Friday, October 5, 2012

Motives and realities of US foreign policy

Some have claimed that US wars are fought to profit US Business interests. I would argue that, while not completely inaccurate, this is an oversimplification that is fundamentally at odds with the broader picture of US policy.

As I wrote to a friend on the subject:

I think you're conflating a couple of largely separate issues when you talk about serving US business's profit motive and executive security powers; while it's true that the areas can overlap (it's at least arguable that politicians' connections to the energy industry [Cheney, but not just him] encouraged, but did not determine, the Iraq war {though, afterward, it's a Sovereign though not democratic Iraq that controls the energy resources, not us, and they contract with whoever they want}. There's also telecom retroactive immunity, I suppose), I'd say that private business's (partial) control of regulation and government policy is 75-95% a separate concern from the modern expansion of executive power used for defense and policing purposes. The extent to which the former premised situation is a reality is also not completely clear (business appears to be only one, non-monolithic, influence among many on government policy, though there's a common belief which I endorse, that the scales have tipped too far in favor of the power of that broad and diverse faction (industry, i.e. the US Chamber of Commerce, Business Roundtable, the financial industry lobbyists, etc).

Ryan, I guess I'm disturbed by your comment that seems to acknowledge the institutional difficulties and limitations constricting the presidency. Would it not, then, be better to help re-elect a cautious reformist like Obama who, granted, has large weaknesses and is not oppositional enough to some of the nastier powers out there and has failed on some measures of leadership, than to allow the selection of an opponent who's both ideologically and fund-raising-wise and primary-voter-wise in the pockets of the powers that you loath (on both of the issues above: economics and security policy)?

No comments:

Post a Comment