The Pentagon Invades Your Life
Rick is a midlevel manager in a financial services company in New York City. Each day he commutes from Weehawken, New Jersey, a suburb only a stone's throw from the Big Apple, where he lives with his wife, Donna, and his teenage son, Steven. A late baby boomer, Rick just missed the Vietnam era's antiwar protests, but he's been against the war in Iraq from the beginning. He thinks the Pentagon is out of control and considers the military-industrial complex a danger to the country. If you asked him, it's a subject on which he would rate himself as knowledgeable. He puts effort into educating himself on such matters. He reads liberal websites, subscribes to progressive-minded magazines, and is a devotee of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.
In fact, he has no idea just how deep the Pentagon rabbit hole goes or how far down it his family already is.
Rick believes that, despite its long reach, the military-industrial complex is a discrete entity far removed from his everyday life. Now, if this were 1961, when outgoing President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned the country about the "unwarranted influence" of the "military-industrial complex" and the "large arms industry" already firmly entrenched in the United States, Rick might be right. After all, he doesn't work for one of the Pentagon's corporate partners, like arms maker Lockheed Martin. He isn't in the Army Reserve. He's never attended a performance of the Marine Corps band (not to mention the Army's, Navy's, or Air Force's music groups). But today's geared-up, high-tech Complex is nothing like the olive-drab outfit of Eisenhower's day: It reaches deeper into American lives and the American psyche than Eisenhower could ever have imagined. The truth is that, at every turn, in countless, not-so-visible ways Rick's life is wrapped up with the military.
So wake up with Rick and sample a single spring morning as the alarm on his Sony (Department of Defense contractor) clock interrupts his final dream of the night. Donna is already up and dressed in fitness apparel by Danskin (a Pentagon supplier that received more than $780,000 in DoD dollars in 2004 and another $456,000 in 2005) and Hanes Her Way (made by defense contractor and cake seller Sara Lee Corporation, which took in more than $68 million from the DoD in 2006). Committed to a healthy lifestyle, she's wearing sneakers from (DoD contractor) New Balance and briskly jogging on a treadmill made by (DoD contractor) True Fitness Technology.
Rick drags himself to the bathroom (fixtures by Pentagon contractor Kohler, purchased at defense contractor Home Depot). There, he squeezes the Charmin, brushes with Crest toothpaste, washes his face with Noxzema; then, hopping into the shower, he lathers up with Zest and chooses Donna's Herbal Essences over Head & Shoulders -- "What the hell," he mutters, "I deserve an organic experience." (The manufacturer of each of these products, Procter & Gamble, is among the top 100 defense contractors and raked in a cool $362,461,808 from the Pentagon in 2006.)
In go his (DoD supplier) Bausch and Lomb contact lenses and down goes a Zantac (from DoD contractor GlaxoSmithKline) for his ulcer. Heading back to the bedroom, he finds Donna finished with her workout and making the bed -- with the TV news on -- and lends her a hand. (Their headboard was purchased from Thomasville Furniture, the mattress from Sears, the pillows were made by Harris Pillow Supply, all Pentagon contractors.) They exchange grim glances as, on their Samsung set (another DoD contractor) the Today Show chronicles the latest in chaos in Iraq. "Thank god we never supported this war," Rick says, thinking of the antiwar rally Donna and he attended even before the invasion was launched. NBC, which produces the Today Show, is owned by General Electric, the 14th-largest defense contractor in the United States, to the tune of $2.3 billion from the DoD in 2006, and has worked on such weapons systems as the UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters and F/A-18 Hornet multimission fighter/attack aircraft, both in use in Iraq.
A Who's Who of Your Life
Of course, the Pentagon has long poured U.S. tax dollars into private coffers to arm and outfit the military and enable it to function. At the time of Eisenhower's farewell address, New York Times reporter Jack Raymond noted that the Pentagon was spending "$23,000,000,000 a year for services and procurement of guns, missiles, airplanes, electronic devices, vehicles, tanks, ammunition, clothing and other military goods." Today, that would equal around $200 billion. In 2007, the Department of Defense's stated budget was $439 billion. Counting the costs of its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the number jumps to over $600 billion. Factoring in all the many related activities carried out by other agencies, actual U.S. national security spending is nearly $1 trillion per year.
Back in Eisenhower's day, arms dealers and mega-corporations, such as Lockheed and General Motors, held sway over the corporate side of the military-industrial complex. Companies like these still play an extremely powerful role today, but they are dwarfed by the sheer number of contractors that stretch from coast to coast and across the globe. Looking at the situation in 1970, almost 10 years after Eisenhower's farewell speech, Sidney Lens, a journalist and expert on U.S. militarism, noted that there were 22,000 prime contractors doing business with the U.S. Department of Defense. Today, the number of prime contractors tops 47,000 with subcontractors reaching well over the 100,000 mark, making for one massive conglomerate touching nearly every sector of society, from top computer manufacturer Dell (the 50th-largest DoD contractor in 2006) to oil giant ExxonMobil (the 30th) to package-shipping titan FedEx (the 26th).
In fact, the Pentagon payroll is a veritable who's who of the top companies in the world: IBM; Time-Warner; Ford and General Motors; Microsoft; NBC and its parent company, General Electric; Hilton and Marriott; Columbia TriStar Films and its parent company, Sony; Pfizer; Sara Lee; Procter & Gamble; M&M Mars and Hershey; Nestlé; ESPN and its parent company, Walt Disney; Bank of America; and Johnson & Johnson among many other big-name firms. But the difference between now and then isn't only in scale. As this list suggests, Pentagon spending is reaching into previously neglected areas of American life: entertainment, popular consumer brands, sports. This penetration translates into a remarkable variety of forms of interaction with the public.
Rick and Donna's home is full of the fruits of this incursion. As they putter around in their kitchen, getting ready for the day ahead, they move from the wall cabinets (purchased at DoD contractor Lowe's Home Center) to the refrigerator (from defense contractor Maytag), choosing their breakfast from a cavalcade of products made by Pentagon contractors. These companies that, quite literally, feed the Pentagon's war machine, are the same firms that fill the shelves of America's kitchens.
Today, just about every supermarket staple -- from Ballpark Franks (Sara Lee) and Eggo waffles (Kelloggs) to Jell-O (Kraft) and Coffee Mate (Nestle) -- has ties to the Pentagon. The same holds for many household appliances. In Rick and Donna's dining room, a small Roomba robotic vacuum cleaner buzzes around the floor. Rick thought it would be cute to have the little mechanical device trolling around the house making their hectic lives just a tad easier. Little did he know that Roomba's manufacturer, iRobot, takes in U.S. tax dollars ($51 million of them from the DoD in 2006, more than a quarter of the company's revenue) and turns them into PackBots, tactical robots used by U.S. troops occupying Iraq and Afghanistan, and Warrior X700s -- 250-pound semiautonomous robots armed with heavy weapons such as machine guns, that may be deployed in Iraq this year.
In addition to selling millions of Roombas to civilian consumers, the company uses government tax dollars to make money on the civilian side of its business. According to the company's December 2006 annual report (which listed as its "Research Support Agencies" the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency [DARPA], the U.S. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command, the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command, and the U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center), government funding "allows iRobot to accelerate the development of multiple technologies." Yet iRobot retains "ownership of patents and know-how and [is] generally free to develop other commercial products, including consumer and industrial products, utilizing the technologies developed during these projects." It's a very sweet deal. And iRobot is hardly alone.
Entering the Digital World with Guns Blazing
Sitting on the dining room table is Rick's HP (Hewlett-Packard) notebook computer. HP is another company that has grown its civilian know-how with generous military contracts, like the multiyear, multimillion-dollar deal it signed in 2005 with DARPA to "develop technologies to improve the performance of mission-critical computer networks used during combat and other vital operations." A spokesman for the company noted, "Our work for DARPA is aimed at significantly improving the performance of the Internet.... If we can successfully create new approaches to the way Internet traffic is detected and routed, we may start seeing the Internet used as the de facto communications and information network in areas where it previously would've been thought too risky." Success would certainly translate into more lucrative civilian work, as well.
Meanwhile, Rick and Donna's son, Steven, is still upstairs, having a hard time tearing himself away from his computer game. His room is a veritable showcase of the new entertainment/sports/high tech/pop culture dimension of the twenty-first-century Complex: there are NASCAR posters (in 2005, more than $38 million in taxpayer money was spent on the U.S. armed forces' racecars); National Football League (NFL) jerseys and baseball caps (the NFL has partnered with the Pentagon to create military profiles aired during TV broadcasts of regular and postseason games, while individual NFL teams have hosted "military appreciation" events); X-Men comic books (the Pentagon teamed up with Marvel Comics to produce limited-edition, "military-exclusive" comic books, with pro-Pentagon themes, that are now sought after by civilian collectors); and a wastebasket filled with empty Mountain Dew bottles (the Air Force was one of the sponsors of the Dew Action Sports Tour, a traveling show featuring skateboarding, BMX, and freestyle motocross contests).
During Ike's time, when civilian firms like Ford and AT&T were the big military suppliers, the payroll showed an utter lack of cool companies. Now, the Pentagon is reaching into virgin territory in new ways with new partners. Today, hip firms like Apple, Google, and Starbucks are also on DoD contractors' lists. And while Ike's complex was typified by brass bands and patriotic parades, today's variant is a flashy digitized world of video games, extreme sports, and everything cool that appeals to potential young recruits.
Steven finally shuts down Tropico: Paradise Island -- a nation-building simulation video game where the player, as "El Presidente," attempts to lure tourists to his/her fun-in-the-sun resort. Neither father nor son is remotely aware that the software maker, Breakaway Games, does taxpayer-funded work for such military clients as DARPA, the Joint Forces Command, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and the United States Air Force -- as well as having developed 24 Blue, a simulator used to improve aircraft carrier-based operations. They are blissfully unaware of even the existence of Breakaway's Pentagon-funded video game that could conceivably lead to more effective bombing of targets abroad.
Steven grabs his iPod MP3 player (from DoD contractor Apple Computer) and heads downstairs to leave with his father. On his way to the door, Rick goes to his bookshelf and scans a selection of progressive texts whose publishers just happen to be DoD contractors, including a reissue of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring (Houghton Mifflin), Bushwhacked: Life in George W. Bush's America by Lou Dubose and Molly Ivins (Random House), and Jon Stewart's America (The Book) (Warner Books), before choosing the Hugo Chavez-approved Hegemony or Survival by Noam Chomsky (ahem, Metropolitan Books from Macmillan publishers). As the last one out, Donna sets the ADT alarm system. (ADT took in more than $16 million from the Pentagon in 2006, while its parent company, Tyco International, cleaned up to the tune of over $187 million.)
The Pentagon on Wheels
Rick and Steven hop into the Saturn parked in the driveway. Rick is proud of his car choice -- after all, Saturn has such a people-friendly (even anti-Detroit establishment) vibe. Admittedly, he is aware that General Motors owns not only the Saturn but the Hummer brand -- the civilian version of the U.S. military's Humvee -- but he believes that, in this world, you can't be squeaky-clean perfect. But Hummer isn't the half of it.
How could Rick have known that, in 1999, GM formally entered the Army's COMBATT (COMmercially BAsed Tactical Truck) vehicle development program? Or that GM actually had its own military division, General Motors Defense, when his Saturn was made? Nor could Rick have known that GM Defense formed a joint venture with defense giant General Dynamics to create the GM-GDLS Defense Group (which was awarded in excess of $1.5 billion in DoD contract dollars in 2005). Or that GM took in $87 million from the Pentagon in 2006. Or that, in 2007, GM entered into a 50-year lease agreement to build a $100 million test track on the U.S. Army's Yuma Proving Grounds. Or that the maker of his Saturn's tires, Goodyear, was America's 69th-largest defense contractor in 2004, with DoD contracts worth nearly $357 million.
Rick might be an aging baby boomer, but he still tries to look cool (to Steven's embarrassment). As he pulls the Saturn out of the driveway, he dons a pair of Oakley sunglasses. Oakley supplies goggles and boots to U.S. troops. And while the military purchased goggles from firms such as the American Optical Company during the 1940s, it's unlikely that anyone ever called that company's designs "badass," as Powder, a skiing magazine that runs Army recruitment ads on its website, called one of Oakley's products.
Driving along, Rick glances over at his son. "Are those the Wolverine boots we just got you?"
"Yeah, Dad," answers Steven, looking down at his now-ratty footwear.
Rick's already thinking about the next pair he'll need to buy his son, not about the five-year, multimillion-dollar contract the company signed in 2003 to supply the Army with an upgraded infantry combat boot, or the other deals, worth tens of millions of dollars, that Wolverine signed with the Pentagon in 2004, 2006, and 2007.
As they drive to his school, Steven perks up. "That's it, Dad!" he says, pointing at a Ford Escape that just pulled into the high school parking lot. "Whaddaya say, Dad? Next year, when I get my license?"
Rick remembers hearing on the radio that Ford makes an Escape hybrid-electric vehicle. "You know what, son? I think maybe we just might look into it." He experiences a little burst of satisfaction. Not only can he feel like a good dad, but as a bonus he can even help the environment. (Ford Motor Company and its subsidiaries have, of course, garnered rafts of defense contracts and aided the Army and Navy in various projects.)
Overjoyed, Steven shoots his father a big smile as he opens the car door, "Alright! Well, I'll see you tonight, Dad."
"Do you have your cell phone?" Rick asks. Steven whips a Motorola from his pocket. (Motorola made almost $308 million from the Department of Defense in 2004, while the phone's service provider, Verizon, took home more than $128 million in DoD contracts, and $50 million more from the Department of Homeland Security, in 2006.)
The Real Matrix
With Steven at school, Rick heads for work. He gives the local Exxon station (ExxonMobil took in more than $1.17 billion in DoD dollars in 2006) a pass and instead pulls into Shell, which likes to portray itself as a kinder, greener oil giant. As he signs the receipt of his Bank of America credit card (a firm which issues special credit cards to Pentagon employees to streamline the process of buying supplies for the DoD), Rick has no way of knowing that Shell's parent company, N.V. Koninklijke Nederlandsche, was the 31st-largest defense contractor in 2006, reaping more than $1.15 billion dollars in DoD contracts.
Entering the Holland Tunnel on his way to Manhattan, Rick realizes that, with Steven driving next year, he can start taking mass transit to work. The PATH train into the city -- recently restored under the watchful eye of Bechtel, the 15th-largest defense contractor of 2004 and the recipient of more than $1.7 billion in DoD contracts that year -- will, he believes, lessen his "footprint" on the planet.
Keep in mind, Rick is now only a couple of hours into his long day. In fact, no part of the hours to come will be lacking in products produced by Pentagon contractors -- from the framed photographs of Donna and Steven on his desk (taken by an Olympus camera and printed on Kodak paper) to the beer he drinks with lunch (Budweiser) to most of the products around his office, including: 3M Post-It notes, Microsoft Windows software, Lexmark printers, Canon photocopiers, AT&T telephones, Maxwell House Coffee, Kidde fire extinguishers, Xerox fax machines, IBM servers, paper from International Paper, Duracell batteries, an LG Electronics refrigerator, and paper towels by Marcal Paper Mills.
Rick is, of course, a fiction, but the rest of us aren't -- and neither is the existence of the real Matrix.
In the 1999 sci-fi movie classic of the same name, the Matrix is an artificial reality (resembling the Western world at the dawn of the twenty-first century) created by sentient machines. Humans, who are grown as energy sources and wired in to the Matrix using cybernetic implants, are kept in a coma-like state -- ignorant of the very existence of the artificial reality that they "live" in. In explaining the situation to Neo, the movie's protagonist, Morpheus, a leader of a group of unplugged free humans who wage a guerrilla struggle against the machines, reveals:
"The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us. Even now, in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth."
At one point in his farewell speech, Eisenhower presaged this point, suggesting, "The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- [of the conjunction of the military establishment and the large arms industry] is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government." But only Hollywood has yet managed to capture the essence of today's omnipresent, all-encompassing, cleverly hidden system of systems that invades all our lives; this new military-industrial-technological-entertainment-academic-scientific- media-intelligence-homeland security-surveillance-national security-corporate complex that has truly taken hold of America.
Nick Turse is the associate editor of Tomdispatch.com. He has written for the Los Angeles Times, Adbusters, the Nation, and regularly for Tomdispatch. His first book, The Complex: How the Military Invades Our Everyday Lives, has just been published in Metropolitan Books' American Empire Project series. His website is NickTurse.com. To view a short video interview with Turse, click here.
From the Book The Complex: How the Military Invades Our Everyday Lives by Nick Turse. Copyright © 2008 by Nick Turse. Reprinted by arrangement with Metropolitan Books, an imprint of Henry Holt and Company, LLC. All rights reserved.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
22 Comments so far
Show AllWhile I tend to agree that in the US "the extent and effect of military interests has reached a dangerous... level" my sense is that it actually reached that level about 65 years ago and has not significantly increased since then, while politically the country is much more divided about war and militarism than it was. I still see no quantitative or systematic evidence to the contrary. Turse's enumeration of "links" is unconvincing on that point, and your ad-hominem attacks are even less persuasive.
Actually, cosmobilly, military spending as a fraction of GDP, which would seem a more meaningful index of military influence than the total amount (in constant dollars), has declined substantially since the 1950s and 1960s. The numbers Turse cites are not impressive; for example, the number of prime contractors has only doubled since 1970. I suspect that is comparable to growth in the total number of companies doing business in the United States.
Which leads me to another point: it is probably illegal for a publicly-held company in the US to refuse the Pentagon's business, so it is hard to know what to make of the fact that so many do service the military.
So, again, I take Turse's point that the military is deeply entwined and entrenched in the "civilian" economy but I don't think this is a new development, and to make the case that there is something qualitatively new about it, something which says something meaningful about the political economy of American militarism, would require a more careful analysis than is evident here.
Mark Abram, surely you jest? Not only did Turse provide those comparisons with numbers, but common sense applies - which also informs us that persuasive arguments are wasted on those who who will not be persuaded.
(Again, another derisive effort to marginalize a valuable and viable discussion - an increasing problem on this forum.)
In terms of constant dollars, Turse points out that military spending increased five-fold, thus wielding a five-fold greater influence from now to then. In terms of current dollars, then to now, that is over forty-fold, Turse aptly and succinctly demonstrated the range of private companies now entangled (invested) with Pentagon interests reaches into virtually every aspect of every citizen's daily life - as opposed to the far more limited reach a mere four to five decades ago.
What's changed is the extent and insidiousness of the "complex." Once a relatively constrained institution viewed as controllable by social mores and the nation's political will, the Pentagon is now much more fully in control, and our society is economically reliant upon its existence and its interests (as opposed to being held to providing only for necessary national security), and thus we are effectively subservient to its social influence and its political will. It is precisely what Ike cautioned against. To argue that lacks common sense and defies the facts, and provides ample cause to suspect the person arguing as either delusional or complicit with Pentagon interests.
On the other hand, for us more down-to-earth types, it may be nice to think that a simple life off the grid or a casual self-interested life doesn't support the beast, but that is very like unto playing the ostrich with its head in the sand. As it has been said often enough, the only thing for evil to thrive is for good folks to set idly by and do nothing...
So the fascist beast is more complex than we might have previously thought. No problem. We consciously chose a solution that check-mates the beast no matter how complex the tangles of its tentacles. We chose localism because it deprives all of the cells of the beast of oxygen, and this stops all of their mutations too. Localism starves the consumer corporations, and the Pentagon, and any any all enterprises, institutions and organizations that are too big. It's hard to argue against localism.
One may argue that localism helps the beast divide and conquer people. But that would be true only if people were drugged and brainwashed. Localism keeps people sharp and aware, localist communities remain united with their peer communities worldwide, against all mutations of the beast. Take a look around the world and you see communities that have already rejected the beast. You can convince your community to join them. People don't need elites, capital, corporations, militaries, or any hierarchical organization that is larger than local scale. Look at Cuba - it's next door to the US - a socialist utopia, with ten times the healthcare value as the US and very likely ten times the nutrition value in its food production, and probably ten times the value in everything important. This doesn't mean Cubans get by with 1/10th the labor. Rather it means Cubans get by with 1/10 the enslavement of people to elites and 1/10 the material resource plunder, per capita, or maybe it's more like 1/20 or 1/50. So who needs Procter and Gamble? Replace its wares with local cottage industry. Get busy!
Can't do anything to stop the Monster? Enjoy the time left. The Chaos times coming will see significant population die-back in the US whether they have a garden or not, e.g. security: people will come and steal/destroy your crop and burn your house to the ground and kill you in order to steal your land - just like we always did when we wanted something somebody else had. Rape gangs will be a normal occurance. Think: Human slavery & Gender slavery. Just like we do around the world, just like we have done here.
Our electricity use will drop to the current imposed Iraqi standards and gasoline will be military use only. Do what you can but recognize that your survival will depend on only one thing: Blind, stupid LUCK. It will be Justice. Sorry. What we've done here and abroad to our victims since 1609 beggars the horror of anything we are about to experience which is 48 separate states and 'trading blocs' armed with Federal WMD Arsenals carving each other into gobbets of bloody flesh. Instead of the normal pattern of Aryans fighting global colonial wars against people of color, we're going to do each other. See: Ditto Head Death Squads.
Nick Turse claims that something has profoundly changed since 1961, but offers no persuasive evidence supporting such a comparison. Who does he think made all the stuff the US military consumed back then? Where are the numbers supporting his vague allegations that connections between the Pentagon and superficially civilian American corporations are more numerous, ramified and pervasive than they were half a century ago?
I take Turse's point that corporate America is deeply entwined with the warfare state and we are all complicit in US war crimes. However, I see no evidence or persuasive argument that this is something new.
Looks like Rick turse just wrote a great article,but it is nothing most progressives did not already know: WE HAVE A GOVERNMENT OF THE MILITARY;BY THE MILITARY AND FOR THE MILITARY.We need a strong military for defensive purposes,not one that is preemptive, offensive and is like some Frankenstein that is out of control destroying America.I would encourage people to learn to live simply,so that others may just live.
redstatelefty April 25th, 2008 2:46 pm
Very nicely put!!
Well, we do need a powerful military force scattered throughout the world. How else are we going to guarantee access to the raw materials of this ridculous American way of life and empire?
BTW, Nick Turse, thanks for an eye-opening piece.
AND YOU ARE PAYING FOR IT ALL..THIS IS ONLY POSSIBLE...THE ONLY WAY..THEY CAN DO THIS..IS WITH YOUR MONEY..PERIOD.
IT REALLY FRUSTRATES ME THAT THIS LITTLE POINT JUST KEEPS SLIPPING THROUGH THE CRACKS IN POSTS, ARTICLES, PROTESTS...ETC..ETC..THAT YEAH..IT IS THAT BAD..IT REALLY IS...BUT WHY? ONLY BECAUSE "RICK AND DONNA" MACTUALLY PAY THEIR ILLEGAL INCOME TAX...THAT IS THE ACTUAL REASON THAT THEY ARE BEING INUNDATED BY MILITARY CONTRACTORS..THAT IS THE REASON..
I NOTICE FOLKS POSTING "LESS CONSUMPTION" ETC..ETC...SURE..GREAT IDEA..BUT WILL THAT END THIS? IN NO WAY WHATSOEVER WILL LESS CONSUMPTION END THIS PROCESS..PERIOD! IT WILL NOT! THE ONLY THING THAT WILL IS WHEN RICK AND DONNA..AND YOU AND YOU AND YOU..ALL STOP PICKING UP THE CHECK FOR THE CONTRACTS IN THE FIRST PLACE...PERIOD!
AS LONG AS YOU SUPPORT..YEAH SUPPORT! THE WAR AND THE CORPORATE MILITARY COMPLEX WITH YOUR TAX DOLLARS..HELL THEY DON'T CARE IF YOU BUY THE GOODS OR NOT..YOURSELF...THEY REALLY CARE IF THE GOVERNMENT BUYS THEIR GOODS..AGAIN..PERIOD!
SO..SURE..CONSUME LESS...AND STILL PAY FOR THE WHOLE SHOW..YEAH..THAT'LL WORK..SURE IT WILL..YOU KEEP BELIEVING THAT IF IT HELPS YOU..IT'S A DECENT RATIONALIZATION AS FAR AS THEY GO...BUT IT IS A FALSEHOOD...IT IS AN EXCUSE..NOTHING MORE..
AS LONG AS YOU PAY..YOU ARE COMPLICIT, YOU ARE SUPPORTING..SA DIRECTLY AS IS POSSIBLE..THE "MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX.."...NO QUESTION ABOUT IT..YOU ARE DIRECTLY..DIRECTLY..FINANCING THE CONTRACTS TO THESE COMPANIES WITH 55% OF EVERY INCOME TAX DOLLAR YOU GIVE TO THIS GOVERNMENT..EVERY SINGLE DOLLAR..JUST CUT IT IN HALF..AND SEND IT TO THE PENTAGRAM...AND THEY WILL BUY MISSILES AND COMPUTERS AND SARAH LEE PO-TARTS AND DEPLETED URANIUM SHELLS AND ON AND ON..AND ON..AND YOU CAN REST ASSURED THAT YOU ARE REALLY GETTING YOUR MONEY'S WORTH..HELL..DARPA WILL MAKE SURE YOU GET SPIED ON BY THE MOST EXPENSIVE DRONE AROUND..THE FBI WILL MAKE SURE YOUR TAX DOLLARS ARE PUT TO WORK TERRORIZING IDIOTS INTO CONFESSING TO BEING TERRORISTS..SO THAT THEY CONTINUE TOGET YOUR TAX DOLLARS..THE AIRLINES THANK YOU..FOR THE BAIL OUT...THE TELECOMS THANK YOU..;FOR THE BAILOUT...AND ON AND ON AND ON...YOU PAY FOR IT ...YOU! SO EITHER JOIN IN A GENERAL TAX STRIKE UNTIL WE ARE "REPRESENTED" AGAIN...OR...BASICALLY...SHUT UP! BECAUSE YOUR WORDS ARE EMPTY IF YOU STILL PAY FOR THE WHOLE EVIL REALITY...WHO CARES WHAT YOU SAY..IT'S WAHT YOU DO THAT COUNTS!
ARE YOU PREPARED TO DEAL WITH YOUR FEAR? IF SO.THEN STOP SENDING THEM MONEY..IF NOT..THEN I'LL SEE YOU IN THE TRENCHES AFTER McSAME DELARES MARTIAL LAW IN THE WAKE OF THE RIOTS AFTER THEY STEAL THIS NEXT ONE..HEY..THEY STOLE THE LAST TWO...WHAT MAKES YOU THINK..THAT WITH ALL THE MONEY THEY ARE GETTING FORM ALL OF YOU..THAT THEY ARE GONNA STOP DOING WHAT THEY ARE DOING....WAKE UP!
I'm the "CEO" of an animal sanctuary. We saw that runaway express train coming years ago. We began to learn how to grow things in a garden, things that could be bottled and dried and stored and canned, and we re-learned those arts. We made ourselves a couple of root cellars. We laid in a year's supply of food and necessities and we draw from that supply and constantly refresh it -- food for us, our employees, our animals, and the refugees that we could end up sheltering, since we are a designated emergency shelter for our township. We bought old-fashioned farm equipment, and are preparing fields for planting and harvesting the old way. (Yeah, the Amish were way ahead of us.) We reduced our electric consumption by 40% to 50%, by changing our habits, and those of our employees, by changing appliances, techniques, and resorting to old-fashioned technology such as clotheslines. We fought our anti-deluvian town board and NIMBY neighbors for 2 years and have finally gotten permission to erect residential windmills to generate our own electricity. Electric, rather than oil heating, comes next, and solar roofing. We drive a Prius and a Highlander and we're looking into electric cars. And yes, we buy everything possible, especially food, locally and "pre-owned". We're not perfect by any means. Especially with the animals, we can't always buy local, but we have reduced, and will shortly be reducing even further, our footprint, personally and commercially. When that express train hits, we might just survive and be in a position to help others survive as well. If everyone would just get their heads out of the sand and see what is coming, and take even a few of the stepr that we have taken, chances for group survial would greatly increase.
@ahomer: the point isn't that we have to boycott everyone who sells to the military. The point is that companies that rake in millions to billions from the military have a vested interest in maintaining the insane status quo. In their shortsighted eyes, the war machine is good for their bottom line. And they will all fight any attempts at belt-tightening that threatens their precious quarterly earnings, even if it improves the odds that humanity will survive long enough for them to retire on their corporate pensions. As the saying goes, it's hard to make a man understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.
Living simply and buying locally may help "starve the bastards out," but it's much more important than that. It reduces the waste that is part and parcel of our consumerist lifestyle. It is the only sustainable way to live. The day is coming when everyone will live a simple, local life - they'll have to. When that time comes, the "early adopters" of voluntary simplicity will have a leg up on those who have continued to depend on the industrialized economy and its machines to feed, house and clothe them.
The real Morpheus is Amish.
ahorner:Reducing our consumption is a good idea for lots of reasons, but it is absurd to expect us to live by a purity code that says we shouldn’t buy from companies that sell to the military.
Yeah wouldn't want to inconvenience you from your happy little life by maybe having to go without a few things to avoid buying goods from companies that suck the bitter milk from the teat of war. So while you're happily living your life, playing your part in supporting the war machine, the world is burning around you. But that's ok... I'll just relax with my Maxwell House Coffee, cuz it's good to the last drop.
Sooner than you think - foodstuffs are already being rationed in my area.
you'll starve if you do not have access to land for a garden - Survival, not Victory!
Coming to a neighborhood near you any day now -er, tomorrow probably.
I have to say life is a lot easier once you figure out you don't need all that stuff.
What's the point? Did we think our huge military magically conjures up all the boots, food, cars, computers, and building materials it uses? No, they come from the companies that make and sell such things. Reducing our consumption is a good idea for lots of reasons, but it is absurd to expect us to live by a purity code that says we shouldn't buy from companies that sell to the military. The real question is How big a military do we really need? Once we get the military cut down to a reasonable size (say, equivalent to the per person military spending in Europe), the question of military procurement becomes moot.
Wow~ the great evil is interwoven into everything. SiCKO!!!!
Excellent information here, if only more people would read it.Buying local and artisan work is what we have been promoting for several years. We offer only made in the US product by small independent companies and retro vintage clothing and furniture. It is so hard for people to get it, even after all the reports of tainted products coming from other countries, they just say I can get is cheaper at Walmart.
http://theredthreadstudio.com
Buy local only or don't buy. Start your own Victory Garden (using only heirloom seeds that you save from year to year) and can and store for the winter, patronize local farmers' markets, and local farms, get your clothes, household stuff, whatever, at thrift stores, garage sales, antique/vintage stores or in the shops of local artisans. Not only is it the way to protest and starve the bastards out, but you will be learning how to surive and keep your own self from starving during the breakup of civilization as we know it that is heading toward us like a runaway express train.
Retire as early as possible. Live as simply as possible. It is getting and spending that feeds the beast.
We can win by refusing to buy more than we need. It is the only non-violent way. It may be the only way.
Mark Abram, I can consider the merit of a more precise and complete analysis, but I cannot support the use of GDP as a useful metric, even a little bit. In fact, that proposition is more insubstantial and reckless than what you have suggested of the author's analysis.
Other measures such as GDI may fare better, and some calculations have put military spending as high as 20% of GDI. But I'm not sure that is the best way to look at it either.
Other measures have been put forth in the attempt to identify quality of life and human development metrics in lieu of or in addition to GDP, because of issues with how GDP is calculated and what it does or does not in fact measure - which is beyond the discussion here, but nonetheless a crucial consideration.
The ratio of military spending to GDP is utterly meaningless without a well understood analysis of the accuracy, appropriateness and completeness of both the sums used to derive that ratio - and better consideration of what the ratio might actually mean - and in recognition that economists do question the validity and viability of the comparison.
To support your point, you marginalized the growth of "prime contractors" to appear as "only doubled since 1970" but which in fact more than doubled, and in a shorter time frame than the article more fully covered. But more importantly, your comparison disregarded the nature of industry diversification and specialization and the related growth of vertical and horizontal markets over the past several decades. When appropriately taken into account that would make the 100,000+ count of subcontractors an indispensable factor to include when making that specific comparison.
No one here (except you) has said the entwinement of military expenditure/investment with civilian economy is a "new" development, but have instead proposed that the extent and effect of military interests has reached a dangerously insidious level. That should be apparent by the reality of the five-fold increase of military spending in terms of constant dollars (ie, adjusted for inflation, blah), the Pentagon's influence on research, economic production and the political landscape, and the accounting for the current psychopathy of US society and extent of US military hegemony. When considered in context of Ike's warning and the current global realities (so favorable to Pentagon interests) it all really isn't as mystifying or obscure as you suggest. (eg, How many US bases existed around the world in 1950, compared to now.)
But as stated before, and as common sense does indeed inform, no amount of persuasive argument will persuade those who will not be persuaded. There simply can never be enough persuasive analysis, but the stratagem of plying for more analysis can be used ad nauseam (like the child constantly asking why) so as to diminish and obscure the effect of the original point.