Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's that difficult to extrapolate eventual difficulties for the Bill of Rights in a world dominated by Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan as the two super powers.
That assumes either Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan would have remained stable enough to matter as world powers. Either or both could just as well have collapsed from within.
War Is a Racket (1933)
81–90 of 192 posts
Re: War Is a Racket (1933)
#82According to CBO analysis the total cost of Afghan & Iraq wars is going to be something like $2.5 trillion for the US. Imagine if this sum would have been used mostly nonviolently for bribing and buying influence in the region. Depending how the money is distributed, it would have been: * $35k per each person in Iraq and Afghanistan. If you divide it into households maybe something like $100k - 150k per household. *…
Re: War Is a Racket (1933)
#83What about your allies' homes? If an aggressor can pick off victims one at a time, you won't have any allies left when they come for your home.
It also assumes that there is no form of dramatically assummetric attack that is hard to defend against. That may have been true when this was written, but nuclear weapons changed the game.
Re: War Is a Racket (1933)
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have exactly the same feelings you do here, but I struggle with one thing in particular. What is the real alternative to American hegemony? I believe it's likely Chinese hegemony. China, on the one hand, is an ethno-state which is rounding up the Muslim (Uyghurs) men, tossing them in concentration camps, and assigning rapists to live with their families to re-educate them into being good Communists. On the other ha…
That question is essentially impossible to answer, IMO. The world we live in, our perceptions of it, the language we use to describe it, is deeply anchored in the technocapitalist empire America was empowered to establish in the unsettled world order left in the aftermath of WW2. So, what are the alternatives to American hegemony? I don't know. What are the alternatives to capitalism? What are the alternatives to acc…
Re: War Is a Racket (1933)
#85I thought he was going somewhere besides conspiracy theory-ville until he said "The trend is to poison us against the Japanese." By 1933 Japan needed no one to make them look bad. The invasion of Asia was well underway, and only those not paying attention were shocked by the Rape of Nanking. If this guy was carrying water for the Imperial Japanese by 1933, he was making excuses for genocide, torture and horror on a s…
So you just conveniently forget Japan has always had an immensely violent history, and only care that someone "made excuses" in the midst of war? Or the innumerable atrocities historically committed on behalf of the US MIC too much for your blind patriotism?
Re: War Is a Racket (1933)
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you saying what the US has been involved in for the past 70 years isn't a racket? This man called it first, and he knew what he was talking about.
All articles need to be read in their historical context. In 1933, the "next war" to come was WWII, roughly 1939 through 1945. Was WWII a "racket" ?
Hitler was bribing many of his own military leaders to keep them on side. The German corporations gained monopolies and power under Hitler. The rich sent Hitler to spy on a small political party because they feared the workers might stand together to gain political power and they stood behind him even after he took control of it and turned it into the Nazis.
Some historians think Germany's wars were obviously suicidal, even without the benefit of hindsight, but at the time a lot of people were living very lavish lives while it lasted. All the while casting the blame for everything on poor immigrants that they caged near the borders.
Re: War Is a Racket (1933)
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
That question is essentially impossible to answer, IMO. The world we live in, our perceptions of it, the language we use to describe it, is deeply anchored in the technocapitalist empire America was empowered to establish in the unsettled world order left in the aftermath of WW2. So, what are the alternatives to American hegemony? I don't know. What are the alternatives to capitalism? What are the alternatives to acc…
I would like to draw an important distinction between what we might like to happen vs what we think will actually happen. Particularly in a world where the two other world powers are annexing territory and/or colonizing Africa. Just imagine that we unilaterally stop. What do you think will happen next?
There'd be a big war and after that who knows what the world would look like. The fact you still see the world as necessarily dipole, a tension between great powers vying for control over "the little people" kind of makes my point.
There is no difference between an American and a Chinese hegemony. The problem isn't that the hegemony we have is American. The problem is hegemony.
Re: War Is a Racket (1933)
#88According to CBO analysis the total cost of Afghan & Iraq wars is going to be something like $2.5 trillion for the US. Imagine if this sum would have been used mostly nonviolently for bribing and buying influence in the region. Depending how the money is distributed, it would have been: * $35k per each person in Iraq and Afghanistan. If you divide it into households maybe something like $100k - 150k per household. *…
Re: War Is a Racket (1933)
#89Re: War Is a Racket (1933)
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
“How does "War is a Racket" align or jive (or not!) with the presumed reason that most young men and women sign up for the military, which is to valiantly protect and defend the country?” It aligns with the fact that the warmongers are putting out a lot of propaganda that makes it a virtue to go to war and die for the warmongers.
We're no longer living in the 19th century, most people no longer believe in the nobility and glory of war. Much of the modern recruitment efforts I've seen focus on benefits like paying for student loan debts, workforce training and healthcare. I would bet that most people who join the military today (at least in the US) do so hoping to avoid ever having to see action, rather than looking forward to killing for thei…
Sounds like you live in a nice bubble.
> Much of the modern recruitment efforts I've seen focus on benefits like paying for student loan debts, workforce training and healthcare.
highly branch-specific. They cater recruiting messages to the target audience. Look up Marine recruiting material.
> I would bet that most people who join the military today (at least in the US) do so hoping to avoid ever having to see action, rather than looking forward to killing for their country
you'd lose that bet