Whatever Happened to Eisenhower's Warning?

[MylesBAstor]

 

[RogerD]

Myle's that horse has been around the galaxy twice since it left the Barn. You think Ike had second thoughts about the Dulles boys? A great speech,but once they killed JFK,the nation was screwed.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Money happened.

Tim

 

[jazdoc]

Famous, but often quoted out of context. Worth reviewing in its entirety:

Military-Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960, p. 1035- 1040

My fellow Americans:

Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.

This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.

Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.

Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation.

My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.

In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.

II.

We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, 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.

III.

Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.

Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology -- global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger is poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle -- with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.

Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research -- these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.

But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs -- balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage -- balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.
The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.

IV.

A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.

Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; 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.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. 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 militaryindustrial 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.

Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present

and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientifictechnological elite.

It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.

V.

Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we -- you and I, and our government -- must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.

VI.

Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.

Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.

Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war -- as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years -- I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.

Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.

VII.

So -- in this my last good night to you as your President -- I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find some things worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.

You and I -- my fellow citizens -- need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nation's great goals.

To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing aspiration:

We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Famous, but often quoted out of context. Worth reviewing in its entirety:

To that point, one must also consider everything within the context of USSR relations which hit its nadir with the downing of Francis Gary Powers.

That said, I don't see how the video really takes it out of context. A very powerful speech that stands for the ages.

 

[mep]

Everything that Ike warned us about has come true. Another point is that the revolving door with high ranking Defense officials both civilian and military leaving their jobs and joining major defense companies actually has a high speed motor on it.

 

[zztop7]

"war is a river of gold"

"WAR IS A RIVER OF GOLD"

This is a very old quote. Many people have used it. History of destructive mankind should get the negative credit.

zz.

 

[NorthStar]

I'd say; War is a River of Blood.

 

[zztop7]

I'd say; War is a River of Blood.

Very astute.

zz

 

[NorthStar]

Ty.

 

[rblnr]

An anecdote about that. Todd Snider is a really talented and funny singer/songwriter -- 'the Devil You Know' is definitely worth picking up.

Turns out Rahm Emanuel is a fan and Snider mentioned to him that he wanted to write a song about power of the military/industrial complex. Emanuel said to him that if you really want to write something about the power in Washington, write something about the bankers.

Eisenhower left a trove of great thoughts and quotes directly applicable to conflicts going on in our society now on a number of subjects. Here's some of them, definitely worth the tap or click:

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/d/dwight_d_eisenhower.html

Here's a sample:

We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security.
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/d/dwightdei136350.html#l0tsTsOJEqed84Rh.99

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Can't see that it changes much in context, but it has changed with time. The cold war is over. We're now trying to continue to float a huge industry, that is a substantial chunk of the American economy by meddling in the affairs of sovereign nations and pursuing an international criminal problem as if it were a war between sovereign nations.

I've said it before: Every developed nation on the planet is some mix of socialism and free market capitalism. Ours leans toward free market capitalism but is, essentially, the same as Sweden and the UK -- a hybrid. But in our near-worship of markets, I think we have made a handful of serious mistakes that are a greater threat to our nation than any foreign power. There are some things that simply should not be profit-motivated. They require vision that sees past ROI and restraint that sees many things as more important than building shareholder equity. I usually use healthcare as an example because it is often the center of this conversation. Another great example is education. If you are very familiar with "for-profit" colleges, it's not hard to see how badly free market capitalism compromises education. But this may be the best example of all. War for profit shouldn't even be a possibility. It is incredibly dangerous and has probably ruined more lives than the worst educations, taken more lives than the most negligent healthcare. Unfortunately, at this point, maybe even at the point when Ike made that speech, it was far too late. It can't be stopped. It can only self-destruct.

Tim

 

[Mosin]

Can't see that it changes much in context, but it has changed with time. The cold war is over. We're now trying to continue to float a huge industry, that is a substantial chunk of the American economy by meddling in the affairs of sovereign nations and pursuing an international criminal problem as if it were a war between sovereign nations. I've said it before: Every developed nation on the planet is some mix of socialism and free market capitalism. Ours leans toward free market capitalism but is, essentially, the same as Sweden and the UK -- a hybrid. But in our near-worship of markets, I think we have made a handful of serious mistakes that are a greater threat to our nation than any foreign power. There are some things that simply should not be profit-motivated. They require vision that sees past ROI and restraint that sees many things as more important than building shareholder equity. I usually use healthcare as an example because it is often the center of this conversation. Another great example is education. If you are very familiar with "for-profit" colleges, it's not hard to see how badly free market capitalism compromises education. But this may be the best example of all. War for profit shouldn't even be a possibility. It is incredibly dangerous and has probably ruined more lives than the worst educations, taken more lives than the most negligent healthcare. Unfortunately, at this point, maybe even at the point when Ike made that speech, it was far too late. It can't be stopped. It can only self-destruct. Tim

Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.
~ Benito Mussolini

It cuts both ways, doesn't it? Catch-22

 

[MylesBAstor]

Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.
~ Benito Mussolini

It cuts both ways, doesn't it? Catch-22

I'm not so sure the Cold War is over. Putin doesn't think so given he's an old KGB agent.

 

[Mosin]

I'm not so sure the Cold War is over. Putin doesn't think so given he's an old KGB agent.

Yep, he's the Russian equivalent of George Bush, Sr., if you think about it.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.
~ Benito Mussolini

It cuts both ways, doesn't it? Catch-22

It does. The merger of state and corporate power is, of course, what we have, not only in the military-industrial complex, but in the overwhelming infusion of corporate money and influence into politics, and the inevitable quid pro quo that has followed. But Fascism is not a word we can use casually, or even appropriately, since the middle of the last century, and some merger of state and corporate power is inevitable in our economic system. But the merger has lost all balance and reason; that's the problem. The representative democracy no longer represents the electorate and publicly-traded companies and their lobbyists threaten to become the oligarchs of the new century.

Tim

 

[Mosin]

It does. The merger of state and corporate power is, of course, what we have, not only in the military-industrial complex, but in the overwhelming infusion of corporate money and influence into politics, and the inevitable quid pro quo that has followed. But Fascism is not a word we can use casually, or even appropriately, since the middle of the last century, and some merger of state and corporate power is inevitable in our economic system. But the merger has lost all balance and reason; that's the problem. The representative democracy no longer represents the electorate and publicly-traded companies and their lobbyists threaten to become the oligarchs of the new century.

Tim

We do need to keep the concept of Fascism in our minds. It's a dangerous game that is played for keeps. If you are wrong, we are screwed.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

We do need to keep the concept of Fascism in our minds. It's a dangerous game that is played for keeps. If you are wrong, we are screwed.

Wrong about what? I think if I'm right we're screwed. In fact, I think we've already been screwed and just haven't noticed it yet. I'd love to be wrong. I'd love to think that the government still represents the will of the people for the good of the people, but I don't think it does. If Fascism is the merger of state and corporate power, we already have it. And it continues to be fed, even by the so-called "socialist" currently in power. But with that said, I think that F word implies much more, has taken on much more meaning, and that's why we cannot throw it around casually.

Tim

 

[MylesBAstor]

We do need to keep the concept of Fascism in our minds. It's a dangerous game that is played for keeps. If you are wrong, we are screwed.

Or, "Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionists and rebels - men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine. As their heirs, may we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion." - Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

[Mosin]

Wrong about what? I think if I'm right we're screwed. In fact, I think we've already been screwed and just haven't noticed it yet. I'd love to be wrong. I'd love to think that the government still represents the will of the people for the good of the people, but I don't think it does. If Fascism is the merger of state and corporate power, we already have it. And it continues to be fed, even by the so-called "socialist" currently in power. But with that said, I think that F word implies much more, has taken on much more meaning, and that's why we cannot throw it around casually.

Tim

Yep, maybe the Catch-22 I mentioned earlier does apply.

Or, "Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionists and rebels - men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine. As their heirs, may we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion." - Dwight D. Eisenhower

Is that a disappearing breed, though? The word complacency can be a scary as the word Fascism.