Further Thought on the Permanent War Economy

The US has been in 74 wars in Third World Countries since World War II (Grossman, 2001, p. 1).

Dekker (1991) described a “permanent war economy,” one that feeds on aggressive intrusion into other people’s lives and countries – and the greed addiction that underlies a nation’s being continuously at war as a means of bolstering its financial well being. (These violations are analogous to the boundary violations of children routinely practiced under the aegis of socialization.)

Shainberg (1987) commented on the human propensity for war:

Look at the vortex of the nuclear arms race as a vortex arising out of the greed of human beings who are isolated in their separate selves and do not feel the connection to other human beings. They are feeling a peculiar emptiness and become greedy for everything they can get to fill themselves. Hence nuclear industries proliferate because they provide large amounts of money and the greed is so extensive that such people do not care what might happen from their actions. (p. 402)

These routine, seemingly unnoticed, boundary violations of government have become incorporated into our foreign policy. This policy has been transposed and amplified from European colonial policy (e.g., massive genocide of, and virulent lies [“treaties”] to, Native American populations since 1492). Based on the arrogance of the ruling class – and the concomitant manipulation of the populace, hidden under various disguises such as national security concerns – the notion that the US has a divine right to forcibly influence other nations to our way of thinking has become normalized to a great extent and goes almost unquestioned. (Though I am certain that there are many businesses that follow ethical standards and attempt to provide quality goods and services, I believe that many businesses are directly concerned with competition and exploitation. Metaphors of killing or defeating the competition are common.)

Argüelles (1975) asserted that while our first and only duty is the “development and refinement of consciousness” (p. 279), living the sacred in one’s daily life in technological civilization “is viewed as a crime and a direct threat to the very existence of society” (p. 277). This is, of course, made much more difficult for all of us when the structure of culture, the container, as it were, is itself corrupt and slanted in favor of the dominant paradigm of production and consumption that benefits only the ultra-rich, not spiritual values that incorporate the totality of humanity. This secularization of daily life is reflected in the frantic pace that many of us live, being constantly pressured and/or overwhelmed by the exigencies of a daily life.

Schmookler (1988) noted: “Civilization inevitably arose in a fragmented state, and under such circumstances, inevitably it was power and not collective human choice that ruled our common destiny. With no escape from the struggle for power, the world was rendered unsafe for most humane and gentle values” (p. 23). The constant fear of war is “anesthetized by economic well being” and we become accustomed to living in the stress of impending war – promoted by the cultural elites as necessary. “If the economy were threatened by war, we would be the most peaceful people on earth” (Henry, 1965, p. 263).