OMNI WAR ECONOMY NEWSLETTER,
December 28, 2012. Compiled by Dick
Bennett for a Culture of Peace and Justice.
MILITARIZED ECONOMY
UNDERMINES ABILITY OF NATION TO ADAPT TO PRESENT AND FUTURE CRISES
My blog: The War
Department and Peace Heroes
Newsletters on Peace, Justice, and Ecology:
Index:
Contents
Petition: HAW Jobs Not
Wars
Southworth: Local Needs
Wittner, Conversion from War to Human Needs
Farruggio, War Is a Racket
Sullivan, From War Economy to Peace Economy for Seymour
99% Speak Up
Nix, Hunger in Africa While
Money Burns Up in Unnecessary Wars
[haw-info] Jobs-Not-Wars
Campaign
haw-info-bounces@stopthewars.org on behalf of Marc Becker [marc@yachana.org]To: haw-info@stopthewars.org
Attachments:
Inbox
Monday, December 17, 2012 9:03 AM
Send
President Obama and Members of
Congress a Strong Clear Message
Congress a Strong Clear Message
On Election Day, the American
people made their voices heard.
We rejected austerity schemes
to reduce the deficit at the expense of working people, the middle class, the
poor, children, and the elderly.
We want those who caused the economic crisis to
pay to fix it. We rejected more tax breaks for large corporations and the
wealthy. We want the super-rich and giant corporations to pay their share and
government to stop coddling the greedy and neglecting the needy!
One of the best ways to reduce
the deficit is to put people back to work. It’s time to invest in our people
and our communities to create stable jobs at living wages, rehabilitate our
nation’s infrastructure, repair the social safety net, restore government
services and programs that serve the needs of people and communities, and
develop a sustainable planet for future generations.
We want the war in Afghanistan
We want an economy, government
and nation that work for ALL of us, not just some of us.
Keep the pressure on – remind
Congress and President Obama that they work for the American people.
We will present the Jobs-Not-Wars
Petition to
Congress & President Obama around the time of the Inauguration.
Forward this email to everyone you
know – ask them to join you in signing the
Jobs-Not-Wars Petition. Post it to your Facebook page
and Tweet about it to your social network. There is strength in numbers. Don’t
let our elected officials forget who they represent.
We can, and must do better for
all Americans.
Thank you.
The Jobs-Not-Wars Campaign
Participating Organization:
Historians Against the War
Participating Organization:
Historians Against the War
…………………………………………………………………………………………
IT’S
TIME FOR PEACE AND JOBS!
The full text of the petition:
The full text of the petition:
Mr. President and Members of
Congress:
During this period, when people
of faith and secular people alike reflect on the year that is ending and
look forward with hope to the year ahead, it is a time to put aside differences and enmities to celebrate
our universal values.
look forward with hope to the year ahead, it is a time to put aside differences and enmities to celebrate
our universal values.
It is in this spirit of
humanity and hope that we call upon you to redirect your efforts and federal
resources to:
· End the war in Afghanistan
· Create good jobs at living
wages: invest in our communities and our people to grow the economy and put people
back to work;
· In communities devastated by
hurricane Sandy
· Train and hire veterans, the
unemployed, and youth from historically disadvantaged communities to perform
cleanup and reconstruction as a part of a broader national jobs program to
rehabilitate inner cities, build affordable energy-efficient homes,
repair/replace public infrastructure, and develop sustainable manufacturing for
the 21st Century.
· Redirect our nation’s resources
from war and uncontrolled Pentagon spending to fund social programs and public
services, protect and improve Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, repair
the social safety net, meet the challenge of climate change, and reduce poverty
and inequality.
· Rely foremost on determined
diplomacy and patient negotiation, rather than military power to respond to
international disputes, differences or conflicts;
· Require those at the top of the
income ladder, giant corporations and financial speculators to pay their fair
share of taxes.
We ask that you summon the
personal courage and moral fortitude to transcend partisan differences to serve
the common good and public interest.
Give
peace a chance!
We need
jobs not cuts! Work not Wars!
War at What Cost? A Veteran Perspective by our own Matt Southworth
Posted by: "Daniel Shea" djshea@hotmail.com
Wed May 23, 2012
Matt, Well said, articulate, expressing our anger, our
losses in lives, family and the opportunity costs in Pentagon spending vs the
real needs in our communities. What a disgrace, shame on our congress for
continuing to fund
a policy of death and destruction
Peace Daniel Shea Board of Directors
Veterans for Peace www.veteransforpeace.org
Governments and
National Security Policy
·
·
By Lawrence
S. Wittner
10-22-12
Sign in
Can local
governments influence national security policy? Congress has the power to
appropriate funds for military purposes and to declare war. But local
governments sometimes have something to say about this -- especially when
national policy has significant effects upon them.
In recent years,
as Congress has poured trillions of dollars into the Iraq
and Afghanistan wars and
into an escalating Pentagon budget, well over half of U.S. federal discretionary spending has been
devoted to funding the U.S.
This squeeze upon
localities has led to a gathering revolt. Dozens of local jurisdictions have
passed resolutions that call for ending the U.S.
military role in Iraq and Afghanistan
The latest of
these campaigns concluded this fall in Albany
County , New York
With Albany County Albany County
clerk mailed off copies to President Obama, the entire New York State
This kind of
pressure by localities to change U.S. U.S. U.S.
Will the more
recent upsurge of protest by localities against U.S.
Related Links
 |
Sunday, May 20, 2012
War
is a Racket! Has Anything Changed?
 |
Phillip Farruggio
Activist Post
In 1935, a book was published, War Is a Racket, by retired Marine General Smedley Butler. In this brief bookButler
Wars, invasions and occupations by our military, according to General Butler, were all predicated on the desire for profit by corporations. He, himself, called his past life as a Marine General as being a gangster for these private industrial interests.
He used WW1 as an example of who made the profits for our military being sent ‘over there’. Apparently, most of our American public at that time could not care less for what Smedley Butler was selling.
In January of 1961, retiring President Dwight Eisenhower gave his famous farewell address. In it, this cold warrior made a sort of indirect mea culpa as to the “vast military industrial complex” as he put it. Ike knew just how diabolical this network of war making corporations could be.
As president he did many dirty deeds in the name of "fighting communism". A whole list of countries that the United States pushed our sabers into, whether overtly or most often covertly, defines how we will be recorded by truthful historians however few and far between they may be.
Our current position as the world’s superpower is the bastard child of this greedy and corrupting military industrial complex, more simply known to many as an empire.
Activist Post
In 1935, a book was published, War Is a Racket, by retired Marine General Smedley Butler. In this brief book
Wars, invasions and occupations by our military, according to General Butler, were all predicated on the desire for profit by corporations. He, himself, called his past life as a Marine General as being a gangster for these private industrial interests.
He used WW1 as an example of who made the profits for our military being sent ‘over there’. Apparently, most of our American public at that time could not care less for what Smedley Butler was selling.
In January of 1961, retiring President Dwight Eisenhower gave his famous farewell address. In it, this cold warrior made a sort of indirect mea culpa as to the “vast military industrial complex” as he put it. Ike knew just how diabolical this network of war making corporations could be.
As president he did many dirty deeds in the name of "fighting communism". A whole list of countries that the United States pushed our sabers into, whether overtly or most often covertly, defines how we will be recorded by truthful historians however few and far between they may be.
Our current position as the world’s superpower is the bastard child of this greedy and corrupting military industrial complex, more simply known to many as an empire.
This writer stands with sign in hand each week to once again sound the alarm bells that General Butler and President Eisenhower rang. I join with many others who want to finally curtail and pullback this military industrial empire. Many of us are progressives and libertarians politically but it does not matter. The truth of it all is that if this obscene and financially disastrous military spending is not cut drastically, our great nation will crumble from within. No terrorist attack could do as much damage as that!
There is a movement nationwide to get the Congress to cut this tragically high spending by a minimum of 25%. Since 2001, military spending has almost doubled! It now hovers at over $560 billion a year, or 56 cents of every tax dollar we each send to Uncle Sam. Imagine if even one half of that savings went back to each state and its cities’ budgets?
The city of
We could then shut down our 800+ overseas military bases and hundreds of thousands of our troops would return home, at even more savings. With our powerful navy and our satellite technology,
It is time for the dedicated Occupy movement members and the labor union movement to get on board with but one focus: Pullback this military empire! All the other peripherals such as a greedy Wall Street, terrible foreclosures, viable and real health care reform, layoffs, etc. are all connected to this overzealous military empire.
It is time for we who "know better" to be role models for the majority of Americans who still buy into the mainstream media’s hype and spin. There is no major difference, so far as this military industrial empire goes, between the two major political parties. Yes, the Republicans seem more caustic, but the Democrats are more diabolical by their hypocrisy.
It's time to come together like libertarian conservative like Ron Paul and lifelong progressive like Ralph Nader to call war what it is a "racket".
You can help
formerly
AfterDowningStreet
You are herecontent / Moving from a War Economy to a
Peace Economy
Moving from a War Economy to a
Peace Economy
By - Posted on 22 October 2011
By Mary Beth Sullivan, for mic50.org
It is my intention to stimulate some
conversation about economic conversion – that is, planning, designing and
implementing a transformation from a war economy to a peace economy.
Historically, this is an effort that would include a changeover from
military to civilian work in industrial facilities, in laboratories, and at US
To that end, I intend to bring to you all
what I’ve learned from reading Seymour Melman, the most prolific writer on the
topic.
Seymour Melman was a professor emeritus of
Industrial Engineering at Columbia
University Columbia
Melman was also an active member of the
peace movement. He was the co-chair of the Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy (SANE),
and the creator and chair of the National Commission for Economic Conversion
and Disarmament. It is reported that Melman was under surveillance by the
FBI for much of his career because of his work criticizing the
military-industrial complex – a sure sign that there must be something worth
hearing in his work. What did he say that the power structure feared?
The economic conversion movement in past
decades played a valuable role in bringing together the peace movement and
union leadership to do the heady work of imaging how this country could sustain
industrial jobs when, as it was envisioned, the U.S. would stop production of
the weapons of the Cold War. It is a history that should not be
forgotten.
Melman noted that US
Military production for World War II began
to change these rules of industry, which were then institutionalized in the
1960’s when Robert McNamara was Secretary of Defense. McNamara, who came
to the Pentagon having been an executive at Ford Motor Company, implemented
some critical changes.
Within the Pentagon, civilian and uniformed
Pentagon officials were in conflict about the procedures for how to determine
the costs of weapons to be contracted for manufacturing. On the one side,
led by an industrial engineer, the idea was to base costs on the formulation of
alternative designs and production methods, etc. – a competitive approach that promoted
economy.
The other side proposed generating costs
based on what was previously spent. For the Pentagon, this meant
following the “cost-plus” system used during World War II, also known as “cost
maximizing.”
As Melman put it, “…contractors could
take the previous cost of making a product for the Pentagon and simply add on
an agreed-upon profit margin. The more a product cost, the more [a
contractor] stood to earn.”
McNamara opted for this second option. The
result was that by 1980, the cost of producing major weapons systems had grown
at an annual rate of 20%. Melman observed that by 1996, “the cost of the
B-2 bomber …exceeded the value of its weight in gold.”
McNamara went on to model the Pentagon
after a corporate central office, defining policy, appointing chiefs of
subordinate units, maintaining accounting and management functions with huge
discretion. Each military service participated in the process of
acquiring materiel and weapons. This process resulted in the tens of
thousands becoming hundreds of thousands of employees, paid for by America
Melman minced no words in articulating the
consequences.
“An industrial management has been
installed in the federal government, under the Secretary of Defense, to control
the nation’s largest network of industrial enterprises… the new
state-management combines… economic, political, and military decision-making.”
“…Nowhere in the constitution is top economic power conferred by the constitution.”
“The operation of a permanent military
economy makes the president the chief executive officer of the state management
controlling the largest single block of capital resources, including the
largest aggregation of industrial facilities in the economy. Thereby, a
core feature of a Leninist state design was installed in the federal government
– top economic, political and military power in the same hands, often
unconstrained by law.”
“…this combination of powers in the same
hands has been a feature of statist societies – communist, fascist, and others
– where individual rights cannot constrain central rule…”
Among the many critical consequences of
this state controlled industry described by Melman, I’ll mention a few:
·
Firms
were no longer efficiency orientated – rather, industry produced increasingly
complicated goods.
·
Production
had nothing to do with meeting the needs of ordinary consumers. Melman
pointed out that a nuclear-powered submarine was a “technological masterpiece,”
– but consumers can’t eat it; can’t wear it; can’t ride in it; can’t live in
it; and can’t make anything with it.
·
Labor
lost control of any decision-making it had over production. With the
influx of capital came an influx of white-collar middle managers, and an
alienation – or disempowering – of workers.
·
Where the
U.S.
·
The
Pentagon consumed the talents of our scientists and engineers whose skills were
needed in other sectors of our society.
In one of Melman’s last articles at the
dawn of the 21st Century, his frustration was palpable. He noted
that New York City U.S.
company bid on the proposal – in part because the US U.S.
Melman shared his vision: “The
production facilities and labor force that could deliver 6 new subway cars each
week could produce 300 cars per year, and thereby provide new replacement cars
for the New York Subway system in a 20-year cycle – for the 6,000 railcar fleet
of the NY subway system… Well-trained engineers are required to design the key
subway transportation equipment. Therefore, we must note that it is
almost 25 years since the last book was published in the U.S.
There was an alternative vision that was
percolating within the economic
conversion movement in decades past with an intent to create and
begin the process of reducing the economic decision-power of the war-making
institutions. This was to be done by mandating a planning process for the
changeover from military to civilian work in factories, laboratories, and
military bases.
The plan was to set up a highly
decentralized planning process based on “alternative-use committees” to do the
necessary blueprinting. Half of each alternative-use committee would be
named by management; the other half by the working people. There
would be support of incomes during a changeover.
Nationally, a commission chaired by the
Secretary of Commerce would publish a manual on local alternative-use
planning. It would also encourage federal, state, and local government to
make capital investment plans, creating new markets for the capital goods
required for infrastructure repair.
Three principal functions would be served
by economic conversion:
First, the planning stage would offer assurance to the
working people of the war economy that they can have an economic future in a
society where war-making is a diminished institution.
Second, reversing the process of economic decay in U.S.
manufacturing in particular (and in the rest of the U.S. economy) the National
Commission would be empowered to facilitate planning for capital investments in
all aspects of infrastructure by governments of cities, counties, states and
the federal government, which would comprise a massive program of new jobs and
new markets.[1]
Third, the national network of alternative use committees
would constitute a gain in decision-making power by all the working people
involved.
Melman worked with students, union leaders,
the peace movement and with Congress to create momentum around these ideas.
There were some key events along the way.
In 1971, George McGovern included the idea
of economic conversion when he announced his candidacy for the Democratic
Presidential nomination. His statement included this position:
“…Basing our defense budget on actual needs rather than
imaginary fears would lead to [budget] savings. Needless war and military waste
contribute to the economic crisis not only through inflation, but by the
dissipation of labor and resources and in non-productive enterprise…
For too long the taxes of our citizens and revenues
desperately needed by our cities and states have been drawn into Washington
In 1976, SANE held a conference in New York City
In 1988 and ‘89, Melman had several
meetings with then Speaker of the House, Rep. Jim Wright. Wright convened a
meeting of congressmen who were committed to support the economic conversion
bill proposed by New York
“…the arms race had taken on not only dangerous but also economically damaging
characteristics, … and that spending on the military was a burden that sapped
the strength of the whole society…”
On the first day of the opening of the 101st
Congress, Speaker Wright convened a meeting of members who had proposed
economic conversion legislation, and their aids. The purpose was to
ensure that all proposals be joined into one, and that this legislation be
given priority. To dramatize the importance of this bill, it would be
given number H.R. 101.
Melman and SANE were elated. And then
reality hit. As Melman reported:
“Supporters of such an initiative did not reckon with the enormous power of
those opposed to any such move toward economic conversion. In the weeks
that followed, these vested interests waged a concerted and aggressive campaign
in Congress and the national media to bring down Jim Wright over allegations of
financial misconduct.”
The allegations had little substance, but
Newt Gingrich, representing a headquarters district of Lockheed Martin, led the
Republican attack. Sadly, they won. According to Melman, “Their
media campaign drowned out any further discussion of economic conversion… A
historic opportunity had been destroyed.”
I found an article written in 1990 from the
LA Times, which reported about economic conversion plans developing in California
In Los Angeles
On the state level, California Assemblyman Sam Farr
promoted a package of bills that required the governor to 1) convene an
"economic summit" on conversion, 2) appoint a council to study the
issue and 3) come up with a means of facilitating the transfer of military
technology to the civilian sector.
Finally, at the federal level, Representative
Ted Weiss from New York
George H.W. Bush’s attack on Iraq
There are some in the peace movement who
continued to keep the embers of economic conversion alive. Many years ago
in Groton , Connecticut St. Louis Woodstock peace
community held a conference in 2009 focused on the conversion of Ametek/Rotron,
a Woodstock
My partner, Bruce Gagnon, is the
coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in
Space. He has been organizing around conversion since the 1980s.
His typical question to any audience is: “What is the U.S.
In 2003, Bruce and I moved to Maine Bath
Initially, people laughed, scoffed,
scorned, and some spewed hateful things at us.
In 2007, Bruce and I moved to Bath
In fact one worker, Peter Woodruff, joined
our “conversion study group” early on. Broken-hearted by the role of the
Aegis destroyers in the shock and awe campaign on Iraq
As BIW copes with episodic layoffs, a
diminishing need for more U.S.
Meanwhile, there is momentum in Maine University of Maine
As a friend who was an employee at BIW many
years ago points out, BIW did
convert years ago – from making commercial ships to naval destroyers. Can
it experience another conversion now, making wind turbines and other renewable
energy products?
What if BIW converted to making hospital
ships? Paul Chappell talked to us here at this conference about
transforming the U.S. Maine
author Kate Braestrup spoke at Maine
It behooves the peace movement to create a
vision that the populace can get excited about – a vision that will capture
people’s imagination. A vision that sees skills and talents of our
engineers and scientists creating the renewable energy infrastructure that is
critical to surviving the 21st Century; a vision that engages peace
activists, environmentalists, labor, students, artists, food security folks in
creating plans for how we will heat homes, feed people, transport people in the
year 2040. This is the true security need for the U.S.
Karen Kwiatowski’s shared an important
admonition at the conference. The MIC culture of cost maximizing/
cronyism/ lack of accountability (and, as Melman noted, worker alienation)
makes its factories an unlikely location for the rebuilding of a worn out
infrastructure and creating the new energy models. Perhaps we are talking
more about reconstruction than conversion. But it behooves each of us –
locally – to look around, determine the needs, create the collaborations, and
wrestle the funds away to start building a survivable future.
Economic conversion is an idea whose time
has come. As evidence, I submit that we have an ally in none other than
Deepak Chopra, the preeminent leader in the field of mind-body medicine.
Few people know that, after the 2008 election, Dr. Chopra sent a public letter
to Barak Obama which he called “Nine Steps to Peace for Obama in the New
Year.” Asserting that it was an anti-war constituency that elected
Obama, Dr. Chopra invoked the spirit of Dwight D. Eisenhower in insisting Obama
move from an economy dependent on war-making to a peace-based economy.
Dr. Chopra’s recommendations included: writing into every defense contract a requirement
for a peacetime project; subsidizing conversion of military companies to
peaceful uses with tax incentives and direct funding; converting military bases
to housing for the poor; phasing out all foreign military bases; and calling a
moratorium on future weapons technologies.
The vision is clear, it is obvious, it is
mainstream. An important next step for us is to determine what we can do
in our home communities to empower local unions and workers, environmentalists,
health care workers, social workers, spiritual leaders, and the neighbors next
door to engage the debate.
References for this article from Seymour
Melman
2003.In
the Grip of a Permanent War Economy, Counterpunch, March 15, 2003
1988. The
Demilitarized Society: Disarmament & Conversion. Montreal
2001. After
Capitalism: From Managerialism to Workplace Democracy. New York
See Economic
Reconstruction and Seymour Melman website at
http://globalmakeover.com/SeymourMelman
2008. War,
Inc. an unpublished book
1989. Interview on Public Access Television.
[1] Melman frequently referred to the annual “report card”
published by the society of civil engineers to highlight the declining
infrastructure in the U.S.
0diggsdigg
·
.
TREASURIES EMPTIED ON WARS
WHILE MILLIONS HUNGER
Reply |Sheila Nix, ONE.org
one-help@list.one.org to Dick
Dear Dick,
You may have seen it on today's front page: yesterday the UN
declared a famine in south Somalia .
More than 11 million people in the Horn of Africa - greater than the
populations of Houston and New York City combined - are desperately in
need of food, clean water and basic sanitation.
Many of our partners are on the ground working to make sure
that immediate aid gets to the people who need it most. But we can’t forget
about the big picture, too.
Tell Congress that in next year’s budget we can’t cut
programs that fight the root causes of world hunger and keep families healthy
for the long-term. Let's do everything we can to prevent a crisis like this from
happening again.
Click below to automatically sign the petition:
Dear Congress,
As you make difficult choices in the budget, please protect
programs that save lives and help the world’s poor pull themselves out of
poverty.
Some people look back to previous droughts and question
whether things will ever change. But we’ve got proof that smart aid works. In Ethiopia ,
millions of people will be able to survive this drought because of an early
warning system that was put in place with help from USAID - and because the
Ethiopian government began distributing food before the crisis hit. The number
of malnourished people in Ethiopia
has fallen from 71% in 1992 to 46% today. And we know that growth in
agriculture is twice as effective at reducing poverty as growth in other areas
So let’s tell Congress that we've got to act now and fight
hunger for the long term. For less than 1% of the US budget, we’ve made sure that
families could feed themselves and children could grow up healthy and strong -
and we've got to keep that legacy going.
The House is scheduled to start making tough budget
decisions on the FY2012 budget as early as next week, so we’ve got to act fast.
Click below to automatically add your name:
Thank you for your support.
Sheila Nix
US Executive Director, ONE
PS: To read more about the Horn of Africa crisis and to find
out how you can help, please visit the ONE blog today.
MILITARIZED ECONOMY UNDERMINES ABILITY OF NATION TO
ADAPT TO FUTURE CRISES: SEE OMNI’S
NEWSLETTERS ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE.
END US
No comments:
Post a Comment