Friedman's on the Military Industrial Complex

I've been pondering over the seemingly contradictory attitudes of Milton Friedman, as shown in this video, and President Eisenhower, as demonstrated by the following excerpts from his farewell speech:

"We yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.

"Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties.

"We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.

"We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

"We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• NVEExport

[16thHop]

Looking at the American wars/coups/military support during the Soviet Era started for three reasons:

- Protect Resources in certain areas(most of the conflicts in the middle east)

- Take up space in the international community with American strongmen (Suharto, South Vietnam, Seko in Zaire)

- The threat of "a good example" of a working socialist state (assassination and coup of Allende in Chile with Friedman's favorite Pinochet, most military supported terror in Latin America such as Contras)

[cjandersen]

@16thHop Your comment about Friedman's "favorite Pinochet" is such a common and absolutely ignorant statement. The question is, do you have the humility to look into this further to discover the lie that it is. Friedman wasn't a supporter of Pinochet.

[MillionthUsername]

Friedman always allowed his statism to derail him. The US military is freakishly bloated, wasteful, unaccountable, menacing. The MIC is a parasite sucking the life blood out of they dying American Empire.

And it isn't hard to defend free market alternatives to "national defense." As an economist, he should have opened his mind more. It seems like he decided to settle in many ways, making an uneasy peace with the establishment so as not to be rejected as too radical.

[cjandersen]

@MillionthUsername Bravely spoken.

[Saebeck32]

This was before Halliburton. Friedman might have a different tone today.

[jezza1789]

WOW I finally disagree with him. The Military Complex uses its influence and political power to start wars all over the world on small nations that could never touch us.

[Vyna80]

I finally found something I disagree with Friedman on.

[SrijitSanyal]

I'm surprised by the weakness of his response here. I would have expected him to say that incentives to wage war from those who invest in the military would be counterbalanced by the incentives of everyone else who invests elsewhere, whose trade would be disrupted, so long as we had a free and competitive society. The real reason for military growth has more to do with anti-foreign bias and general democratic failure. People still think we need soldiers to secure our oil supply.

[InnuendoXP]

@MillionthUsername

You know that's interesting. How it suggests that Miltons statements against all taxation and social programs could be considered to be less controversial than the privatisation of military.

The only dilemma I can really see then is to what, whom and how is a private military force kept in check or held accountable to anyone but itself if ALL militaries were private. Though of course you could very-well say that the US government isn't doing too terrific a job itself either.

[hamnose]

Milton's remarks may have been made before Haliburton but they were after Kodak lobbied for national ID cards ...after DOW lobbied to keep vets from getting recognition for illnesses caused by Agent Orange. The U.S. might not make a good hard drive but we make bombers and tanks. The MIC (along with attorney's fees) are a major portion of the GDP and the multinational corporations Milt loves so much, are the largest segment of our economy, not small business. Anybody think that's a coincidence?

[hamnose]

@cjandersen Milton called it the "Miracle of Chile". And whoa! some miracle: triple digit inflation, negative balance of trade, pathetic GDP. etc. Their social security system disappeared a year after privatizing it. And surprise! Without a civil infrastructure to provide messy non free-market things like justice and democracy, people abused their authority. Who'd a thunk it? So Milt didn't go along with that? Well, under those miraculous circumstances how do you prevent it?

[hamnose]

@tehatemachine Now "the question is do you have the humility to" admit that your post didn't make any sense. The "video author" didn't say that. That's a segment of Eisenhower's farewell speech up there and he doesn't say it either. If you are you trying to express disagreement, then say what it is. Say what "fact" or "rhetoric" you dispute. And how the hell can you say rhetoric makes me feel good? No, it doesn't make me feel good. Apparently you aren't clairvoyant. WTF

[tehatemachine]

@hamnose Like the Video Author said

"The question is, do you have the humility to look into this further to discover the lie that it is."

That in whcih you do not, Your facts are based upon rhetoric that makes you feel good.

[MatthewRider1]

A little unfair to criticize Friedman about this interview, at the time of the interview military spending wasn't as bloated as it is now. There is NO WAY Friedman would have the same position about the 36% military spending of today.

[hamnose]

"I don't believe that for a minute" ... This said at a time when we were still paying for the cost of Vietnam. And yet people listened to this snake oil salesman and like a dog to his vomit we went back to doing the same old shit with even less regulation. Horay!