Eisenhower's Farewell Address: More than just the Military-Industrial Complex

I did a search here on ATS figuring I'd find this or something close enough but came up pretty empty.

Everyone knows the famous phrase Military-Industrial complex, some understand it better than others, some use it almost as a mantra. What has always struck me as odd is how few people know of ( or even if they do know of, pay almost no heed to) his warning that immediately follows that part. Here's a link giving the full text of the speech:

mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

The scientific-technological elite rarely gets mentioned, yet to my mind is every bit as alarming as the previous. And history has indeed proven it to be every bit as true. These researchers are not exclusively at public universities, but many are. So in addition to being beholden to their financial sponsors in government they are also in postion to shape and mold (dare we say brainwash-probably too extreme a word IMHO) young minds as well.

Regardless of one's stance on say, Global Coo-er no that was 70's into 80's, I mean Global War- er no that was 80-90's, I mean Global Climate Change (Aha! that covers all bases now!), one cannot dodge the fact that some studies have demonstrably been fudged to get "desired" results. The Hockey Stick example amongst them. This is just an example to point out just how important those research grants are and what they can buy.

This is not a uniquely US scenario either, in the USSR for instance it worked exactly the same way despite the lack of any profit motive. They even had their own nickname which took both aspects into account, the Metal Eaters Alliance. Whether you were colonel in the US Air Force or Soviet Strategic Rocket Forces you had to show acumen in getting new/more armaments for your branch if you wanted to make General; if you were a research scientist in either country and you wanted more grant money, developing new weapons was sure way to get it; and if you were an executive at a US defense manufacturer or a bureaucrat at the Soviet Ministry of Heavy Machine Building, you acquired control over more resources-ie moved up the career ladder, by bringing the scientists and the military together for the project. It works like this all over the place though the lables and the scale may differ from place to place.

I can't be the only one who thinks this is just too much control over too many aspects of the polity in general, finishing rant to catch my breath.

Old Dwight D. Eisenhower knew the score. If only the American nation had paid heed to his last address then they and the rest of the world might not be in the mess that is the life we currently seem to live.

Freedom from the totalitarian oligarchy and the Military–industrial complex is both recommended and required or we are all screwed!

reply to post by andy06shake


Sometimes, I wish I was just stupidly addicted to daytime TV and all the other lemming-esque bread-and-circus diversions. Sadly, I actually care. 8>D

Perhaps one day Dwight's warnings will be taught in schools, this ought to be as mandatory as the Gettysburgh address. I never knew a word of it until college when I went and found it on my own.

*blink blink* *smash forehead on desk*

I hate to admit it, but I had never seen the full text, nor watched the actual broadcast which can be seen in full here

www.youtube.com...

I mean, forget Nostradamus or Edgar Cayce, Dwight spelled it out in full detail on a national broadcast. And we LET IT HAPPEN ANYWAY!

I'm very well read, bright enough to be conversant on a lot topics - even ones that have nothing to do with NFL Football!- and I am a bit embarassed to admit I'd never seen/read the whole thing. Even as an admitted Abe Lincoln fanboy, yeah, this needs to be taught BEFORE the Gettysburgh Address IMHO. I just the spent the better part of an hour reading and then watching it and I doubt anyone could have spelled it out clearer.

reply to post by HabiruThorstein


Great speech!

English is not my first language, and must admit that I am having a hard time understading your points on the scientific-technological elite, and how it relates to the quote. Could you dumb it down a bit?


Either way - thank you for sharing the full quote.

really ???
none of you guys had heard/seen this previously ??

'bows head in shame' ... i sincerely apologize, i thought it was common knowledge
thanks to all of you for making me aware that such important speeches should be heard again and again and again ... just like Gen Cleburne's.

reply to post by Honor93


I had only ever seen the rather small portion that was specific to the military-industrial complex part. I had never bothered to read/watch further and see that he also pointed out what was then the newfound power of public grant money over the scientific research community amongst other influences.

I take no offense for your just incredulity, I assure you. This just isn't something I'd have ever thought I'd have overlooked so yes, forehead smash to desk was me being kind to myself.

reply to post by Snoil

incredulity ?? a bit strong don't ya think?
i never said i wasn't willing to believe the youth of today hadn't seen it ... but, i saw it when it aired.

it made a profound impact on me then and i'm glad it's still doing the same, this many years later. please, share.

by all means, be kind to yourself and while your at it ...
enjoy some of Ike's lesser known quotes

“I like to believe that people in the long run are going to do more to promote peace than our governments. [color=amber]Indeed, I think that people want peace so much that one of these days governments had better get out of the way and let them have it.”

“Dollars and guns are no substitutes for brains and will power”

“Motivation is the art of getting people to do what you want them to do because they want to do it.”

source ... thinkexist.com...

you might find this of equal interest ... www.commentarymagazine.com... ... or this ... (i can't view the video but i do remember the beginning of campaign 'commercials')

"It’s Time for a Change"
[haven't we heard this one before]

In 1952, there was no precedent in presidential elections for the use of television "spot" advertising—short commercials that generally run between twenty seconds and a minute. Governor Thomas Dewey, declaring spots "undignified," rejected their use in his 1948 presidential campaign. In 1952, most campaign strategists preferred thirty-minute blocks of television time for the broadcast of campaign speeches. What distinguished Eisenhower’s campaign from Stevenson’s was that it relied more on spot ads than on speeches. The campaign pioneered their use with a series of ads titled "Eisenhower Answers America."

source ... www.livingroomcandidate.org...

reply to post by Honor93


I suppose I could have used the word 'surprise' but honestly, I truly can't believe I'd never bothered to dig deeper than the standard clip that everyone knows quite well, so both a) no offense intended and b) thanks for the additional material! I guess I was projecting my own incredulity that I'd left a nugget of nearly prophetic wisdom like this on the shelf for so long. This thread has me re-evaluating Dwight quite a bit

Then again, I read about 90% of Heinlein's stuff before reading Stranger in a Strange Land so maybe I subconsciously save the meaty stuff for last

Off to explore those links you dropped and best to you and yours

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 scientific-technological elite. 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.
..........THIS..............

Originally posted by Snoil
reply to post by Honor93

 

I suppose I could have used the word 'surprise' but honestly, I truly can't believe I'd never bothered to dig deeper than the standard clip that everyone knows quite well, so both a) no offense intended and b) thanks for the additional material! I guess I was projecting my own incredulity that I'd left a nugget of nearly prophetic wisdom like this on the shelf for so long. This thread has me re-evaluating Dwight quite a bit

Then again, I read about 90% of Heinlein's stuff before reading Stranger in a Strange Land so maybe I subconsciously save the meaty stuff for last

Off to explore those links you dropped and best to you and yours

edit on 11-12-2012 by Snoil because: typo

no offense taken but that word (incredulity) was a surprise all the same
i'm glad this thread didn't serve to dismiss Ike's assertions as i believe there is no reasonable argument that can stand against them.
and scary enough, history has proven him correct on more than one issue.

you are quite welcome for the incredulous response if it motivates you to learn something new.
i am rather happy to oblige
if you need more suggestions/references, please ask.

Originally posted by Mads1987
reply to post by HabiruThorstein

 

Great speech!

English is not my first language, and must admit that I am having a hard time understading your points on the scientific-technological elite, and how it relates to the quote. Could you dumb it down a bit?

Either way - thank you for sharing the full quote.

Yeah, I'll be happy to try to as best I can-and if anyone out there catches anything I miss, please chime in.

What Dwight was trying to point out was that scientific and engineering research and development were becoming dependent on ever larger sums of money, and that more and more often that money was coming from the governemnt. Not private individuals or independent researchers. Now, once the government and big money researchers and developers start working together, their priorities can change because they could become dependent on each other. Let's a fictitious example:

Congressman John has a company in his district that researches and develops new metal alloys. Congressman John is also a member of the House Defense committee and knows that the Army wants lighter, stronger, faster vehicles. He uses his influence in Congress to get this company's research department a large amount of grant money. Because of this extra help, they hire 50 new engineers and scientists and buy a lot of new equipment and 1 year later they make a breakthrough and sell this to the Army, making lots of money for the company.

Now, 1 year after that, Congressman John runs for re-election. The company really likes what he did for them and donate a big amount of money to his campaign, and because he's got a lot of money for his campaign and he can tell the voters he got new jobs for the area, he gfets elected again. The Army likes that he helped them get better vehicles, and John is on the Defense Committee again.

The company then hears the Navy wants new materials for their ships. They call Congressman John and tell him they want the contract to make the new stuff for the Navy, and if they don't get the contract, they have to lay off the 50 guys they hired a couple years ago. So John now uses his leverage to get the company another contract.

Pretty soon, all the parties have lost their objectivity. The Company and John work together for each other. John doesn't need to pay attention to other concerns from his voting district because he can always depend on this company to get him enough money to win re-election, the Company doesn't need to produce things for the regular consumer because they can make so much just by getting money from the government and John will see to it that they get lots of contracts for the engineers and research grant money for the scientists.

Obviously this happens on a much wioder scale with large multi-national defense contractors in the real world, who might have 20-30 or even more congress districts in which they have either factories or research and development facilities. And it also is not just military money, any and all kinds of research are more expensive than ever.

So another example might be that a certain area has a resource the locals would like to mine. However the company that owns the mining rights knows that if they wait 10 years, the mine would be worth 100 times what it is right now due to increasing scarcity. Before the mining can take place, an environmental impact study has to take place. The local congressman gets some researchers together, tells them he has millions of dollars in research grant money for them, a lot of which they can use on whatever projects they want to pursue. But he needs them to conduct a study that will prevent the mine from being cleared to open right now. The scientists get their money, and give the congressman the result he needs. The company is happy with him so they donate lots of money to get him re-elected. The congressman is happy because the extra money helps him win his campaign. The scientists are happy because they are flush with lots of money from the taxpayers. But the taxpayers are screwed because they don't get their mining jobs with all the additional jobs it would entail, their tax money has gone to support bad research, and they don't have much of a chance electing a different congressman because he's got the big money company financing his campaigns.


PS- I only came to think about posting this because a small pet project of mine is trying to 'follow the money' in the college textbook business, which as anyojne who ever went to college knows is a scam of outrageous proportions. I went back in the 90's and it's a lot worse now. Not sure Ike's warning about the scientific-technological elite quite applies in the case of the textbook scam, but it did cause me to remember the speech the other night, thanks for all of you contributing!