EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Proposal: A Global Day of Action on Military Spending
By now, the commission’s more regressive recommendations have been sufficiently excoriated that we can safely sense where the battle lines have been drawn on domestic issues. Paul Krugman memorably referred to the proposed package as “a major transfer of income upward,” while Nancy Pelosi called its cuts to Social Security and Medicare “simply unacceptable.”
But a comparatively less mentioned aspect of the panel’s recommendations, the proposed $100 billion in cuts to the Pentagon budget, has proven surprisingly resilient under such public scrutiny. While few congressional Republicans have spoken publicly in favor of such defense cuts, the new Congress’ Majority Leader, Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), has allowed that such cuts are at least “on the table.” Even the hawkish Senator John McCain conceded that the bloated defense budget should hardly be considered “sacrosanct” while popular social programs find themselves under the ax. Meanwhile, mainstream progressive groups have concocted their own alternatives to the Bowles-Simpson panel’s recommendations, virtually all of which seek even deeper defense cuts than the ones already proposed.
Earlier this month, President Obama surprised even the Pentagon by ordering $78 billion in cuts to its budget over the next five years. This comes in addition to $100 billion in “savings” that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has set aside to “reallocate to combat-related projects.” While some Republican lawmakers have made clear their strenuous objections to cutting the military budget in an era of unnecessary wars, they can take some solace in noting that even with the cuts, the Pentagon’s budget will continue to increase over that same five years.
So this is where we come in. Long the lonely purview of frustrated civil society activists, defense cuts are now finally part of that “adult conversation” our Washington elders are holding on the deficit. But it would be a regrettable mistake for us to surrender this policy conversation on the very cusp of its mainstream debut. Now is the time to make clear that trimming the Pentagon budget must not precipitate a scramble to find faster, sleeker, or cheaper ways to fight our wars. Rather, we should correlate a reevaluation of our budget priorities to a similar reevaluation of our global priorities.
In early April of this year, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) will release its calculations of global military spending for 2010. We estimate that this figure could reach $1.6 trillion. Already we’ve tried to show what this means in terms of what we’re not investing in public health, education, and the environment:
Even humbly illustrated by our cut paper flags, the disparity is astounding.
So on April 12, 2011, the Institute for Policy Studies and the International Peace Bureau will host a Global Day of Action on Military Spending. Peace groups, budget priority activists, arms control advocates, and concerned citizens the world over will hold public demonstrations calling attention to the disparity between bountiful global investments in war-making and the worldwide neglect of social priorities. When newspapers cover the SIPRI numbers, perhaps they will illustrate their coverage with photographs of their own readers demonstrating against everything those numbers entail – rather than reaching for a stock photo of a desert tank.
Budget deficits may have given us an audience, but decades of failed militarist policies have given us a cause. We need public pressure to ensure that these cuts actually happen and that our money is reinvested in the public interest.
Scores of event organizers from some two-dozen countries have already joined us. Don’t let Erskine Bowles or Alan Simpson be the strongest voice you have. If you have ever suspected that your government’s relentless pursuit of military technology has negatively impacted your planet or your community, we hope you will visit us at demilitarize.org and get involved.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

7 Comments so far
Show AllLet's face it. The MIC is the ONLY industry in the US that is creating *some* jobs, and it sure is filling the coffers of MIC workers and shareholders alike.
Knackering the MIC (the right thing to do) will result in a huge contraction of the American economy. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Excessive investment in the military disadvantages and stunts investments in other sectors of the economy that could otherwise be more robust. The MIC does indeed have its tentacles in virtually every congressional district, but there's no reason it should hold the rest of our industrial capacity hostage to their reliance on war-making.
I'd recommend a report by John Feffer and Miriam Pemberton that offers concrete examples of how an economy can be demilitarized to more socially responsible enterprises: http://www.fpif.org/reports/greendividend.
A great video for the cause of all causes really! (I wouldn't expect much help from the newspapers though.) The American economy will be forced to transform and find a new basis sometime in the next few decades notwithstanding anyone's stake in it. Let's try to do it in a non-catastrophic way.
A very easy way to put this in perspective is to read and digest these two disparate but most relevant statements that emerged from the outstanding program that has been featured on Free Speech TV which is entitled The Hollywood Librarian:
1) The U.S. Government spends around $250 million every year for all types of libraries.
2) That amount is spent in Iraq and Afghanistan in a single day.
It is absolutely incomprehensible how anyone would not be outraged by those two statements. Not only could more libraries be built but so could schools, hospitals, job training, infrastructure. One has to believe that universal health care could also be implemented in a country which apparently puts more of a priority upon needlessly and unjustifiably killing people overseas than it does in providing for the growing and desperate needs of its citizens.
"Endless money forms the sinews of war."-Cicero [106-43 BC], Roman statesman and philosopher
GENERAL STRIKE (NATIONWIDE): 11/11/11
All those workers who can afford to, STAY HOME THAT DAY (a Friday).
All students who can afford to, STAY HOME THAT DAY.
All others, STAY HOME THAT DAY: NO SHOPPING, NO APPOINTMENTS.
EVERYONE: NO TV THAT DAY OR NIGHT.
STRIKE THE CORPORATIST-MILITARIST MACHINE WHERE IT MOST FEELS IT: IN THE WALLET.
CONTINUE AS NEEDED EVERY MONTH, ADDING DAYS.
SPREAD THE WORD.
No offense, ED.
But as others have noted, your target date is the Veterans' Day holiday, and a Friday to boot.
I must reluctantly dust off a word I typically hate to use: it seems at best quixotic.
Is it wise and prudent to attempt to stage a memorable event atop a pre-excavated Memory Hole?
I know 11/11/11 is Veterans' Day, and a Friday, and thought that would make it more meaningful as well as easier for some who to stay home. Not everyone has that day off.
As for it being quixotic: is it more quixotic than voting for a choice of corporate shills? Or emails, phone calls, letters, and visits to Congress critters which are ignored? Or demos, rallies, protests, and symbolic acts of civil disobedience (i.e. chaining oneself to the White House fence) the Corpstream Media doesn't bother to cover (unless the Tea Party stages them)?
Corporate capitalism works on consumption (in all meanings of the word, most of them destructive). A day when we can halt that would be noticed.
What else can we do to make the Corporatist-Militarist Ruling Class know we have power and are willing to use it unless they listen to our demands? Violent revolt is practically doomed and many of us oppose it on moral grounds.
What does that leave us, as the U.S. descends further into a Police State and climate catastrophe gets closer?
Suggest more effective actions.
If not, suggest a better day for a General Strike.
I would suggest May 1, 2012, a Tuesday, knowing it is May Day, but also knowing it is celebrated worldwide as International Workers' Day.