President Eisenhower warned of the perniciousness of the “military-industrial complex” in 1961. Since that time the U.S. has become steadily more belligerent. There hasn’t been a day our lives that the U.S. hasn’t been engaged in active military action.
In fact, there hasn’t been a day since the government was formed in 1789 that the U.S. hasn’t been fighting somewhere.
In addition to fighting overseas, the U.S. has conducted three wars on its citizens – the Indian actions, the Civil War and the long running Drug War. To top it off, before Bush botched it up, the Neo-Conservatives were calling for “The American Century”. THEY planned for a military and cultural empire.
In his book “The Assassination of Caesar”, Michael Franti shows how Rome’s middle-class was drained of its wealth and income to support the empire. The booty from the adventurist policies went to the influential, either wealthy or military plunderers.
Rome went from republic to Caeserian Empire and the middle class devolved to Rome’s welfare class, who were controlled and disenfranchised with bread and circuses of cruelty – Animal against animal; animals vs. people. The Romans decimated North African wildlife and executed many Christians in these arenas of bloodlust.
George McGovern was the first and last candidate to bring up the empire issue in his disastrous run against Nixon in 1972. Since then the anti-empirists and pro-peace, anti-war groups have been invisible to the press. Empire has not been the issue – only how to conduct it.
Now Ron Paul has brought the issue to the forefront by endorsing my platform calling for withdrawal of all U.S. bases from other countries. He has shown how the corporations benefit from our military and the U.S. population suffers. His arguments cannot be ignored.
Paul has put the anti-war, anti-empire argument on the discussion table. The philosophy of not being a military bully has made a giant jump into American consciousness thanks to him. By pulling from the right he gave it a legitimacy that it didn’t have coming from the left.
At first I thought Ron Paul’s campaign was more powerful than the multitude of voices opposing U.S. militarism. But the Occupation movement with its Greek chorus of human microphones has also had a hand in turning public opinion around. It took both right and left to set the stage for a re-evaluation of American exceptionalism. Forty years is a long time to wait for the discussion. Obama, are you listening?
RESCIND OBAMA’S NOBEL PEACE PRIZE
I would assume that the Nobel Committee selected Obama for the Peace Prize in 2009 in anticipation of the good acts they expected of him. Perhaps the closing of Guantanamo, stopping torture of prisoners, pulling out of Iraq, stopping support of tyrants like Mubarek, Assad and Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan. Perhaps they thought he would sign the Kyoto Accords or the Land-Mine Treaty.
He turned out to be another U.S. President-warmonger. He’s the world’s biggest arms dealer. He commands the biggest army. Spends as much on military as the next 10 nations combined, and he just signed a law allowing the use of military courts and military justice on U.S. citizens in the U.S.
Well, it’s just another example of paying the contractor before the job is completed and inspected. Advance payment is a often a set-up for disappointment and shoddy workmanship.
What should the Nobel Committee do? Rescind the Prize! And rescind Henry Kissinger’s, too. He was an architect of the Vietnam War, which destroyed the lives of millions of people. Instead, send both of these suspects to the World Court in the Hague to stand trial for crimes against humanity and genocide. Obama’s eligible now and he’s still piling up the body count*. First step: Rescind their Nobels. Isn’t it unseemly for the Committee to award prizes to these creeps and not to Pete Seeger, one of the world’s foremost peace-mongers?
* Sorry Bush, no prize for you, but you are eligible for the one-way to the Hague.