Too often, the so-called "War Party," an unholy alliance between the military-industrial complex and the politicians in Washington, has called the shots in regard to US foreign policy. However, never before has the War Party been so vocal in its open propaganda of the benefits of war. After the publication of Tyler Cowen's latest piece, The New York Times can safely be labeled a fully Orwellian publication.
In Orwell's dystopian world, war is peace, ignorance is strength and freedom is slavery. In Cowen's world, war means prosperity and peace means poverty and economic stagnation. The fundamental lie on which the NYT's article is built is so outrageous that it is hard to understand how anyone with even a modicum of common sense could believe it. The core assertion, presented by War Party propagandists, can be found in this quote: "An additional explanation of slow growth is now receiving attention, however. It is the persistence and expectation of peace."
So, in the NYT's world, peace is bad and the expectation of peace is even worse because it hampers economic growth. The inevitable conclusion is that war is good and the author of the article agrees with this logic, saying that "War brings an urgency that governments otherwise fail to summon. For instance, the Manhattan Project took six years to produce an atomic bomb, starting from virtually nothing, and at its peak consumed 0.4 percent of American economic output. It is hard to imagine a comparably speedy and decisive achievement these days."
War is, by definition, a process of asset destruction. Buildings are razed, members of the workforce are killed or disabled, production circuits are destroyed. Any scientific progress, resulting from war, is a mere byproduct that can't cover even a tiny fraction of the economic losses incurred because of a major war. What the War Party propaganda is trying to tell American citizens is that America needs a new global war in order to rejuvenate its economy and save it from collapse. The US used this trick successfully in two global wars of the past century and are now trying to ignite a new war in which assets around the world will be destroyed while Washington remains unscathed.
In this scenario, a big global war is good for the US economy because it destroys competitors to the US' companies and transforms entire countries into economic colonies of US capital. It is easy to see that the wars and civil unrest in Syria, Egypt, Libya, Iraq and Ukraine fit perfectly into this strategy of burning the rest of the world to the ground for the sake of saving the ailing American economy.
In this context, the American strategy of making the European Union give up its commercial ties with Russia and engage in an expensive and futile confrontation with Moscow is a clever ploy to help the creation of a new global conflict in which the US will be the main winner and sole beneficiary. However, despite the efforts of American propaganda, the world has learned its lessons from the 20th century. It is unlikely that Washington will manage to start a new global conflict and remains unharmed.
Read more:
http://voiceofrussia.com/2014_06_15/US- ... pert-5682/
