Sunday, August 19, 2012

The Forbidden Subject

It has been quite a week for politics, hasn’t it? Last weekend Mr. Romney announced his choice for a running mate, in Rep. Paul Ryan. Quite a few pundits chimed in with the observation that this was a ”bold” move. I suppose it was bold because Mr. Romney broke his usual pattern and went for someone (or something) that reflected a defined position. You have to admit he has a history of being pretty wishy-washy. Even when he ventures out to a clearly defined position, either he or one of his close aids ends up “walking it back”, as the news guys say. At least Rep. Paul Ryan has helped define this race a little more clearly. There is nothing ambiguous about where Paul Ryan stands on the issue of the economy. He’s a committed fiscal ultra-conservative who went way out on a political limb last year with the “Ryan Budget”. He’s a devotee of the Ayn Rand philosophy, and he is willing to back it up with an actual proposal that reflects that philosophy.

I have been saying for some time, in several of these articles, that this election cycle is going to be a cultural crossroad. It is about clear choices, and the selection of Paul Ryan just adds some bright lines to the choice. I think that’s a good thing. For too long our Government has been too timid to actually govern, creating perpetual gridlock. Those in the Congress have failed to tackle the big issues that face our country. We do have fiscal crisis. We do have a health care crisis. We do have a government confidence crisis. We do have a leadership crisis. We have major issues to address including climate change and the environment, our evolving and complicated international relationships, better educating our youth, violence, entitlements, and the role of government in our lives. In short we are at the crossroads, and we have to do something soon. We have entered this millennium unprepared to deal with the world as it is. This election and the choices we make in November will be the start of a new direction. I doubt the ultimate course will be decided by this election, but I believe it will begin an awakening about the need to really address our future with intelligent thought- not just the political motives that have stagnated progress until now.

That being said, I began to think about the one subject that no one will even mention. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that we can’t have a meaningful discussion about any of our pressing problems, unless we talk about “it”. I haven’t heard President Obama mention it on the campaign trail. Mr. Romney and Rep. Ryan haven’t said a meaningful word about it. There is no desire in either Party, or among any current member of Congress to even speak of it- unless they use it for some self-serving platitude- or use it to cloak themselves in patriotism. The forbidden subject is: Our Military. 

Shhhhhhhhh! Oh my god! We can’t talk about our military or someone might think we are un-American, unpatriotic, weak, or just plain stupid. Can you imagine trying to get elected by questioning anything about our military? Social Security used to be the deadly “third rail” of politics- now it’s the military. But, I contend that as we begin to have serious debate about how to actually solve our problems, the time is long past due to include our military in the discussion. In case anybody gets the wrong impression right off the bat, let me make this clear from the start: this discussion has nothing to do with my regard, or anyone's regard for the men and women in uniform. It’s NOT about those who serve. It’s about our policies, and the way we view our military might as a nation. We should never again confuse the two issues like we did during, and after, the Viet Nam War.

As each of the contenders shout back and forth at each other about our economy, they talk about the aspects of the economy that make up this complicated and intertwined system.  They selectively talk about entitlement programs, deficits, taxes, discretionary spending, trade policies, job creation, Medicare and Medicaid, and welfare. But they never, ever talk about 25% of the Federal Budget that goes to the Department of Defense- over $700 billion a year. There seems to be some unspoken assumption that we can talk about every other aspect of government spending, but the military can just magically go untouched or unexamined. This may be an outgrowth of the attack we suffered on 9-11-01 by terrorists. You will recall our immediate response was to create a whole new bureaucracy in the Department Homeland Defense, and wage two wars in the Middle East- for the last eleven years. The costs of these responses were enormous in both money and lives. Even though our war death toll was relatively low (though even one unnecessay death is tragic), the number of wounded and maimed is staggering, along with the cost of caring for them. But we have still failed to come to grips with the reality that our enemies are no longer nation-states with standing armies. Our enemies are small bands of disaffected religious zealots, and political outcasts who don’t wage wars in conventional ways. The old enemies of the past are now our trading partners. At worst, they are economic adversaries. Nonetheless we pay 25 cents on every tax dollar to maintain a military that may not be needed in its current configuration.

I grant you that I’m no expert on military needs, but I am aware that we spend more on our military than practically all other countries combined (including our allies). Intuitively that doesn’t make sense to me- particularly considering the crisis we’re facing, and the needs we have as a country that are going unmet. We are the only western country that does not have universal health care- our schools rank low in the list of academic achievement world-wide, our entire infra-structure has been neglected and deteriorating for 30 years with no real investment for the future, and we have a huge promise to keep to citizens who will need old age pensions and health care. The political debate is all about the “other” spending, and never about the military elephant in the living room.

Our penchant for military spending is about more than self-defense. Defense spending has become an all-consuming corporate monster that sucks up government contracts by having us believe we are still in the cold war with the Soviet Union- or something like it. The times have changed but the military spending binge continues. President Eisenhower warned us that this would happen in 1961 as he was leaving office, but we did not heed his warning. He said in part, “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” The entire section of that farewell speech goes on to eloquently describe in more detail how unchecked military spending and corporate influence could actually threaten the nation. He was right and we are living it. Military spending with defense contractors (spurred on by an “’army” of lobbyists) has become the golden-calf of corporate welfare. And to question our worship of this idol inevitably brings howls of “being soft” on America’s defense, and casts the questioner as an abettor to our enemies. That’s why the mere mention of military expense reductions falls on deaf (and very frightened) ears in the halls of Congress and the White House.

My hope is that if we are to have serious debates about our future and how to rationally decide on the use of precious resources, we will acknowledge and rightly include our military spending as an important part of the discussion.  At this crossroad it might be a good time to put all our issues on the table for consideration. The fix needs to include all the elements that make up our society, our economy, and our way of life, or it will never be a real solution.

Thanks for looking in.

No comments:

Post a Comment