A Peace Strategy for Warmongers

The political barriers to getting humane economic policy through Government House or Senate or Wall Street or whatever it’s called in your country appear to be formidable. In confronting this reality, Mike Norman may have come up with a winning strategy when he notes that Americans have no problem with a single payer in the case of defense, so why not health care? At the very least, this observation could have legs with the bloodthirstier electorates of the world. The applications seem endless.

All we need do is recast each policy area in militaristic or violent terms and classify them as defense. For instance, education could be the ‘Battle for Brains’; protecting the environment, ‘Disappearing Pollution’; full-employment policy, ‘Sabotaging Unemployment’; and basic income, ‘Waterboarding Wage Slavery’.

Health care could be a ‘Preemptive Strike on Illness’; childcare, an ‘Annihilation of Babysitters’; aged care, a ‘Forced Evacuation of Granny Flats’.

Funding public television could be re-framed as the ‘War on Zombie TV’; a bigger arts budget, the ‘War on Conformity’; and spending on sports, the ‘War on Free Weekends’.

Protection of free speech could fly as an ‘Assault on Censorship’; the broadening of civil rights, a pincer movement to ‘Smash the Police State’; and progressive legal reform, ‘Operation Sweet Infinite Justice’.

Infrastructure investment could be ‘A Bridge Too Far’; research and development to speed up mechanization, a foray down the ‘Road to Surfdom’; and publicly funded dissident activity to undermine the profit system, ‘Class War’.

Simultaneously, steep tax hikes on the 1 percent could go under the banner ‘Kill Bill’.

Best of all, world peace could be established with the delisting of all military personnel, dismantling of military bases and disarming of every nation in a monumental ‘War on War’.


5 thoughts on “A Peace Strategy for Warmongers

  1. As usual, an excellent post by Ruccio. I actually retweeted that one, which is a rarity. My tweeting activity is exceedingly minimalist.

    You know, the first-year textbook in my undergraduate days was one by Rudiger Dornbusch and Stanley Fischer. We learned the IS-LM model. I don’t suppose this is enough to gain a spot on the family sofa. Mind you, that textbook was a big step up from the one we were expected to teach from by the time we began “tutoring” the next generation of hapless victims: Mankiw’s Principles. The education system has gone to hell.

  2. Given that the line is always ‘the market says this’ and ‘the market says that’, I’d suggest they are already into false idols at least and probably false gods.

    Deification and sacrifice to false gods are the memes we have to challenge.

  3. Pope Francis is already on it. He recently trashed “the prosperity gospel” as pagan. I’m sure these people are ballistic over it. A good outcome for policy is that it is lending strength to the peace and justice movement and breaking the alliance between conservative Catholics and Evangelicals, which has been a major factor in US politics and policy.

    Pope Francis is also wisely disavowing “Marxism” too. Looking back is not the way forward. We need a fresh approach suitable to the unique challenges of our times that incorporates the new knowledge that has unfolded since the 19th century. Unfortunately, a lot of the controversy is still in terms of 18th and 19th century thinking.

    Development of knowledge and technology have proceeded apace, but the dispersal of knowledge has not kept pace with the dispersal of technology. That means that raw power greatly exceeds distributed knowledge of how to use it, and few controls are in place. This has led to emergent challenges that humanity as the potential to meet with existing knowledge but not the existing ability to use it. Dangerous.

Comments are closed.