Running head: THE PONOGRAPHY OF POWER 1

The Pornography of Power

Name

Institutional Affiliation
 THE PONOGRAPHY OF POWER 2

As journalist Scheer examines the proliferation of U.S. military bases worldwide, our

insane nuclear strategy, the moral turpitude of corporate profiteering in Iraq, and the arrogance of

our foreign policy, he exposes the growing military power of the United States. Scheer, although

a liberal, holds views reminiscent of former Republican president Eisenhower, who spoke

prophetically in his farewell address to Congress about the need to guard against the influence of

the military-industrial complex. Republicans like Ike and Nixon seem like prudent centrists in

the America of George W. Bush (Scheer, 2008). Media outlets dominated by liberals, pacifists,

and libertarians often overlook or ignore libertarian views. He says that it continues to grow

despite the shift in players and consumes national resources, and distorts political discourse. A

manifesto for reform, he claims that its foreign policy must be rethought and its military presence

should be reduced. Having changed the terms of debate through his work, a respected journalist

has now published his book.

Meanwhile, the U.S. spends more on foreign defense than the next 11 countries

combined. The priorities are skewed because that's what the lobbyists pay the politicians for.

Much of the United States military budget is wasted upon killing people who were no threat to us

until we started killing them, which caused others to want to kill us in return. The United States

engaged in a "war" in the Middle East that started back in 1947 with the formation of Israel. The

support of Israel began the conflict, which has now lasted 70 years off and on. The first Gulf War

was in 1990. The States established military bases and placed embargoes on Iraq that did nothing

but create suffering among the Iraqi people. Then came 911, and it invaded Afghanistan in 2002,

going after Osama bin Laden (Scheer, 2008). The states still have forces there fifteen years later.

It is still a training cadre in Iraq assisting the Iraqis against ISIS. It has forces in Syria and a
 THE PONOGRAPHY OF POWER 3

military "presence" throughout the Middle East. Effectively it is engaged in a "Forever War" that

could run for decades more.

There is corruption in the defense sector. Given the vast amounts of money involved and

all the moving parts, immoral participants will be swayed toward getting some of that money for

themselves, and opportunities will present themselves. From my experience working in DoD,

possible corruption was more prevalent in areas far "from the flag pole," where oversight was

challenging and many acquisitions needed to be done quickly, like during operations associated

with Iraq. There are instances of Commanders and critical leaders who are close to specific

contractors who coincidentally end up in highly paid positions working with those same

contractors on retirement. Individuals sometimes have received benefits and coincidentally

choose those proving the benefits for contracts. Some of the rules associated with contracting are

skewed to overly benefit contractors and excessively reduce their risk in ways that place the

government at a disadvantage in contracting and price negotiations.

It is an enormous scam that utilizes military support to forward an agenda to profit. Most

military spending goes to civilian contracts that produce something for the military, including

services. The majority of them are unnecessary, and the military truly does not benefit from the

billions of dollars spent on them (Scheer, 2008). For example, when Halliburton got their

military contract, it was unopposed, and there was a connection between the president, the vice

president, and Halliburton that should have disallowed that contract. The fact that there were

personal relations and a contract that was unopposed for any other bids showed that a fix could

be that easy to push for war ("weapons of mass destruction" and "those responsible for 9/11 are

in Iraq" both were proven lies). Then after that war, a civilian company profited in the billions

from it? Nobody focused on that more than they should is a massive problem in this country.
 THE PONOGRAPHY OF POWER 4

There is continued spending on unnecessary civilian contracts with the military. Americans pay

20 times more for a wrench because of a military contract. So the wrenches you just purchased

by an army contract for our Marines were made in our enemy's country? Then who profits. That

wealthy American who put the money in the right pocket got a contract for overpriced wrenches

that made one rich American more money. Then China benefits from those military contracts.

So, military spending is a budget inflamed by overspending so rich people can make more

money from taxpayers and then get their tax cuts and hide their profits overseas. The real issue is

that most Americans have no clue about "military spending" and how much these civilian

companies profit. They are simply okay with it as long as they are being told that "it is for the

military" government programming takes over  

The good part is that the vast majority of the players in the defense sector are extremely

honest, amazingly dedicated people who have devoted their careers and their lives to serving the

United States. There are strict rules against corruption, and when someone is caught, the

penalties are severe (Scheer, 2008). The Defense Sector is amazingly complex, much different

than most one-dimensional businesses, where success can be measured by profit. It is often at the

cutting edge of applying the cultural change, such as diversity and equal opportunity. It is driven

by politics, where a change in leadership or the public mood can completely change the mission

overnight. It is expected to be at the cutting edge of technology, which is extremely expensive

and criticized for being so costly. Volumes of regulations are necessary to comply with the

requirements mandated by social, technical, business, and other interests, which adds cost. It is

criticized for not being nimble or cheap enough.

Since it would drive the deficit through the roof, the defense budget is $700 billion. Cut

that in half, and you're nowhere near the $3.2 trillion annual costs of Medicare. Without finding a
 THE PONOGRAPHY OF POWER 5

way to pick up more revenue, you'd quadruple a yearly deficit that is already far too high. And

that's before dealing with the fact that the $3.2 trillion estimate includes cutting the

reimbursements that private payers are currently making to providers by 40%. The government

now pays for about half of healthcare in this country, so we're being asked to believe that we can

cut the money going not to insurance providers but providers by 20% and maintain current

standards of care.

Over half the military budget goes to the personnel accounts. These accounts pay salaries

for active duty, reservists, and government civilians, not to mention paying retirement pensions

for decades after the servicepersons retire. In most cases, the wages are competitive with the

private sector, and the benefits are often better: free medical, free dental, and free prescription

drugs for the whole family (Scheer, 2008). Research, development, and prototype testing all are

costly, but it's not even one-third of the personnel costs. The irony is universal healthcare, as

implemented by all developed countries, is cheaper and more efficient than the patchwork of

private and government-provided healthcare in the U.S. The life expectancy in the U.S. is lower

than in all other developed countries with universal healthcare. American healthcare is a business

to make as much money as possible. For example, in Britain, the National Health Service (NHS),

paid for out of taxation, provides the vast majority of healthcare to everyone, rich and poor,

young and old. There is no co-pay or insurance companies denying payment for spurious

reasons. Health care and education would come back, but too late to save the U.S. from being a

third-world failure. The world would be a safer place without U.S. wars of aggression (We need

to reduce the military by half immediately and have them do the only job they were supposed to

do; defend the United States (instead of genocidal wars for the profit of the military-industrial

complex).
 THE PONOGRAPHY OF POWER 6

The root of the problem is that the country's spending priorities have significantly shifted

from spending more money on valuable things for the general population to spending more

money on the military-industrial complex and useless and endless wars so that very few

individuals could increase their wealth. If you couple that with the lack of regulation of

healthcare and education costs, it's no wonder the U.S. does not rank high in those things but

spends more money on the military than the next ten countries combined (Scheer, 2008).

Statistics about the "low" U.S. spending on the military as a percentage of its GDP are

meaningless because when it comes to federal budget allocation, way too much is spent on the

military that could be spent elsewhere, including spending to alleviate poverty. The most

significant number of ICU beds is a good thing. However, it still doesn't justify America's overall

healthcare performance in healthcare, which is still below that of many other countries. It can't

justify the highly inflated costs for routine healthcare services and health insurance costs for

many.

Liberals have been calling for a realignment of budget priorities from the military to

socially beneficial things like health, education, and infrastructure for just about forever. But the

military-industrial complex is powerful in America. About 15%, but that's somewhat misleading.

In the first place, for example, our department of veterans affairs, an agency for the treatment

and care of our military injured and wounded and the families of our military dead, plus post-

service education and some few other things, is clearly in support of our military and has a

budget more significant than the military budgets of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain

combined. In the second place, the budget for nuclear weapons, which is not large, does not fall

under defense. In the third place, we do not count things like the CIA and NSA, which include
 THE PONOGRAPHY OF POWER 7

the recon satellites that aid the military. Finally, nearly every state in the union also has a small

defense budget.

War is one of the most expensive activities a government can engage in, not just in

casualties but monetarily. War was the primary reason for government debt until Keynesian

economic stimulus and progressive entitlements surpassed it. Without the ability to defray the

cost of war, governments would be forced to raise taxes to pay for it (Scheer, 2008). This would

ensure that wars would be brief and seldom as the people would grow weary of the excessive tax

burden. Granting itself the authority to issue debt allows a government to engage in prolonged

wars with more minor protests from its people. It also allows a government to maintain a much

larger standing army than the people would otherwise allow. Our government has been in a near-

perpetual state of military conflict ever since World War II. Most of these engagements have

been relatively small "police actions" (at least compared to WWI and WWII). Regardless of the

size and scope of each conflict, they are always expensive.

As for poverty, welfare programs have proven ineffective at reducing the poverty rate.

This is partly because the programs are designed to treat the symptoms of poverty rather than

the causes. Instead of giving people the help they need to avoid poverty and helping those

already in poverty to escape it, welfare programs are only accessible to those already in poverty,

and they only serve to prolong it by making it more bearable than cutting off financial support if

a person attempts to better their situation. Of course, the real cause of poverty is lack of

employment and insufficient wages. This brings me to my next point.

Another reason welfare programs are ineffective is the self-defeating regulatory burden

imposed by federal, state, and even local governments. Overregulation has created a considerable

barrier to entrepreneurialism. The more complicated and expensive it is to start a business, the
 THE PONOGRAPHY OF POWER 8

fewer jobs there will be and the less competition the established businesses have to contend with.

This reduced competition simultaneously encourages higher prices and lower wages. It's just

common sense (Scheer, 2008). If anything can be done to reduce poverty, our government at

every level is doing the exact opposite of what it should be doing.

It seems like the states spend way too much on the military compared to other countries.

However, that is essentially a mirage. It is responsible for the ultimate security of several nations.

It is the world's hegemonic power, and we are engaged in several small to medium-sized military

conflicts and geopolitical machinations worldwide. The U.S. Navy and Air Force are responsible

for the free flow of goods and services worldwide. After WWII, international economic

prosperity was secured and supported by the U.S. Naval and Air Forces. The U.S. has always

faced difficulty whenever we hastily cut defense spending and downsize the military. A good

example of that was the strife faced during the beginning stages of the Korean War. The states

need to have an overwhelmingly powerful military because it is a large, rich, and inherently

powerful nation with various global interests. Russia spends more on its military as a percentage

of GDP because it is a vast nation with international interests. Ditto for China, India, and Saudi

Arabia. Some argue that we need soldiers everywhere to protect our 'interests' abroad. Others

who voiced similar arguments included the British empire, the Soviet empire, and Germany

during their rise. Those nations realized too late that their interests abroad, or anywhere for that

matter, were not served by over-extending their militaries and bankrupting their empires

internally. 

In conclusion, Sheer (the author) analyzes our military expansion throughout the world,

our nuclear strategies, our immorality in profiting from Iraq, and our arrogance in foreign affairs.

In spite of Scheer's liberal views, his views echo those of former Republican president General
 THE PONOGRAPHY OF POWER 9

Dwight Eisenhower, who warned against the growing influence of the military-industrial

complex in his farewell speech to the American people. The governing classes of George W.

Bush's America look like the conservatives like Ike and Richard Nixon. The conservative and

liberal debate aims at changing the debate on whether the military budget expenditure has to be

reduced or not.
 THE PONOGRAPHY OF POWER 10

Reference

Scheer, R. (2008). The pornography of power: How defense hawks hijacked 9/11 and Weakened

America. Twelve.