the plumbing of oil, and the collection of spoils through political largesse.
These are the people who need war. They need it to pile up the contracts from the Pentagon, to enrich the banking institutions that protect them, to pay the lawyers who defend them, to pay the lobbyists who sustain them, to purchase the politicians who champion them, and to buy up the media that hides them from sight.
Yet though this group is small in number, they are "we," for they are our leaders and our myth-makers. They have convinced the majority of this population that war is a necessity. They create the premises for combat and invasion, they convince and cajole and, when necessary, frighten us into line. All too often, almost every time, we buy into the fictions they manufacture, thus sustaining the "permanent crisis" mentality and the need for war after war after war.
The economic need for war creates the required excuses for war. The "permanent crisis" of the Cold War motivated the United States to support the Shah in Iran, a decision that led to the Islamic Revolution and the establishment of Iran as a permanent enemy. The Cold War motivated us to support Saddam Hussein financially and militarily as a bulwark against Iran. The Cold War motivated us to establish the House of Saud in Saudi Arabia to ensure a steady supply of oil. The Cold War motivated us to support Osama bin Laden and the so-called "Jihadists" in Afghanistan in their fight against the Soviet invaders.
Now, we prepare to invade Iran. We have invaded Iraq for the second time in 15 years. We will never invade Saudi Arabia, despite the fact that this nation's vast wealth and Wahabbist extremists make it the birthing bed of international terrorism. We lost two towers in New York City at the hands of a group that we created in the 1980s to fight the Soviets. Put plainly, the "permanent crisis" of the Cold War created a cycle of military self-justification. We build enemies with arms and money, and then we destroy them with arms and money, thus keeping our wartime economy afloat.
The Cold War ended more than ten years ago, but we still need war, and we need that "permanent crisis" to continue the cycle of military self-justification. If a legitimate war is not available, we will create one because we have to. We have our new "permanent crisis," which we call the War on Terror, another turn of the cycle created by an attack that our foreign policy and war-justifications of the last 50 years made almost inevitable.
We need wars. That's why we are in Iraq. This invasion and occupation of that nation has given our economy the war it needs, and has also created the justification for future wars by creating legions of enemies in the Mideast and around the world. Our wartime economy will tolerate no less.
Talking about Bush's lies regarding weapons of mass destruction, or about bringing democracy to the region, or about the dollar-to-Euro transfer, or about the midterm elections, is window-dressing. We invaded Iraq because we had to. This is the elephant in the room, the foreign policy reality nobody talks about.
If you want peace, work to change the underpinnings of our economy. Until that change is made, there will always be wars, invasions, and lies to brings such things about. It is what it is.
Develop an alternative for fossil fuel, and the cycle of endless wars to enrich the rich begun in the late 19th century will end.
It's quite possible.
It is so easily done with modern biotechnology and chemical engineering and a bit of re-tooling that the now falling fossil oil supply neccessitated the rush to oligarchy by that military-industrial machine known as the Carlyle Group.
If they don't grab power now, in 10-20 years there may be no need for the Princes of the desert and their mercer cadre of Western aristocrats.
Just another Reality-based bubble in the foam of the multiverse.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I often wonder "what if" there had been no Hitler, no Mussolini, no Hirohito, no World War II -- but still a worldwide depression. What types of micro- and macro-economic experiments would have been tried? Instead, at least for the United States, the military-industrial (and later aerospace) complex became the protected (and invincible) market sector, and pretty much everything else was sacrificed to it. What if, in hindsight, WWII was just a historical blip that threw the American economy off-course forever?
Hi, CD. Pitt is a little self satisfied. But Truthout's a great site serving a good role. Yes, when he's on he's definitely on.
Grace, unfortunately it seems there are people- often families- who have been using high emotions to profit off of war for a very long time.
Pick up Kevin Phillips' American Dynasty sometime. The Walker-Bu$h family has been doing this for a hundred years at least.
The war blips don't screw us up forever. The Clinton years are great evidence of that. Clinton's big mistake was bowing to business pressure to deregulate industry and the market.
Once you could form a monopoly again, and once you could treat the market like a horse race, speculating on future values, the robber-barons had their foot in the door.
Without oversight, it is inevitable they win the game, because they cheat.
Post a Comment