Rethinking patriotic dogma...

Posted by deBohun 6 years, 9 months ago to Culture
20 comments | Share | Flag

$Q: "Multinational corporations have a profound interest in cheerleading for war and in the deification of those sent to execute it. For many of these corporations, the U.S. military is essentially a private army dispatched around the world as needed to protect their investments and to open new markets."

I am surprised to find myself linking to a second article from Salon.com. Salon is not an organization that I have much respect for. Since Glen Greenwald exited to the London Guardian, it is mostly staffed by Neocons, neo-Trotskyites (or do I repeated myself?), and nihilist whim worshippers. This article is worth your time however, but with this caveat: it may offend you and challenge many of the things you think you know and which you believe you know to be correct and moral—but you should let it. A mind that is not willing to engage, especially in private reading, with challenging ideas is the most closed. I would hope this is case on this site.

Let me also say upfront, it is not my intention to accuse or cast a guilty light upon anyone in the military or their families. We all travel our own journeys, based on the roads that were open to us at the time we made each choice. If we have at some point made a turn based on limited or wrong information, well that was not our fault if that information was withheld from us. We all do the best we can with tools we have available. The challenge though, is to be willing to do better once we have better tools and better information.

It is not a long article. Indeed, I hope you spend much longer thinking about it than reading it...

http://www.salon.com/2013/08/25/no_thank...
SOURCE URL: http://www.salon.com/2013/08/25/no_thanks_i_wont_support_the_troops/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ kathywiso 6 years, 9 months ago
    Well, I have to say I can NOT believe I read this whole line of bull. Yes, I Support Our Troops. I happen to know a whole unit that is returning home this Saturday from Afghanistan, they have given it all to defend this country in war. I will be there to let them all know that I appreciate what they have done. Freedom is what these soldiers have dedicated their life for and it is what they have achieved. I am Proud of Each and Every One of Them !!!!!!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by 6 years, 9 months ago
    I'm guessing by the terse, emotional responses, that less time was put into consideration of the ideas than to the reading of the post or article. I'm curious, of those who responded, who is familiar with Smedley Darrlington Butler, the Businessmen's Putsch, and Butler's famous speech, "War is a Racket"? ( http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=F3_EXqJ8f-0... )

    The reason I ask is, if it is not acceptable to ask one man to live his life for another, or to do the same yourself, how does one justify a mercenary military paid for on the backs of taxpayers for the almost exclusive benefit of corporations or special interests? Butler hinted at these questions almost 80 years ago and they remain without rational, internally consistant response. I would have thought that given Rand's philosophy and process, such questions would at least receive serious discussion here.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ johnrobert2 6 years, 9 months ago
      You have basically misread the intent of John Galt's famous words. There was never any thought of denial of sacrifice. If the person making a/the sacrifice thought a/the sacrifice worth the cost, then they had the privilege to make it. John Galt made the same decision in part 3 when he voluntarily gave himself up to save Dagny, indeed manipulated the situation so she could escape unscathed. Military people make that same decision. They serve so their loved ones do not have to face the horrors of battle (read the last verse of the Star Spangled Banner). When those who are protected spit in the face of those who protect them, I get a tad upset. And BTW, I DID read the entire article.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 6 years, 9 months ago
        I don't think you did read it, or you wouldn't be so upset, as I clearly(!) voiced in advance NO disregard for those in the military or their families, let alone an intent to spit on them. My point, if you had read and considered the comments, links and follow-up was to ask people to question the dogma surrounding the clichéed 'fighting for our freedom' thinking when in reality we are killing to provide a free ride for corporations so to not have to pay the cost of their desire to force open markets that don't want to be opened. The Americans and British have a history of abusing their militaries in this fashion that goes back at least to China and Japan. It is not about 'protecting our freedom,' no sovereign nation's army has launched an unprovoked attacked against US territory since WWII and before that against the US proper since 1812. My comment was about protecting and supporting our men and women, by keeping them from inappropriately and abusively being put in harm's way for profit and the special interest goals of small cliques.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ johnrobert2 6 years, 9 months ago
          Did I accuse you of that viewpoint? I don't think so. I believe I said I gifted the WRITER with the privilege. Yes, I do think Eisenhower was correct in his warning of the military-industrial complex. As to the writer's premise of not glorifying our military men and women, I cannot subscribe. They are heroes in the tragic sense. I do not know if you are familiar with Rudyard Kipling but one of his poems encapsulates my unease at most of our 'adventures' in the near past:

          http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/176...
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo