Decline of the American Empire
If ever we needed evidence of the Cost of Empire, Floyd Norris's scary chart of Durable Goods Production from the U.S. Economy is it.
We have so hollowed out our industrial plant that the only thing we are now producing is weapons of war. The great British Historian Arnold Toynbee's theory about the decline of the Roman Empire has lessons for our current age.
The economy of the Empire was basically a Raubwirtschaft or plunder economy based on looting existing resources rather than producing anything new. The Empire relied on booty from conquered territories (this source of revenue ending, of course, with the end of Roman territorial expansion) or on a pattern of tax collection that drove small-scale farmers into destitution (and onto a dole that required even more exactions upon those who could not escape taxation), or into dependency upon a landed élite exempt from taxation. With the cessation of tribute from conquered territories, the full cost of their military machine had to be borne by the citizenry.
This I know. We cannot continue on this course of decline. While many of the elite escape taxation with their brilliant "tax shelter" accountants, the middle class (Rome's "small scale farmers") are being asked to shoulder the economic burden of empire.
Shortly after the election President Obama made it clear that the chokehold of the Military Industrial Complex over our economy was not going to change on his watch--"To ensure prosperity here at home and peace abroad, we all share the belief we have to maintain the strongest military on the planet." After all, with 4% of the world's people why shouldn't we spend 45% of the world's military spending?
While Obama makes symbolic cuts in the Military budget, the House threw in 550 new earmarks into a $636 Billion Military Budget. Lyndon Johnson thought we could have both Guns and Butter, but he was wrong. Both Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were afraid to take on the Military Industrial Complex that the Republicans have always favored. Eisenhower was right that continuing on this disastrous course is a form of generational theft. According to Catherine Lutz the U.S. Military has "909 military facilities in 46 countries and territories." This is truly insane. We need to bring the personnel on these bases home and start selling off the precious foreign real estate to help liquidate our massive debt.
I have only one question--Where is the national politician with the courage to say we no longer have to act as the unpaid policeman of the world?
Great blog other than the obligatory swipes at the republicans being responsible for the MIC while at the same time admitting democratic presidents did nothing to change the paradigm despite the warnings of a republican president who oversaw its birth in the 1950s. The MIC and its seemingly unbreakable hold on our federal budget is a strictly bipartisan affair.
August 1, 2009 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think it's a great blog at all.
What Taplin is doing is called "interference" when friends help friends pick up girls. In other words - this is all about health care, all the time.
If Taplin had a shred of intellectual honesty, he would have been consistenly and frequently talking about the substance, direction and excercise of our foreign policy - which is the main driver behind the defense spending.
But it's not policy that's the object of Taplin's attention here. It's the $$igns.
August 1, 2009 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're a great one to talk about "intellectual honesty" there, Lowlife. If you ever had a single honest thought it was by accident.
Did you somehow get tired of being an apologist for racism and come over here to lie about economics?
You truly are one of the most contemptible scumballs this site has ever seen.
August 1, 2009 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
No OG. I respect of all the other contemptible scumballs in the world, he would have to come up a notch to qualify.
C
August 1, 2009 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your ignorance is showing. The main driver behind our military spending is the clout and influence the defense industries have at the Pentagon, in the Congress and at the White House. It has nothing to do with foreign policy and everything to do with continuing to throw largesse by way of military contracting to a parasitic and wasteful group of arms manufacturers, munitions producers, the subcrontractors and those associated industries who benefit from that largesse and the maintenance of a vastly oversized military.
August 1, 2009 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
"A country's foreign policy is a set of goals outlining how the country will interact with other countries economically, politically, socially and MILITARILY"
You wouldn't need this kind of defense budget if your foreign policy wasn't based on making alliances that must be backed up by the defense; if you claim the right to intervene in the domestic affairs of other countries; if your support of an ally antagonizes the entire region; if you didn't act like a world's policeman.
I don't know if you a birther in reverse since you're seeing conspiracy everywhere, but the simple fact is that defense spending has everything to do with foreign policy.
Foreign policy is what creates the push for defense spending larger than necessary to defend a country in case of invasion.
August 1, 2009 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hooey! The defense budget is not a product of foreign policy considerations. If anything, it's the other way around, but the truth is as I put it above. It is a system of self perpetuating largesse to the merchants of death and their allied industries. It really is that simple.
August 1, 2009 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cold War, arms race, NATO, super-powers... any of this rings any bells?
August 1, 2009 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking of a "shred of intellectual honesty", I find this gratuitous slashing at the columnist to be disingenuous. Obviously, the substance, direction and exercise of our foreign policy is important, but it is surely also important, as people like Seymour Melman and others have done over the years, at the raw money numbers. They DO matter, and this radical increase in military investment at a time of slumping other durable goods investment is a point VERY well worth noting.
Surely, imperialists and their apologists will not be pleased by this, but I think the column is a set of figures well taken and will repost/email it myself
August 1, 2009 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree and it's good to see that somene else knows about Melman and his important work!
August 1, 2009 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I though he made decent observations with regards to the MIC and its impact on our ability to accomplish so many other desperately needed reforms in other areas of the economy.
August 1, 2009 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
All this is, of course, true but our current Emperor has no plans to de-escalate our rush to imperial ruin. He is increasing the imperial war budget and looking to steal from domestic and other programs to maintain it! Bush more than doubled our annual military outlays in yet another insane, not to mention just plain stupid, effort to prove he didn't have the world's tiniest dick. And despite the bloated and unnecessary spending Obama proposes nothing that would reduce the military budget. The few things he would eliminate won't save us a penny because he simply wants to redirect those funds, as his Republican defense secretary advises, to other more desirable killing machines so we can continue fighting pointless and unproductive imperial wars abroad. It's totally unAmerican.
August 1, 2009 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
"... so we can continue fighting pointless and unproductive imperial wars abroad. It's totally unAmerican."
I agree with this blog and mostly with you,so not to attack your points except for one, oleeb, but how long do we have to continue the pointless killing in pointless wars before we see and can admit to ourselves that it is NOT un-American but COMPLETELY and ABSOLUTELY American American. It's what we do so it is what we are. Maybe not for all individuals but certainly as a country.
We are a country that has a national psyche that thinks it is John Wayne. That is our myth. We accept propaganda which demonizes last years friend and we embrace last years enemy but in fact don't know shit about any of them and don't care as long as we are safe and comfortable. We don't recognize who are the good guys and who are the bad guys and we are not particularly brave. We react to fear mongering by getting scared and sending a hired army of brainwashed young men off to kill any and all in the hopes of getting the scary guys while not giving a flying fuck about the "collateral damage".
America is like a bright shinny coin that keeps getting flipped and keeps coming up tails and everyone who called heads keeps thinking that even though we keep costing the world and eventually will bankrupt ourselves financially as well as morally, we are really one bright shinny coin and aint we great! All we need to do to get back to the "real" America [We all have our vision of the "real" America] is get someone who says they can flip the coin the way we want them to.
August 1, 2009 11:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I understand your point. I guess the only respnse is that those who drive the John Wayne actions of the nation have suppressed and supplanted the best side of the American character which is really the antithesis of what we've become.
August 2, 2009 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the lame pacifists who cannot but drone on about "empire" -when talking of an American economy actually built more on automobile addiction, junk food, and sleaze entertainment than on Roman temples and fortresses- had pushed invertebrate Democrats in Washington to oppose one of the all-time most idiotic WASTES of military spending, in 2002-03, instead of cravenly rubberstamping such towering incompetency, we MIGHT be in a position now to significantly cut our military budget. Instead, thanks to 8 years of colossally weakening of America foreign power, we are fairly well destined to spend trillions for decades sweeping up the broken shards in the Mideastern&Global pottery shop Chickenhawk Cheney bought for out posterity with the blank check endorsed by most leading Congressional Democrats.
August 1, 2009 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pacifists? Where are they? I don't think you could find enough to fill a phone booth in this country. That's specious.
China spends $65 Billion annually on it's military. We spend 10 times that. It has nothing to do with pacifism at all it's common sense: we spend way, way too much on war and empire and have for decades. We are now spending so much annually that we spend as much as all the other countries on earth spend combined! That is insane no matter how you look at it, not to mention completely pointless.
The imperial wars begun under Bush do not require US military presence. The best thing we could do for all concerned in Iraq as well as Afghanistan/Pakistan is to immediately implement a complete and orderly withdrawal from both areas. It would save everyone lots of time and trouble. We cannot solve the problems in those regions through military action of any kind. It is an extraordinarioly costly excercise in futility.
August 1, 2009 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
And why are we spending it? What country poses the big conventional military threat that warrants so much of our tax dollars going to the M-I complex? Who are we arming ourselves for protection against?
Of course, no one!! And, as you pointed out oleeb, the theaters we are operating in right now don't require a new generation of conventional military weapons. It is like flushing money down a toilet...
August 1, 2009 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
We'll find someone you pessimist! Just have to badger some paranoid regime by putting an ex-UN ambassador like Bolton on TV screaming we want to bomb them and take all their nukes away. Works like a charm...
August 1, 2009 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
It isn't like flushing money down a toilet, it IS flushing money down a toilet!
August 1, 2009 10:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
A phone booth the size of the world's largest aircraft carrier wouldn't be big enough to house all the people who regularly march around holding up "End War" signs while never accomplishing anything useful in their lives. I'd like to think that they at least believe in something (world peace and brotherhood, maybe) but I admit it's possible they are not lame pacifists but only lame fools.
As for Libertine's point: yes, there is still waste along with a real national security need that got much bigger under the chickenhawks' reign of incompetency. One of the biggest wastes is all the mostly empty SUVS driving around endless ugly urban sprawl and requiring military bases in the Mideast to secure the natural fossil fuel capital they so massively squander. Maybe you could convince the drivers of such behemoths sporting old wrinkled "No blood for oil" and "Kerry 2004" stickers to get their bloated hypocritical behinds onto bicycles instead?
August 1, 2009 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
So... people opposed to the Iraq war (who were right, by the way) are somehow responsible for the Iraq war? You don't make any sense. And you seem angry to have been so wrong on Iraq -- it is obvious you supported it at the time -- now blaming those damn hippies who lost another war!
How about making something useful with your life yourself, as you put it, accept that the Afghanistan and Iraq war were both catastrophic mistakes, and apologize to the people around you who tried to warn you? Also, stop being so angry.
Then not only will your blood pressure be lower when you hear 'Give peace a chance' on the radio, but you might also understand why one country spending 45% of world military expenses is unsustainable.
August 1, 2009 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your jerking knee and poor reading skills are rocketing you to completely false assumptions. I opposed the so-called "war" in Iraq from the day Bush and Cheney started hatching it in September 2001, and I continue to object to the foolish peacenicks who were so irrevocably full of righteously irrelevant nonsense that they did not do a damn thing to stop or even slow or lessen it in the slightest way. We will never get anywhere with dismantling the military industrial complex until feel-good and do-nothing antiwar marchers, -pacifist, incurably incompetent, or just plain stupid- are finally retired and out of the way of progress.
August 1, 2009 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am puzzled. You need to elaborate on what happens after the "feel-good and do-nothing antiwar marchers, -pacifist, incurably incompetent, or just plain stupid- are finally retired and out of the way of progress."
I can understand the skepticism as to whether such acts of protest change anything or not but to say that those acts of protest are inhibiting the "better" form of resistance requires some explanation.
Is there a better kind of protester being squelched by the lesser sort?
August 1, 2009 8:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
History is also "littered" with examples of successful movements for political reform, social change, and even improvements in international relations. If everyone who ever marched in one of the very many and very worthless act-mindless-while-feeling-good rallies over the past 15 years devoted the same time and effort to constructively and intelligently contributing to his or her favorite worthy cause, including political action against a "loyal opposition" that does not oppose but wimps and panders, e.g. the John Kerry Democrats in 2002-04, I doubt we could be worse off than now.
My main point here, though, is to advocate an end to the mass denial amongst self-styled "progressives" about the fact that a lot of idiotic sign-waving and rote formulaic ranting about "empire" is doing jacksh-- to achieve any change at all. Getting Obama in the White House was a fluke. Next time there won't be the worst presidential administration in history to run against. And I guess most of us probably agree that without better and more intelligently organized assistance, Obama himself is not realistically going to manage more than incremental progress against international weapons proliferation or anything else. It is time to move on from endlessly trying and endlessly failing at clumsily recycling 1960s protests in a different era and against a very different set of challenges.
August 1, 2009 8:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Many of the peace marchers were ordained ministers, I doubt, there congregations would agree with you on your assessment of their accomplishments.
August 1, 2009 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I attended more than one such "rally" and there were plenty of fine decent people there, no doubt including some popular religious leaders. I have no sympathy for the organizers of those events, however. I highly doubt that almost any of them have any real interest in actually accomplishing any political or social change, and if any of them DO have such an interest, they have been very successful at hiding it and utterly unsuccessful at achieving it.
Next time you march along, feeling morally uplifted, amidst a rainbow coalition of Palestinian flags and mumbo-jumbo rappers, ask yourself how many there know who their Congressional representative is, and how to compose a letter to that decision-maker.
At any rate, after ignoring the atrocity of military over-spending for years, now someone is talking about it here, so we can all sing "Give Peace a Chance," pretend that our techno-rotted culture is still capable of delivering music like that that was written 40 years ago, feel good about ourselves again, and then bury our heads back into the sand again until the next "war" comes along and we can march around again like crazy busily doing nothing to stop it, and feeling oh so morally awakened.
August 1, 2009 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is in response to all of your pathetic arguments against Americans who think they can make a difference. Not once in this diatribe have you offered anything constructive. Until you are ready to recognize, instead of denigrate, these American heroes for their efforts against senseless war maybe you should go hide under the bed. There are plenty of us who believe we can make a difference. WE HAVE A DREAM and we don't need you casting stones from the sidelines.
August 2, 2009 8:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, jonnie here's a "constructive suggestion": Study the history of US foreign policy over the past 40 years.
For example:
Which major world governments supported Saddam Hussein when he actually committed the crimes he was later executed for?
How many feel-good "protesters" in 2003 (after the Congress had already issued the blank check for the chickenhawks' "cakewalk" to Baghdad) were even able to find Iraq on a map of the world, let alone raised a peep about the place in the 1980s?
If you must ape Karl Rove Orwellian doublespeak and refer to America's Iraq fiasco a "war" at least try to identify the two sides that are fighting in this "war", where the "front" is, where the major battles were. Or come to your senses and realize that it never was a war in any conventional definition of the word, but that feel-good "antiwar" protesters happily played right into Karl Rove's hands by "protesting against our troops."
Which major country uses the most oil per capita, and when was the last peacenik march in favor of a carbon tax?
Learn a few facts, try to control the off-target personal insults, and then you may dream away with my sympathy and best wishes.
PT
August 2, 2009 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Try to control the insults, isn't that the pot calling the kettle black. You denigrate a large portion of the population and have, as yet, not offered any constructive dialogue.
August 2, 2009 10:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Read what I wrote in my last post, Jonnie, try to answer my constructive questions and stop insulting me (I have been not insulting you personally). It is true that I have been highly critical of the people who march along in mindless and counterproductive rallies to feel good rather than address the country's problems, but they have in fact (another bit of history for you to examine if you feel inclined to educate yourself) been an extremely minuscule, not a large, fraction of the population. The Iraq mess was never terribly popular with voters, and it was one of several reasons why Obama got elected, so why were the protesters able to get less than 0.1% of population to join them? Could it be that the masses actually care about accomplishing things, rather than being dreamily irrelevant?
I think it is time to start winding up this tangent to the topic of the page. I am not in disagreement about the desirability of reducing military spending, especially the shipping of weapons to foreign dictatorships, and of rolling back America's military industrial complex. I do think that a couple of sloppy graphs and a lot of recycled ancient boilerplate about "empire" will accomplish nothing towards those desirable ends.
August 2, 2009 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your condescension towards me is insulting. Your denigrations of many are insulting and some how you don't see it.
August 2, 2009 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Better just keep marching, Jonnie. At least it's better exercise than sitting at a computer. America's military industrial complex will run out of money soon enough anyway no matter how many feel-good demonstrators help keep it going.
August 2, 2009 2:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
The people who have consistently opposed war and military spending are now few, they are simply not heard and people like you don't help by belittling what efforts they make. And yes, Americans are hypocrites with their big SUV's but without those we would still be being driven by the needs of the MIC and not any actual consideration for our security.
August 1, 2009 11:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
History is littered with empires and would-be empires that failed precisely because they lacked the capacity to equip their own militaries.
The reason why the United States was the arsenal of democracy in WWII was that it had that ability in abundance while the reason the sun then sunk on the British Empire was that England needed lend-lease and other inputs from the United States to sustain itself. There are numerous other examples on point.
In short, the ability of the United States to produce military durable goods ultimately depends upon its ability to produce ordinary everyday civilian durable goods.
And this ability is declining.
Which means that the United States is going to have to start importing its military durable goods along with its civilian.
And that ain't going to last. It can't.
August 1, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
On the pacifism theme, just learned about the Swiss movement to abolish their army. Apparently failed to pass the abolition law but got 33% of the referendum vote.
When you know how militaristic a country it is, pretty impressive result. But then again they aren't invested in the goal of world domination...
http://europeanpeaceaction.org/gsoa-gruppe-fuer-eine-schweiz-ohne-armee-gssa-groupe-pour-une-suisse-sans-armee-gsse-una-svizzera-se
August 1, 2009 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is an intelligent and clever bunch of pacifists, but their country -which contributes its fair share to the international arms bazzar, by the way- cannot get its kidnapped citizens released from Khadaffi's goons, and de-militarization is not the reason they did not become part of the Third Reich 70 years ago.
August 1, 2009 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
1. Yes, of course: war is a brilliant way to get hostages released. Why don't we try that with N.Korea.
2. The Swiss military was not the reason they did not get invaded by the Reich, as far as I know
3. The existence of a Swiss arms industry is intimately linked to the maintenance of an independent army. That is its very justification. Throw that away and so does their arms trade.
4. God knows why I'm defending full-on pacifism, but these arguments just don't cut it...
August 1, 2009 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with your points 1 and 2, and to some extent 3, but most of all 4. In fact, I don't see the relevance of these points to the conversation about US military spending. An interesting tangent only.
The best reason for Switzerland and other little countries to consider doing away with most of their military apparatus is that there is a UN with US-supplied military firepower available and in existence for the purpose (read the UN preamble) of preventing the next world war. Of course, Switzerland only joined the UN recently because it was reluctant for a long time to compromise its "armed neutrality" in the slightest way, which gives you a gauge on the snowball's chance in hell of that 33% protest-'cause-we-know-it-won't-pass margin rising above 50% anytime soon.
August 1, 2009 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
My foreign policy is to surrender to Canada.
August 1, 2009 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where's Quinn, we can start negotiations?
August 1, 2009 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll go.
August 1, 2009 9:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think perhaps the most incredible thing is us as Chinamerica. China could pull the rug on our entire economy in a couple days.
I do have to wonder what the politicians in DC think of themselves? DO they think they are doing a great job? Does Nancy Pelosi admire herself in the mirror every night and...wait, uhm..nevermind...Does Dianne Feinstein admire herself every night in the mirror as some great purveyor of democracy? Murtha? Oh My God. Murtha. How does he think he is doing? How do any of them think about how they are doing or do they even think about how they are doing? Their complete support of a system that is obviously in need of total change not just for the survival of democracy but of the planet makes me really wonder about them.
In other words, they don't get it and naively perhaps or stupidly, we elected them because we thought maybe they would or COULD get it.
All empires collapse no thanks to an Old Model way of the world they are holding on to with their grimy corporate stained claws.
August 1, 2009 9:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
First, I think oleeb and lalo are in a chicken/egg argument. Our foreign policy is interdependent with our entrenched military architecture. They form an ouroboros.
Overall, this is a good post. Toynbee illustrated his theory of history through meticulous research and sourcing. Oddly, his conclusion is similiar to the intuitive beliefs reached by Vico and Spengler. An empire can only grow so large before the cost of spoils exceeds ability of the mitary to obtain them.
The first step is for this nation to come to terms with its history as an empire. We aspired for empire the moment we purchased territory from Napoleon. Then we need to inderstand that we are not a republic or democracy, but an oligarchy composed of military/industrial interests. The fruits of democracy are in fact the plunder from centuries of invasion and exploitation. The noble experiment is a tissue of lies.
This sober appraisal of the United States would do us all well. So many of us make tacit assumptions about our government and politics that are false, and this besotted view hurts us deeply.
August 1, 2009 10:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I respectfully disagree. It isn't chicken and egg at all. Our imperial designs and foreign policy are driven by the merchants of death and have been now for decades. Without the Cold War they didn't know how to prevent the self evident need for de-escalating and then they discovered the fictitious Global War on Terror and now they have an enemy that can't be found or ever defeated so neverending layouts of tax dollars will come rolling their way. We need to cut off the spigot, immediately withdraw all our troops from the two war zones and cut military spending immediately back to what it was in 2000 before all this nonsense began. Then we cut even further from there. All the savings realized can be invested in productive activities that will employ people, produce goods that are needed and useful and restor prosperity to our country. It is the military boondoggle that is killing us more than anything else and there are no threats of any kind on this planet that justify the level of spending we are engaging in. This obscene and unbalanced war machine has been driving our foreign policy and our economics for too long. If we fail to stop it now it will destroy us. No enemy will need to lift a finger as the madness of our imperial war machine kills us from within.
August 1, 2009 11:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is the military boondoggle that is killing us more than anything else and there are no threats of any kind on this planet that justify the level of spending we are engaging in.
Very true. Don't you think it is interesting that Russia has now opened up a logistics route for the US in Afghanistan through it territory? It should be obviouse to any sentient being that the Russians do not want us to "succeed" there but here they are encouraging our efforts. They see what the US is doing to itself and they are enabling us. It is their interest to see us fail. And all they have to do is hand us more rope that we eagerly seek.
August 2, 2009 12:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well said! There isn't the slightest reason for US troops to be engaged in Afghanistan, and, of course, it is widely acknowledged now, that our presence in Iraq is counter productive. All of those military bases in other countries are just money sponges, and sources of irritation to the citizens of those countries.
A major part of this problem is that those who could rein in the military spending are bribed to do otherwise, usually by offers of very highly paid jobs as consultants after they resign from their government jobs. Even those with no interest in "working" as a consultant, still gain lots of money and benefits from the military lobbyists, both in industry and in the Pentagon.
Perhaps the reason the last president preferred to be called the commander in chief is that being that is the more important part of the job, when you look at a president's future prospects. Let's face it, if our government was any more corrupt, it would be seen as the fascist government it is slowly becoming.
August 2, 2009 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's been the unspoken truth of this recession, that it represents the permanent impoverishment of the American people.
R. Crumb, in all his optimistic glory, saw it coming years ago:
http://mfinley.com/gallery/economy.wmv
August 2, 2009 8:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
What's the problem here? With Sole Remainin' Hyperpower, Sam can swipe it all back any time.
Yours,
McRaubfest
August 2, 2009 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
You beat me to it.
On a related to note, it also makes us pretty damn credit worthy. Helps with those hyper deficits.
August 2, 2009 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
"We no longer have to act as the unpaid policeman of the world" ?
OK, give us your top three candidates to fill the role. Capability tops the list of requirements, closely followed by trustworthiness.
OK, give us your top three candidates to fill the role. Capability tops the list of requirements, closely followed by trustworthiness (being highly trustworthy, like Switzerland, doesn't count without the capability, however).
Or, did you mean to say that there's no reason to HAVE a country willing and able to step in an put a stop to atrocities? No more standing up to Hitler or Tojo, no more backing up South Korea, Kuwait or any other nation faced with naked aggression.
Your choice.
August 2, 2009 9:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is exactly what Chalmers Johnson predicted in his trilogy Blowback, The Sorrows of Empire and Nemesis. We are already a military empire with hundreds of colonies/bases around the world, many of them secret--and nothing that anyone will do can reverse the trajectory. Our country has also become culturally militarized after eight years of constant references to the president as commander-in-chief. That's been a profound misnomer. He's commander-in-chief of the armed forces, not the country, but the MSM has lost the distinction, and we have lost our Republic. It doesn't matter who the president is, since nobody will dismantle the MIC that is destroying our democracy.
August 3, 2009 8:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Did you ssee Eugen Jarecki's film "Why we fight?" I think PBS aired it. The film is a take-off on Dwight's MIC speech. It is full of facts and figures on the issue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_We_Fight_(2005_film)
August 3, 2009 11:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
viking,
If "most" of the US military bases around the world are secret, how did you -- or my old professor -- find out about them?
Doh!
August 3, 2009 9:04 PM | Reply | Permalink