This practice, used partly to gain public confidence, has been around for centuries.
Apart from all the sacrifices of life, liberty, and treasure that wars have entailed directly, wars have also served as the prime occasions for the growth of the central state, and hence in the United States they have fostered the long-term diminution of civil and economic liberties and the ongoing subversion of civil society.
Every government recognizes that force alone is an inefficient means of propping up its position. Hence, every government seeks to ease its retention of power by persuading people that it acts only in their interest. A government that goes to war promises its subjects that it is doing so only in defense of their security and freedom.
In matters of war making, as elsewhere in its wielding of power, a government acts in the interest of its own leaders, with as many concessions as necessary to retain the support of the coalition of special-interest groups that keeps those leaders in power.
Aware of this reality, some of us steadfastly resist any claim that war will promote either liberty or security; we do not expect that notwithstanding what has almost always happened previously, nature will change its course on this particular occasion.
Can anyone seriously maintain that we Americans are now freer or more secure than we were before the sainted Franklin D. Roosevelt and his spiritual descendants took command of the ship of state and steered it into the storm of perpetual war?
Owing to the series of hot and cold military emergencies sincethe president has become, for all practical purposes, a Caesar. He now goes to war entirely at his own discretion. After all, as his spokesmen tirelessly reiterate, he is the commander in chief of the armed forces as if this fact simply wiped out the rest of the Constitution.
To the injury of all past attenuations of our rights under the Constitution, the government has now added the insult of shredding the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments.
Say good-bye to the writ of habeas corpus, the very bedrock of limited government. The government has to but whisper those two magic words, unlawful combatant, and you may be rendered as much a desaparecido as any unfortunate victim of Argentine tyranny.
I know that it has been already and will continue to be abused because its elastic language allows unscrupulous prosecutors to scratch a variety of itches completely unrelated to terrorism EggenLichtblau In the face of all this and of too much else even to mention, some people, even some self-described libertarians, persist in arguing that the price we are paying is worthwhile and that we can trust the government to act responsibly and effectively in wielding its new powers.
Neither element of that argument will bear scrutiny. The history of U. No one of sound mind can suppose that it will even try, much less that it will succeed. This adventure, like so much else that the government undertakes, is a gigantic hoax, and all too much of it verges on racketeering of the sort described by the legendary Marine general Smedley Butler.
Not for a moment. We should scarcely need any special sources to understand these matters, but the government and its handmaidens in the news media have worked hard to obscure them and to persuade us that black is white.
In particular, see Bovard and Hentoff The most authoritative source on the neoconservative neocon zealots who have operated at the highest levels of the Pentagon hierarchy is Lt. Kwiatkowski, now retired from the Air Force, has written many articles that are accessible on the World Wide Web.
Among many other informative sources on the neocon schemers, see especially Lobe a, b, and From Country Giant to Prisoner of War: President George M. Weah Surrendered to the Economic logjam By Alfred P.B. Kiadii In the wake of the worsening economic condition, the lowering of living standards, the scaling down of investment, the implacable unemployment and permanent inflation that are taking a toll on the mass of people in the homeland, the people have slammed the Weah government.
In the last few weeks, over , Rohingya Muslims have fled a bloody pogrom in Myanmar’s Rakhine state, crossing into Bangladesh. Among the horrified and largely moralistic reactions in the West, some have pointed to economic factors supposedly behind these events.
The Legacy of War on the Economy. There are occasions when the end of a war can lead to recession. In the Napoleonic Wars, Britain had a huge increase in military spending. National debt as a % of GDP increased to % (Triple current borrowing levels).
However, at the end of the Napoleonic wars, many soldiers were demobilised. The war on drugs is a campaign, led by the U.S. federal government, of drug prohibition, military aid, and military intervention, with the stated aim being to reduce the illegal drug trade in the United States.
The initiative includes a set of drug policies that are intended to discourage the production, distribution, and consumption of psychoactive drugs that the participating governments and.
INTRODUCTION. While many Americans continue to struggle with unemployment and financial distress in the aftermath of the Wall Street crisis of the late s, it is increasingly recognized that these acute problems are symptomatic of deeper negative trends in our economy, decades in the making.
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.