Nexus - 1306 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

forcefully. During and after World War I, the US instituted The break-up of the Soviet Union undermined the rationale repressive responses to social movements through the Palmer for continued military spending at high Cold War levels, and Raids and the passage of the Espionage Act of 1917 and the some within the HCPE, while celebrating their victory over Sedition Act of 1918. After World War II, the McCarthy era communism, saw the possibility of balanced budgets and peace attacks on liberals and radicals as well as the passage in 1947 of dividends in the 1990s. In early 1992, Senator Edward Kennedy the National Security Act and the anti-labour Taft—Hartley Act called for the taking of US$210 billion dollars out of the defence were allowed and encouraged by higher circle policy elites. budget over several years and spending $60 billion on universal The Cold War led to a continuing arms races and a further health care, public housing and improved transportation. '' consolidation of military and corporate interests. President However, by the [northern] spring of 1992 it was clear that Eisenhower warned of this increasing concentration of power in strong resistance to major cuts in the military budgets had his 1961 speech to the nation: widespread support in Washington. That year the Senate, ina "...Our military organization today bears little relation to that 50-48 vote, was unable to close Republican and conservative known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the Democrat debates against a proposal to shift defence spending to fighting men of World War II or Korea. domestic programs.'’? In 1995, Defense Secretary Les Aspin— "Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had who during his tenure under Clinton made minor cuts to no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, Pentagon budgets—argued that spending needed to remain high, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we especially for intelligence on "targeting terrorism and can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; narcotics".'’ By 1999, editorials bemoaning the loss of the peace we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments dividend were all that was left of major cuts to military industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half spending."* million men and women are directly engaged in the defense At the same time as liberal elements of the HCPE were establishment. We annually spend on military security more pushing for a peace dividend, a neo-conservative group was than the net income of all United arguing for using the decline of the States corporations. Soviet Union as an opportunity for "This conjunction of an immense US military world dominance. military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the "We annually spend on Foundations of the Global American experience. The total on . Dominance Group influence—economic, political, military security more than the Leo Strauss, Albert Wohlstetter and even spiritual—is felt in every city, net income of all United States others at the University of Chicago every State house, every office of . " working in the Committee on Social the Federal government. We corporations. Thought have been widely credited recognize the imperative need for for promoting the neo-conservative this development. Yet we must not agenda through their students Paul fail to comprehend its grave Wolfowitz, Allan Bloom and Bloom's implications. Our toil, resources student Richard Perle. Adbusters and livelihood are all involved; so summed up neo-conservatism as: is the very structure of our society. "\..the belief that Democracy, "In the councils of government, however flawed, was best defended we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, by an ignorant public pumped on nationalism and religion. Only — US President Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961 whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. a militantly nationalist state could deter human aggression... The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists Such nationalism requires an external threat and if one cannot be and will persist..."’ found it must be manufactured.""* The HCPE support for the continuation of military expansion The neo-conservative philosophy emerged from the 1960s era after WWII was significantly different than after WWI. In the of social revolutions and political correctness as a counter-force 1920s, the higher circle policy elites were uncomfortable with to expanding liberalism and cultural relativism. Numerous war profits and the power of the arms industry. After WWII officials and associates in the Reagan and George H. W. Bush with the Cold War, Korean and Vietnam wars, the HCPE presidencies were strongly influenced by the neo-conservative supported continued unprecedented levels of military spending.* philosophy; they included: John Ashcroft, Charles Fairbanks, The top 100 military contractors from WWI acquired over Dick Cheney, Kenneth Adelman, Elliot Abrams, William Kristol three billion dollars in new resources between 1939 and 1945, and Douglas Feith.'* representing a 62 per cent increase in capital assets. Five main Within the Ford administration there was a split between Cold interest groups—Morgan, Mellon, Rockefeller, DuPont and War traditionalists seeking to minimise confrontations through Cleveland Steel—controlled two-thirds of the WWII prime diplomacy and détente and neo-conservatives advocating stronger contractor firms and were key elements of HCPEs seeking confrontations with the Soviet "Evil Empire". The latter group continued high-level military spending.° became more entrenched when George H. W. Bush became Economic incentives, combined with Cold War fears, led the director of the CIA. Bush allowed the formation of "Team B", HCPE to support an unprecedented military readiness, which headed by Richard Pipes along with Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis resulted in a permanent military-industrial complex. From 1952 Libby, Paul Nitze and others, who formed the Committee on the to the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US maintained defence Present Danger to raise awareness of the Soviet threat and the funding in the 25 to 40 per cent range of total Federal spending, continuing need for a strong, aggressive, defence policy. Their with peaks during the Korean and Vietnam wars and the Reagan efforts led to strong anti-Soviet positioning during the Reagan presidency."” administration.” military security more than the net income of all United States corporations." 26 = NEXUS "We annually spend on www.nexusmagazine.com OCTOBER — NOVEMBER 2006