Are We Going Down Like the Soviets?

This is the provocative question Tom Engelhardt asks in his blog.

It seems we’ve finally entered the Soviet era in America.

You remember the Soviet Union, now almost 20 years in its grave.  But who gives it a second thought today?  Even in its glory years that “evil empire” was sometimes referred to as “the second superpower.”  In 1991, after seven decades, it suddenly disintegrated and disappeared, leaving the United States — the “sole superpower,” even the “hyperpower,” on planet Earth — surprised but triumphant.

Looking back, the most distinctive feature of the last years of the Soviet Union may have been the way it continued to pour money into its military — and its military adventure in Afghanistan — when it was already going bankrupt and the society it had built was beginning to collapse around it.  In the end, its aging leaders made a devastating miscalculation.  They mistook military power for power on this planet.  Armed to the teeth and possessing a nuclear force capable of destroying the Earth many times over, the Soviets nonetheless remained the vastly poorer, weaker, and (except when it came to the arms race) far less technologically innovative of the two superpowers.

The USSR had been heading for the exits for quite a while, not that official Washington had a clue.  At the moment it happened, Soviet “experts” like Secretary of Defense Robert Gates (then director of the CIA) still expected the Cold War to go on and on.  In Washington, eyes were trained on the might of the Soviet military, which the Soviet leadership had never stopped feeding, even as its sclerotic bureaucracy was rotting, its economy was tanking, budget deficits were soaring, indebtedness to other countries was growing, and social welfare payments were eating into what funds remained.  Not even a vigorous, reformist leader like Mikhail Gorbachev could staunch the rot, especially when, in the late 1980s, the price of Russian oil fell drastically.

The lessons for our present situation are surely dazzlingly obvious.

In The Roots of War and Domination I wrote: (p. 19-21)

In our time, in the United States, we have obscenely bloated military budgets, and a world-wide trade in arms that dwarfs the trade in all other products (with the possible exception of drugs), as declining portions of the society’s wealth are used for infrastructure, education, and healthcare for the poor. Other countries fall victim to this imbalance as well: the Russian economy imploded under the weight of its excessive military industrial bureaucracy. We have countries like North Korea, where nuclear missile technology co-exists with mass starvation.

There is a fateful connection between capitalism and militarism at the societal level, just as there is between addiction and violence at the local, tribal level. Force is needed to support the addiction. The relentless drive for profits and growth in the capitalist system is backed by military force; and military spending is the ready solution to capitalism’s biggest weakness – overproduction. The military-industrial complex soaks up excess capital looking for investment, and provides consumption without limits, in a vicious cycle closely analogous to drug addiction. This malignant connection is made strikingly clear, in the comic-book format book Addiction to Militarism (Andreas, 2002).

It should be recognized clearly: to maintain a military system does not actually contribute to the productive wealth of a society. True, military-industrial corporations generate profits for their investors, soaking up enormous amounts of money; and they employ a certain number of people, both in the armed forces and the civilian sector. However, they don’t contribute “goods and services” to the country’s overall economy, its infrastructure, the well-being of its people, the uplifting of the poor, or the improvement of its natural environment; nor do they contribute to the diversity and vibrancy of cultural life. From an ecological perspective, the relationship of the military system to the larger socio-economic order is parasitical: resources are drained from the productive sectors of society to feed the growth of the military system, and the inequalities inherent in a capitalist society are exacerbated enormously.

Understanding Deep Politics – From a Conference at UC Santa Cruz

Byron Belitsos, friend and publisher, writes in his blog,

“As oil gushes in the gulf, debt gushes in Greece, and blood gushes in futile conflicts in central Asia, and while the U.S. gets ready to implode from a fraud-ridden financial system…the Understanding Deep Politics conference in Santa Cruz delved deep in its quest to uncover the covert realities behind such “overt” phenomena that now dominate today’s headlines.”

The following presentations, to my mind, were most thought-provoking and far-reaching in their implications.

  • David Ray Griffin, philosopher and theologian, author of five books on 9/11, continued his meticulous dissection of omissions and deceptions in the official accounts of this crime of the century. (Wikipedia)
  • Peter Dale Scott is a former Canadian diplomat, poet and author,  who coined the concept of “deep politics” to describe the hidden undercurrents of public policies. Scott revealed how under the cover of assuring the “continuity of government” the United States executive branch has laid the foundation for the imposition of martial law, the suspension of the constitution and the mass detention of dissidents – all without congressional oversight or discussion. (Wikipedia)
  • Peter Phillips, who recently retired from organizing and publishing the annual Project Censored compilations of under-reported news – gave an over-view of provocative high-lights from the 2010 edition.
  • Ellen Brown, an attorney and author of the recent book Web of Debt, gave a most lucid and illuminating account of the intricate financial maneuvers of the “casino economy” – and outlined steps individuals and communities can take to protect their assets.
  • As a person of bi-national origin myself the most engaging presentation for me personally was by Dahlia Rasfi, MD, daughter of an Iraqi Muslim father and New York Jewish mother – who honored her parents and their respective peoples by presenting a clear-headed and warm-hearted analysis of the Mid-East conflict situation. The US occupation of Iraq and the Israeli occupation of Palestine, she averred, are expressions of the same policies of colonial domination.

As I wrote in Roots of War and Domination (p. 33):

“Imperialism and colonialism involves one dominant state or nation taking the resource base of another, and imposing their rule on the subject population, exacting tribute or taxes. Genocide, from the perspective of the dominators, is simply a strategy for removing an entire population from a certain area, and replacing it with another population, which then takes over the existing resources. The cost of maintaining the original population is reduced or eliminated by extermination.”

Astounding Connection between US Marihuana Prohibition and Mexican Drug Cartel Violence

While I, like many others, have long deplored the senseless US drug prohibition, and have been appalled by the escalating violence of the drug cartel wars south of the border, a recent Alternet article by Paul Armentano, Deputy Director of NORML (National Organization for the Reform of Marihuana Laws), opened my eyes to a connection I had not seen. While the increased violence of the cartels is an obvious reaction to the increased militarized, US-supported enforcement tactics, I had always assumed that the bulk of the immensely profitable drug trade with Mexico (and Colombia) involved cocaine (as the bulk of the Asian trade involves opium/heroin).

After all, I thought, California, along with half-a-dozen other states has legalized medical marihuana and is even now fielding an initiative to legalize recreational use. Meanwhile, cash-strapped state lawmakers are hungrily eyeing the multi-billion dollar pot economy in Mendocino and Humboldt counties, as a way to help staunch the continuing multi-billion dollar deficits in the state budget. Marihuana, I thought, is of minor importance in the cross-border traffic and Mexican gang violence. The essay by Paul Armentano has thoroughly disabused me of this illusion – and lends emphasis to the need for legalization and licensing of marihuana. Here’s what he writes:

Wire-service reports estimate that Mexico’s drug lords employ over 100,000 soldiers — approximately as many as the Mexican army — and that the cartels’ wealth, intimidation, and influence extend to the highest echelons of law enforcement and government. Where do the cartels get their unprecedented wealth and power? By trafficking in illicit drugs — primarily marijuana — over the border into the United States.

The U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy … says that more than 60 percent of the profits reaped by Mexican drug lords are derived from the exportation and sale of cannabis to the American market. … (By comparison, only about 28 percent of their profits are derived from the distribution of cocaine, and less than 1 percent comes from trafficking methamphetamine.) … Government officials estimate that approximately half the marijuana consumed in the United States originates from outside its borders, and they have identified Mexico as far and away America’s largest pot provider.

If the Obama administration wishes to once and for all reduce this unprecedented wave of Mexican drug-gang violence, then it needs to remove the drug lord’s primary source of income — and that’s marijuana trafficking. Despite 70+ years of criminal prohibition in the United States (and countless billions of dollars spent attempting to interdict marijuana at our southern border), America remains the primary destination for Mexican pot. Why? Because like it or not, Americans consume cannabis; in fact, Americans lead the world in their consumption of pot. According to a 2007 economic assessment, U.S. citizens spend $113 billion dollars annually to consume an estimated 31.1 million pounds of pot. According to the federal government, over 100 million Americans have used marijuana; over one in ten Americans do so regularly. In short, marijuana prohibition is not, and will not, reduce demand. So then it’s time to regulate the supply.  It is time to remove the production and distribution of marijuana out of the hands of violent criminal enterprises and into the hands of licensed businesses, and the only way to do that is through legalization.

For a penetrating and documented analysis of the  bigger global picture of this situation, read the book by Peter Dale Scott  Drugs, Oil and War- The United States in Afghanistan, Colombia, and Indochina (2003).

In my Roots of War and Domination (2008), I wrote the following in a simplified (perhaps simplistic) formulation of the situation:

The game of global capitalism is a game of money and power. There are multiple, overlapping conspiracies and agendas – all revolving around a fateful web of forces that define the elites’ agendas. Some refer to this as the G-O-D triangle, where G = guns and armaments, O = oil and other carbon fuels, and D = drugs and narcotics. Money flows and accumulates around all three points of the triangle (p. 37).

Legalizing marihuana consumption and regulating and taxing its sale and distribution, wouldn’t dissolve this triangle of murderous power, but it would take some of the juice out of it, restore freedom to the 100,000 pot prisoners in this country and facilitate the beneficial applications of this ancient medicinal herb.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,444 other followers