The Political Sociology of Mass Society

Ever since the first invasion of Iraq, I’ve railed against the worship of the American military, despite coming from a military family. By the early 1970s, was embarrassing to be a soldier. Servicemen hid their status when going into bars and restaurants lest they be called “baby killers” or some other name. Dozens of ROTC centers went up in flames on campuses across the country.

Today, “stolen valor” has become a social issue of some importance. What happened? How did the soldier go from a pariah to a hero in a generation or two? The reason for the change is simple. It’s the nature of the enemy. In Vietnam, communism was the ostensible enemy. Contrary to popular myth, Marxism was never opposed by the ruling class. Most universities are stuffed with communist professors who lord it over dissenters with the vehemence of the Cheka he so admires. Today, its nationalism. This the ruling class despises with every fiber of their Armani suits since it goes against their ultimate dream: full economic globalization.

During Vietnam, the ruling class, unsurprisingly, came to oppose the war. This is why the press published lurid accounts of American “war crimes” and covered the same crimes up just a generation earlier against Germany and Japan. Since the enemy was the USSR and most American business was heavily invested there, the war was seen as unnecessary. The elite had seen the USSR as the wave of the future for decades. Bankers loved the idea of being able to control the economy from one place.

The ruling class, however, is not identical to the government. Under Nixon, the state and ruling class diverged. Nixon wasn’t supposed to win. He was punished for his slaughter of George McGovern in 1972, the worst landslide in electoral history. Poor George didn’t even win his own state. We can say the same thing about Donald Trump today.

The attacks on Yugoslavia, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan and elsewhere have been against vaguely “rightist” figures, whether secular or religious. In 1990, the main enemy of the Zionist state was Iraq because it was on the verge of first world status and boasted a powerful, experienced, battle trained and Soviet supplied army. Libya and Syria weren’t far behind. There’s no other reason for wars in the Mideast except for Israeli security concerns. No Arab “dictator” would dare turn off the oil spigot to the west and deliberately destroy their economy. No Arab leader hated the US for any other reason than support for Israel and none had the ability to threaten the US. Israeli security alone is the issue.

No nuclear armed Islamic power would launch a strike only to see their entire civilization wiped out minutes later. Communist China killed more of its citizens than any other state in world history during its lauded “great leap forward” and “cultural revolution.” Estimates go from 20 million to 60 million corpses and up, yet being a Maoist today carries no social stigma. Yet, no one complained when these butchers exploded their first nuclear device in 1964. Why not? Iran’s rulers butchered nobody. These are nonsense issues and used to distract attention from Israel as the sole purpose of these failed adventures. Since the welfare of Israel is the reason for skyrocketing defense budgets, suddenly, overnight, being a soldier is the world’s most wondrous occupation. Women who used to spit on these men now throw themselves at them.

Hilariously, the enforced language is “men and women,” as in “we need to thank our men and women in uniform. . .” Should we? Of the million or so Americans who died in combat throughout history, exactly zero were women. Zero. Of the POWs who suffered, zero were women. Of the 400,000 Americans KIA in the Second World War, again, zero were women. It’s men alone who should be receiving this respect, not women. They merely benefited from the blood of males, but, as always, demand the same respect.

The term “veteran” has changed its meaning radically. Prior to 1995 or so, a “veteran” is a male whose military service placed him directly in the line of fire. Today, it’s anyone who joined the military at the same time a war is going on somewhere. “US Army veteran” refers to a “veteran” of the service, not of the war itself. This sleight of hand has been stealthily introduced to permit women to claim veteran status. As always, it’s all based on illusion. As always, no one notices.

To see a human in a uniform leads to cat calls of “thank you for your service” and “thank you for my freedom.” This never before existed in the US. Alan Cutter writes in The Guardian:

No one said “thank you.” My tour of duty in Vietnam ended in August of 1972. I flew back to my family in Maine; they were glad to see me, but not even they said “thank you” or “welcome home,” Even if they had, I wouldn’t have known how to respond. . . Exhaustion and despair, expectation and exhilaration had been my duty companions for too long. Warriors returning from Iraq and Afghanistan are met with a heartfelt “welcome home” and sincere “thank you.” That’s much better than the hostility and indifference that marked my return and many of my colleagues. But I wonder if these men and women, like I was, are at a loss about how to respond to these one-sided statements.

The Vietnam War Reference Library (2001) states:

Some people who opposed American involvement in the Vietnam War treated U.S. soldiers and veterans poorly. They tended to blame American troops for the tragic situation in Vietnam, instead of blaming the government leaders who had sent them there. “Some protesters simply did not make a clear distinction between the war and those who fought it, and they regarded American soldiers as ready and willing killers or ignorant dupes,” Christian G. Appy explains in his book Working-Class War: American Combat Soldiers and Vietnam. In some instances, antiwar protesters reportedly spit on returning veterans and called them baby-killers. . . Rather than being greeted with anger and hostility, however, most Vietnam veterans received very little reaction when they returned home. . . “Society as a whole was certainly unable and unwilling to receive these men with the support and understanding they needed,” Appy writes. “The most common experiences of rejection were not explicit acts of hostility but quieter, sometimes more devastating forms of withdrawal, suspicion, and indifference.”

Yet again, I alone have to ask the questions that a diseased and disordered American polis cannot. Both the war in Vietnam and those in the Mideast and Central Asia were televised. Vietnam had a clear enemy, a great advantage over the current Middle Eastern adventures. Both wars were lost and the US humiliated. It’s been said that no one ever spat on the returning soldiers after Vietnam. This is a quibble from aging hippies who today have a “thank you for my freedom” bumper sticker on their Volvo. No, they burned down the university ROTC headquarters instead.

Most curious is the total lack of an antiwar movement today. If my thesis has proof, this is it. Since 1991, the US has fought a war of attrition with substantial casualties for far longer than Vietnam without any clear strategy or criteria for success. Trillions have been thrown at this war (or set of wars) with no end in sight and yet, in an age of utter contempt for government, no antiwar movement developed. This fact strongly suggests that the antiwar movement of the 1960s and early 1970s was artificially created and that the ruling class, while rejecting Vietnam, loves these wars today.

This parallels the different treatments of the military wing of the state. The USSR was profitable for most large capitalists and banks. There was no “Cold War” given the massive contribution of western capital to the “Soviet experiment.” At most, the empire just got too large. It wasn’t ideological, it was just the fear that an empire of that size could squeeze the US out of its trading bloc and dump the dollar, the ultimate American elite nightmare.

Given that the ruling class is so massively top heavy with Israelis, a fact very easy to empirically demonstrate, and that that these people are by far the most powerful and well organized within that ruling class, it stands to reason that wars which defend Israel will be supported by the elites and hence, antiwar movements will not form. Thus, the soldier was an enemy in 1971, a superhero in 2018. This alone explains the differential treatment.

In 2014, the USAF began purging its ranks of conservatives of whatever type. I’ve been in contact with an Air Force Colonel at a West Coast base who tells me that “conformity alone leads to promotion,” with superior ability being seen almost as a threat, not an asset. He tells me that “ideology is most certainly important to the promotion process.” In other words, liberals, however incoherent their understanding, have a leg up on everyone else. He says “being apolitical has some benefits, but being liberal has more.”

In their “diversity training,” for example, the Air Force are told the nature of possible abusers. They were described as conservatives of all sorts. The powerpoint used says:

“Potential Perpetrator Characteristics/Indicators”
Hold traditional gender role stereotypes;
Endorse statements used to justify rape (“rape myths”);
Hold adversarial beliefs about relationships between men and women; and
Use powerful rationalizations to excuse their behavior as non-criminal.

In 2012, they created the Workplace and Geneder [sic] Relations Survey of Active Duty Members and the 2015 Diversity & Inclusion (D&I) Initiatives:

Promotion Board Memorandum of Instruction (MOI): Through a MOI, the Secretary of the Air Force provides specific instructions to board members for every officer promotion and federal recognition board to ensure only the best qualified officers are selected for promotion or recognition. In addition to seeking officer demonstrating commitment to the welfare of our Airmen and to our core values of Integrity, Service, and Excellence, board members are instructed to find officers who have demonstrated that they will nurture and lead in a diverse and inclusive Air Force culture. . . Increased Female Officer Applicant Pool: Despite a rich pool of talent across our Nation, our female officer applicants typically comprise only 25 percent of our applicant pool. Therefore, we have set an applicant pool goal of 30 percent for our officer accession sources. This goal will encourage our accession sources to more aggressively compete for our Nation’s top female talent and encourage the next generation of innovative leaders to apply for our officer corps. The female officer population was selected as a starting point, as it is a smaller group than the enlisted force on which to focus efforts.

Officer promotion should be based only on combat experience and ability, both the result of discipline. Women have no role in this except as auxiliary services. The Air Force, which has been in no danger of enemy fire since 1973, sees things differently. In 2012, the ADL entered into a partnership with the Air Force Academy in Colorado for “intensive training” against anti-Israel sentiment. From

Last year, the academy and its partners, including the Anti-Defamation League, developed three additional lessons that will be taught at other times: one-hour lessons during sophomore and junior years, and a two-hour lesson during senior year, Menchion said. The training teaches cadets “to become allies to other cadets when they witness respect infractions,” he said. “We’re giving them avenues to address those issues. We emphasize addressing those issues at the lowest level.”

In the USAF’s “diversity day” of 2014, one of the handouts reads:

4. Why do offenders want us to question victims and believe the myths around sexual assault?
They can get away with what they do
It allows them to hide
It’s easier to think that what someone did caused the crime than the “good guy” was capable of doing it (just world theory, our wingman wouldn’t do this to one of our own). . .
6. Those of you who do personally know a survivor, that means a lot that they can trust you with such private information. What can we do to encourage victims of sexual assault to come forward and report when they are ready?
Believe them
Know who to refer to if the person needs help
Never blame them no matter what the situation is
Respect their privacy by not gossiping

Apart from being empirically false and irrational, this should not be a priority of any military branch. They cannot promote women based on gender and expect things to go smoothly. The Air Force’s intermediate school of professional military education at the Air Command and Staff College, is peddling a lesson on “critical thinking.” It goes like this:

[Ethnic nationalism is] the pressure that comes from presuming that our own group is the best, the right one, the chosen one, and all other groups are, well, not as good. … The assumption that your group is better than others is at the heart of prejudice. This we-are-better pressure is probably the most powerful of all. We all have certain beliefs not because we have thought critically about them but because our parents raised us to believe them or because the conceptual push and pull of our social group has instilled them in us. That is, we may believe what we believe—and assume that our beliefs are better than anyone else’s—because we were born into a family or society that maintains such views.

Only in the Chair Force could the repetition of official dogma be called “critical thinking.” The war against nationalism is officially part of the military’s curriculum. The US military seeks to impose liberalism on the world. That conservatives continue to support the service as a “conservative institution” shows their level of ignorance and their dissociation from reality. The military they laud would shoot them dead if so commanded.

This nonsense gets expensive. The defense budget is far larger than reported. The American officer corps is so overpaid and pampered that the system has had to hide the real numbers. The officer corps of the USAF, for example, is part of the “1%” of Americans. A major (0-4) with six years, stationed at Andrews AFB with dependents makes $115,000 yearly according to the USAF’s official “Pay and Benefits” site. Only a portion of this is taxable. The base pay is $80,000 but a housing allowance of $38,000 is kept separate. The only reason for this bizarre separation of pay from housing is to disguise the salary of an officer. The press will say that a major will received “$80,000” a year, but this is false.

A Colonel based on the West Coast, to use another example, with 22 years experience gets over $200,000 yearly as his minimum pay (including health insurance and other subsidies), and much more is added to this. They pay far less tax than others and all bonuses are tax-free. Their health insurance is beyond what anyone else can get at almost no cost. They have subsidized life insurance. Their pay is increased 10 percent a month when deployed. They receive food and housing allowances on top of this. They receive 30 days off a year with pay. They can use USAF travel packages at no cost.

The retirement package after 30 years is over 80 percent of the salary of their last rank for life. There are no income limits for outside jobs. Their continuing education is free of charge. This is significant, since more than 80 percent of retiring admirals and generals are working as lobbyists for Lockheed-Martin and other defense industry giants. Seminars, at taxpayer expense, are held yearly, according to the Boston Globe, instructing these men on how to land these jobs. The Four Star Group is an equity firm made up of a handful of retired generals all invested heavily in the industry while also acting as advisers to the Pentagon. The company, which no one has ever heard of, is worth $4 billion in committed capital.  These men also assist the Defense Department on their purchases and overall priorities. Was this an issue in the 2016 campaign? This might have something to do with these endless, no-win wars.  These men command salaries in the seven figures, plus their full pension, insurance of all kinds and kickbacks.

There’s a year-long “cooling off” period before retired officers can work for these firms while also advising the Pentagon and Defense Department. It is not enforced.  They call in favors to gain massive contracts and use personal networks to both increase the budget and lie about it. (see below). Never fear, however, since, as the Boston Globe reports in 2010: “The generals who navigate these ethical minefields said they are capable of managing potential conflicts without oversight, because of their own integrity.”

If this isn’t enough, living expenses for officers, including utilities and maintenance, are covered for those who choose to live in on-base housing. A monthly tax-free housing allowance based on rank, family status and geographic location is provided for off-base residents to help pay for living expenses. To repeat, this is just to disguise the huge salary of even minor officers. This doesn’t include bonuses, deployment pay or a thousand other hidden payments made to these defenders of democracy. Trump has signed a 3 percent raise for 2019 “to keep in step with private sector wage increases.” This is a fantasy. Ther has been no “private sector wage increase” of 3 percent this past year.

Signing bonuses, retention bonuses and other incentives to keep men enrolled massively increase this salary. Since the military is starving for men, this number is substantially inflated for airmen who decide not to go into civilian life. In fact, as of 2018, the USAF increased its retention bonus to a maximum of $100,000 according to a September article in the Air Force Times. The “maximum” should be taken with a grain of salt. Since the Pentagon cannot be audited, the skies the limit, so to speak. This is especially true for pilots, but other key jobs are included here too. Today, the Air Force, even with this compensation package, is still 2000 pilots short. Its so bad that the Air Force has been forced to meet with civilian airlines to discuss their poaching of good pilots.

Official sources won’t give the size of the real retention bonuses, but most believe its far more than $100,000. For drone pilots, its $125,000. This is not a typo. Drone pilots are in no danger of physical harm. When all this is factored in, it is not an exaggeration to say that a pilot, at the rank of major with seven or more years in can make $250,000 in one year, not including a massive array of intangible benefits. In 2017, they announced bonuses for fighter pilots amounting to over $455,000 over 13 years at the maximum.

The Aviator Bonus Program shows the extremely high salary of American officers for all branches of the service. There are other “unofficial” forms of payment that the service allows for retention as well. A Colonel can get $10,000 for one speaking engagement for a military-industrial complex confab tax free. The money higher ranking officers receive from such corporations as Lockheed or GE are well known. The point is that military officers aren’t serving anyone but themselves. These desk jockeys are parasites. They aren’t “sacrificing” anything and almost all will never be in the slightest danger. When this is added up, the major at Andrews is really making $175,000 with ease. It remains true that most of the grunts do all the work but get only a small piece of the massive defense budget pie. In a strong sense, these massive salaries are designed to keep officers loyal to the Regime at all costs.

One of the more obnoxious elements of the modern military is their inability to stop giving medals to themselves. I’ve written on this subject many times before. In 2000, hundreds of Bronze Stars were given out, apparently at random. The official Stars and Stripes website says,

Controversy continues to swirl around the awarding of the coveted combat medals to service members who served far from last year’s fighting in Yugoslavia. Stars and Stripes reviewed 185 Air Force Bronze Star citations and learned the vast majority of those awards went to troops who served in places such as Italy, England, Spain and even as far away from the Balkan war zone as Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri.

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been lost. Therefore, with a kept media, medal inflation is a way to maintain the male ego in the services. It justifies their failure and they can blame it on “politicians” or not having enough money. Since the Iraq war began, the Chair Force has issued almost 7000 Bronze Stars. From 2002 to 2004 alone, they gave out 2425. Precisely zero of the Air Force’s crews were in danger of death. These are Bronze Stars granted for bureaucratic labor and is a mockery of the medal’s intent.

James Stevenson, longtime military analyst, wrote “The ribbons received by an Air Force airman after four years is close to reaching the number of American ribbons two American generals, Eisenhower and Arnold, received after over 30 or 40 years respectively in the U.S. Army.” The Daily Press mocked:

Besides giving Kosovo Bronze Stars to people in Missouri, Ohio and Washington, D.C., the Air Force awarded the medal to servicemen and servicewomen in Italy. . . And four Navy Bronze Star winners stationed in Naples, Italy, ran a greater risk of being run over by a motor scooter than being hit by enemy fire.

An airman – though it affects all branches – can sit behind a desk for 30 years and have a chest full of medals and ribbons. To the outsider, he must be a “war hero” and doubtless carries himself as such. One form of deception is to add a “V” to the medal. One can get a star for operating the color printer at the base for 10 years without any criminality, but it won’t have the “V” device. It’s a “merit,” not a “valor” award. The military can say that, since there’s no “V,” its not a combat medal and hence, there’s no dishonesty. This is clown-world logic since very few notice this subtle distinction and the general public will still see it as a combat medal. It’s deliberate fraud to reward the spoiled children for yet another failed war. Today, the Bronze Star is just a participation ribbon and should be treated as such.

On a personal note, several years ago, I confronted two USAF Captains at a convenience store somewhere in Maryland. They were wearing their uniforms gratuitously. I heard them talk about “hitting” some obscure group in Afghanistan during “their last tour.” In other words, they bombed some group their commanders saw as a “threat.” This they thought was funny.
Now, my father was a combat veteran of the USMC during the Korean Conflict. He lost most of his left hand and most of
his left ribcage. He received the Bronze Star for two years fighting the Chinese elite Eighth Route Army for two years with his BAR. He said quite often that no one talks flippantly about killing others. “The way to spot a combat phony is that he talks about it to just anyone,” he said often.

As they left, I stopped them and asked them to repeat their tale, which they gladly did, expecting some sort of congratulations. I asked, “did these men have AA batteries, or Stingers, or something like that?” They replied, “these guys wouldn’t know what an AA battery was if it bit them!” Or words to that effect. Then I asked, “so you slaughtered them?”


“Is this the western way of war?” I taunted.  “You dare call yourselves “combat vets?” According to your logic, when my child is irritated on the playground by a little girl, I can smash her in the face, right? What’s the difference? How much of a threat could these tribesmen be if they had no idea what an AA battery was?” I was expecting resistance, but I received none. I was shocked to see they were listening, albeit with a faint sneer. I think one was about to say something, but the young guy behind the counter told me sternly to leave. I informed him that only the owner has that authority, and that maybe he should go back looking at the porn proudly displayed behind him.  Immediately, way in the back of the store, I heard a voice yell, “they were in the way of the heroin shipments!” I never even saw the guy. If their story was true, he’s probably right. Maybe it was all stolen valor? I didn’t know. I saw no obvious irregularity in their presentation.

At the end, I sneered at them: “this argument today is the only combat you “warriors” will ever see, though I’m sure there’s some program that will take care of the PTSD I’ve caused and grant you yet another retention bonus to ease your suffering.” I walked out of the store, pleased with myself, having inadvertently shoplifted a Snickers I didn’t even want. I’d forgotten why I went into the store in the first place.  Afterwards, it hit me that off duty soldiers and airmen shouldn’t be wearing uniforms. They were wearing theirs for free stuff, women and veneration. They got me instead. Long afterwards, I considered their silence and lack of resistance towards me. Their lack of hostility was noteworthy and a little unsettling. Had they really not thought of it this way before? Did I hit a nerve?

These attitudes are created by many things, not the least of which is the existence of massive budgets. The “official” defense budget sits at around $716 billion, but this doesn’t include the massive retirement fund, veterans affairs or international affairs. It doesn’t take the huge off-budget amounts into consideration. It’s deliberately misleading. Just like the unemployment and debt figures, media elites only refer to the “base” figure. The $716 billion doesn’t include the contingency fund for overseas operations and much, much else.

In fact, the $716 billion only deals with on-budget weapons and deployment costs. It doesn’t deal with social spending, which is a huge amount of “military spending.” It doesn’t include payments to mercenaries. Most forget the trillions in failed and abandoned projects over just the last 10 years such as the RAH Attack Helicopter, the Polar Orbiting Satellite System, the Marines’ Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, the XM2001Crusader Howitzer, the Non-Line-of-Sight-Cannon and many other failures which cost billions each.

When you add 20 percent interest charged on the debt, the real defense budget looks more like $1.5 trillion. The Center for Defense Information says the “national security” budget is $1.1 trillion, though this doesn’t include off-budget projects, interest or the cost of mercenaries.

This means that serving the needs of the neocons costs this country 70 percent of its entire discretionary budget or more. The US hasn’t won a war since 1945, and even then, the USSR did most of the heavy fighting. The US spends more on its military than the next 11 countries combined. This includes Russia and China. As the population is told the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, both lost, are winding down after almost three decades, there is a 10 percent increase in the budget.

So, how do they get away with it, that is, apart from the propaganda, media and the “thank you for your service” idiocy? Ernst and Young were hired to audit the Pentagon’s budget and failed miserably. This is due to the total lack of controls and accountability in the military. I guess in certain areas, discipline isn’t important. The corruption in accounting and the lack of record keeping has forced Ernst and Young to abandon its auditing project.

There are no firm policies to keep track of inventory, the value of assets or construction projects, just to name three. The logistics agency, in charge of budgetary outlays, had such shoddy record-keeping that the auditors gave up. In other words, no one knows how much they really spend. The auditors concluded their 37 page report by saying that the military doesn’t even remotely maintain even basic standards of accounting. While the Fed has never been audited, neither has the Pentagon.
It gets worse.

Then there’s the often baffling nature of the Pentagon’s accounting and lack of transparency. Skidmore singles out a report that indicated just under $800 billion had been transferred from the treasury to the army in the 2015 financial year, the majority of which, according to a footnote, was “related to budget execution adjustments from prior years” needed to set the ledger right.

In 1990, Congress passed the Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act, requiring every federal agency to be subject to audit. Only the Pentagon refused to comply. In 2017, they refused to comply with the Audit the Pentagon Act, a law quite clear in its intent. The truth is that, as Ernst and Young (among others) have said, the Pentagon is “unauditable.” Put another way, it flaunts the law. Inventing new enemies is not just profitable, its necessary for day to day functioning.

A group called Taxpayers for Common Sense says this concerning the audit failure:

In fact, no major part of the Department of Defense (DOD) has ever passed an audit, according to recent congressional testimony by the non-partisan U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO), the investigative arm of Congress. The Pentagon admitted that flawed business systems and practices are common within the agency and said it would take decades to get all of the agency books in order. Accounting problems led the GAO in 1995 to put DOD financial management on GAO’s list of agencies that are at high-risk of waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement. About 58 percent of the material the Pentagon possesses ($36.9 billion worth) are items it does not need. Over the past three years, the Navy lost track of $3 billion in equipment and other items.

At one distribution center for the Navy, there was a backlog of over 122,000 items that had not been properly processed, leading the Navy to purchase items it didn’t need. The $600 billion Pentagon inventory of weapons systems and other items failed to include nearly $6 billion in Army communications defense equipment, $7.6 billion in Navy aircraft engines and about $7 billion in Air Force electronic pods that attach to warplanes.

Was this a major issue in the 2016 elections? Or any election? Could you imagine if this had been uncovered in 1969 rather than 2017? It would have led to massive riots and the resignation of Nixon long before Watergate, but it doesn’t end there:

The GAO testimony follows a March report by the office of the Defense Department’s Inspector General that concluded that the Pentagon’s books were in such disarray that they couldn’t be audited. In fact, the Pentagon’s books are in such poor shape that the military’s money managers last year made almost $7 trillion in adjustments to their financial ledgers in an attempt in make them add up. The Inspector General also concluded the Pentagon could not show receipts for $2.3 trillion of those changes and half a trillion dollars of the adjustments were corrections of earlier mistakes.

This is a nice way of saying that the money is so absurdly plentiful and the public so ignorant, they keep no records and dare anyone to do anything about it. This shows every mark of deliberate obfuscation. Keep in mind that this only refers to “on-budget” amounts. There are billions in secret funds kept off budget for security purposes. Making themselves unauditable is a defense mechanism, so to speak.  I might add that Ernst and Young were headquartered at the Trade Towers in New York. The 9-11 attack occurred a day after they had uncovered over $2 trillion in unaccounted for cash. This might be a coincidence, but an important one nevertheless.

This is the predictable result of a military that’s worshiped beyond all reason. Politically speaking, they’re spoiled children.

When outside agencies have been able to gather data they’ve discovered rampant fraud. Records show that the Raytheon Company defrauded the Pentagon 5 times up until 2003. Lockheed Martin 7 times as of 2013, Northrup Grumman 7 times as of 2010. They continued to receive huge Pentagon contracts.

These almost certainly understate the issue. This exists because all actors know there will be no consequences. When a little girl runs wild without discipline, when she’s never told “no” under any circumstances, when she’s never criticized for anything, how do you think she’ll turn out? Now add to this constant adulation bordering on worship; even her misbehavior is praised. How do you think she will be as an adult? What sort of person will she become? She will become the modern American woman. Both the Pentagon and today’s liberated woman, at least decent looking ones, are the products of this institutionalized corruption and moral bankruptcy.

In June 2016, the Gallup agency found that 73 percent of Americans had “quite a lot” of confidence in the military, versus 36 percent for the presidency and 6 percent for Congress. I suppose no one told these people that the military isn’t separate from the Presidency, most certainly, or Congress, more indirectly.

This veneration of the soldier exists at the same time as the services become dens of criminality and perversion. John Glaser writes in his “The Folly of Soldier Worship:”

Like most aspects of state doctrine, this precept contradicts basic truisms and abundant facts. For example, numerous studies have concluded that violent sexual assault is rampant in the U.S. military. In 2008, an estimated 41 percent of all the women serving in the military were victims of sexual assault, a problem Rep. Jane Harman called “an epidemic.” In a January 2012 Pentagon report on “rape, sexual assault, and forcible sodomy” in the military, it was found that these crimes have increased 64 percent since 2006. The vast majority of cases go unreported though, and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta estimated the number of cases was close to 19,000 in 2011. Rape and other forms of sexual assault are among the most derided and abhorred crimes in society, but their high occurrence within the military is ignored so that anyone in a uniform can be indiscriminately praised for their “service.”

I’ve written and spoken on this subject several times. Again, it’s to be expected in a world where these people are venerated as deities and receive everything they want regardless of any merit. One needn’t be Dr. Phil to see the connection. He continues:

But the society-wide inclination towards soldier-worship is a rot that runs much deeper than that. What does it say about a culture that idolizes and fetishizes a commitment to kill on the orders of politicians in Washington? Even setting aside what soldiers actually do throughout the American empire, that is an odd thing to admire. Politics is often ridiculed by the public as a fickle, foolish enterprise, but that criticism vanishes once the issue is war and those paid to carry it out. Then, state policy is the divine manifestation of goodness and freedom and honor. Nationalist themes uphold this system of belief, as I’ve written.

While the author here isn’t quite sure what “nationalism” means, you can get the point.  Liberals are at the root of military worship. This makes perfect sense. While a few elderly vets think the military is a conservative institution, younger right-wingers know better. At the same time, younger liberals, not socialized in the same post-Vietnam anti-military world I was, see the military as their personal bodyguard, removing Islamic or nationalist governments and installing liberal, capitalist and feminist ones instead.

Nevertheless, people will believe what is in their interest to believe. Illusion is comforting. To accept my arguments on most things would require an entire retooling of their lives. They couldn’t trust the same authorities ever again. It would not be an easy transition. This explains the resistance to truth even when they fully accept the accuracy of these statements. There’s more to the story than truth and accuracy.

The assumption that anyone actually cares about truth is one that died hard with me personally. I pour over texts in numerous subjects for 30 years in the search for truth. Its cost me dearly. Yet, among “normies,” I’m still surprised to discover that facts are rarely the issue. Truth isn’t an important category for most people. An idea has to be profitable in some way, financially, professionally or emotionally, for it to be accepted. If it costs too much, it will be rejected. If it doesn’t mesh well with other beliefs they might hold, it will be rejected. If it makes them unpopular, it will be rejected. Often, if they’ve not heard of it before, it will be rejected on that ground alone. Yet, none of this has anything to do with its actual truth.

Nevertheless, Das Man will still be occasionally pestered by the thought that they live in fantasy land. For males especially, this is a dystopia, not a fantasy, yet escaping from it is just perceived as too costly and “radical.” Living a lie has its cost, albeit mostly psychological and emotional. Today, its also become economic and political, as their debt-created, Kabbalistic universe comes crashing down around them. The “men and women of the US military” will not be there to save them from that.

Matthew Raphael Johnson

Matthew Raphael Johnson is a scholar of Russian Orthodox history and philosophy. He completed his doctorate at the University of Nebraska at Lincoln in 1999. He is a former professor of both history and political science at the University of Nebraska (as a graduate student), Penn State University and Mount St. Mary’s University. Since 1999, he was the editor (and is presently Senior Researcher) at The Barnes Review, a well-known renegade journal of European history. Dr. Johnson is the author of eight books. Six are from Hromada Books, "Sobornosti: Essays on the Old Faith;" "Heavenly Serbia and the Medieval Idea;" "Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality: Lectures on Medieval Russia;" "The Ancient Orthodox Tradition in Russian Literature: "The Foreign Policy of Mass Society: The Failure of Western Engagement in the Middle East;" and "Officially Approved Dissent: Alasdair MacIntyre’s Strategic Ambiguity in His Critique of Modernity." And two published by The Barnes Review, "The Third Rome: Holy Russia, Tsarism and Orthodoxy;" and "Russian Populist: The Political Thought of Vladimir Putin."

Recent Posts
Recent Comments