by Chalmers Johnson, Tomdispatch.com, July 27, 2008
Most Americans have a rough idea what the term "military-industrialcomplex" means when they come across it in a newspaper or hear apolitician mention it. President Dwight D. Eisenhower introduced theidea to the public in his farewell addressof January 17, 1961. "Our military organization today bears littlerelation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime," hesaid, "or indeed by the fighting men of World War II and Korea We havebeen compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vastproportions We must not fail to comprehend its grave implications Wemust guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whethersought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex."
From its origins in the early 1940s, when President Franklin DelanoRoosevelt was building up his "arsenal of democracy," down to thepresent moment, public opinion has usually assumed that it involvedmore or less equitable relations -- often termed a "partnership" --between the high command and civilian overlords of the United Statesmilitary and privately-owned, for-profit manufacturing and serviceenterprises. Unfortunately, the truth of the matter is that, from thetime they first emerged, these relations were never equitable. >>Read More
Chalmers Johnson is the author of three linked books on the crises of American imperialism and militarism. They are Blowback (2000), The Sorrows of Empire (2004), and Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic (2006). All are available in paperback from Metropolitan Books.