-Caveat Lector-
THE CFR IN THE MILITARY --
EXPANDING EMPIRE: THE GLOBAL WAR DRIVE OF BIG BUSINESS
AND THE FORCES THAT WILL STOP IT By Vincent Copeland
[Copeland's "Expanding Empire" tells the story of U.S. imperialism
from its beginnings in 1898 up to the Vietnam War. The pamphlet was
written during the Vietnam War and became one of Workers World's most
popular titles. It went through several printings. The purpose of the
pamphlet was to show that the war was not caused by any particular
politician. Rather it was a product of the capitalist system.
The same is true today. In the end, it all comes down to profits.
"Expanding Empire" explains how the capitalists' insatiable greed for
increased profit inevitably produces war. And it shows how the only
way to prevent future wars is to destroy capitalism at its roots.]
PART 1: FOREIGN WARS AND FOREIGN INVESTMENTS
The war in Vietnam, the longest the U.S. has ever waged, at first
seems also to be the most illogical and inexplicable. Its supporters
will not explain it. And its opponents--even some of its most serious
opponents--often cannot.
The latter usually attribute the war to President Lyndon Johnson's
dictatorial nature, to the jingoism of the generals, or to a blindly
chauvinist, anti-communist "crusade."
All of these are powerful factors, of course. But the basic cause of
the U.S. invasion of Vietnam lies deep within the social and economic
system of the United States. The aggression was built in and the
Asian war was predetermined before Lyndon Johnson was born. And
although the U.S. is indisputably the most anti-communist country in
the world, its present war drive was building up before communism was
known as a theory in Vietnam or organized as a party anywhere in
Asia.
War today is far more deadly, destructive and infinitely more
expensive than it was in the early 19th century. But what Clausewitz
said then is still true today: "War is the continuation of politics
by other means."
And the high politics of war and peace, like the low politics of
vulgar personal aggrandizement and corrupt machine rule, is
"concentrated economics."
The politics that produced the war in Vietnam was the politics of
advancing the interests of the "United States" on the world arena.
The economics was--and still is--the interests of big business.
The reason for the quotation marks on the "United States" is that
a tiny clique of men rule the United States and identify their own
interests with the "national interest" and always mean their own
interests when they use the phrase "national interest" in their
newspapers or on TV, radio, etc. They virtually own the United States
and certainly own the government of the United State. They are--big
business.
Big business has been continually expanding within the United States-
-with many "contracting" panics and depressions, of course--eating up
its competitors, getting bigger and bigger, some branches of it now
making thousands of times the profit that their corporate progenitors
made a century ago.
And it is also expanding outside the United States.
Since approximately 1898, the giant North American continent has been
too small an arena for the fullest expansion of big business. Its
auto plants, billion dollar banks, glorified hot dog stands and
hotels now dot the globe.
Considering the tremendous open spaces still in the United States to
this day, not to mention the under-population of Canada--where U.S.-
owned industry predominates--and the under-development of Mexico--
where the U.S., like 16th century Spain, is the real overlord--this
would seem to be illogical, at the very least.
And considering that millions are unemployed in the U.S. itself, that
hundreds of cities are crying to have their slums torn down, that
tens of millions of homes need to be constructed, and even the
existing factories seldom operate at full capacity--considering all
this, it would seem strange indeed to ordinary logic that big
business would have to put up so many plants, dig so many mines,
drill so much oil and sell so many Fords and so much Coca Cola
abroad.
But it is not strange to the U.S. businessperson. And a moment's
reflection would turn up at least one good reason: namely, that it's
usually more profitable to exploit the European countries, the
extremely low-paid colonial workers and plunder the underdeveloped
countries' resources, than it is to invest at home.
It isn't just greed for this extra profit that causes the big
money people to invest abroad. It's also because the field for
profitable investment at home periodically shrinks under this system,
even though there is plenty of open space and human need.
The first real foreign war of the United States--the Spanish American
War--took place almost simultaneously with the first real expansion
in U.S. foreign investment. And that is the real secret of unders-
tanding that war, as it is of understanding all subsequent U.S. wars.
It was precisely in the 1890s that investment abroad--that is, the
export of U.S. capital--took place on any substantial scale. And in
1897, just before the Spanish- American War, there were still "only"
700 million U.S. dollars invested abroad. By 1914, the foreign
holdings had leaped to $3.5 billion--five times as much. Without the
war, this could not have happened.
The war with Spain was motivated by the desire to exploit Cuba,
Puerto Rico, the rest of Latin America and the Philippines, etc., and
to get complete control of the Caribbean so as to facilitate the U.S.
control of the contemplated Panama Canal and open up easier access to
business expansion in Asia. It was a question of economic expansion
and pretty much understood and openly explained as such at the time.
The expansion into foreign countries resulted from a new stage in the
expansion of business: the export of capital. Business had been
exporting ordinary commodities of trade for centuries. The export of
capital was something new-- especially for the United States. And it
couldn't be done without foreign wars.
The reason for this isn't so very complicated. The export of capital
goods--that is, machinery, mining equipment, railroad engines, earth-
moving tools, etc., is intended not to make just a quick "small"
profit, but a constantly repeating profit that can go on forever, if
the exploiter can hold onto the "investment."
WHAT A FOREIGN INVESTMENT REALLY IS
The investment of capital in a foreign country should be regarded
somewhat like sending a huge suction pump there, which pulls out the
metals from the ground, the products from the soil and the fruits
from the trees--with the help, of course, of the labor of the
"native" people working on this suction pump.
It is as if the pump were connected to pipes that run back to the
"home" country, via the banks and big corporations. All the rich
products are showered from the pipes into the treasuries of these
institutions, in the form of profits.
Whole nations are drained by these great suction pumps--or
"investments." And the profits are so great that rival groups of big
business, led by small cliques of big banks, go to war with each
other over the exploitation of these nations.
And when they go to war, they make sure the masses do the fighting
for them--although in the name of "national defense" or "freedom" or
"democracy" or some similar ideal. The Russo-Japanese War, the First
World War and the German- Japanese-Italian war against the U.S.-
Britain-France were such wars.
These wars were to settle the question of which set of bankers
would have the privilege of setting up their suction pumps in
"underdeveloped" and some not so underdeveloped countries.
It was a new thing for the United States. It was obviously aggressive
and imperialistic. And there was tremendous opposition from one end
of the country to the other.
A public outcry went up against the rape of the Philippines, the
taking over of Cuba and Puerto Rico, and even the quiet annexation of
Hawaii in the same year.
And since the U.S. actually attached land in the "old fashioned"
colonialist way, rather than the modern, less visible way of simply
"investing," the outrage was all the greater. But Theodore Roosevelt
and his fellow imperialists defended their course stoutly and virtuo-
usly --in about the same words as Lyndon Johnson did the Vietnam War.
[Next: The Philippines: U.S. wedge into Asia] - END -
(Copyright Workers World Service: Permission to reprint granted if
source is cited. For more information contact Workers World, 55 W. 17
St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For subscription info
send message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://workers.org)" JC
=======================================================================
CFR = COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, TC = TRILATERAL COMMISION
Department Of Defense:
Les Aspin, Secretary of Defense -- CFR
Frank G. Wisnerll, Under Secretary for Policy -- CFR
Henry S. Rowen, Asst. Sec., International Security Affairs -- CFR
Judy Ann Miller, Dep. Asst. Sec. Nuclear Forces & Arms Control -- CFR
W. Bruce Weinrod, Dep. Asst. Sec., Europe & NATO -- CFR
Adm. Seymour Weiss, Chairman, Defense Policy Board -- CFR
Charles M. Herzfeld, Dir. Defense Research & Engineering -- CFR
Andrew W. Marshall, Dir., Net Assessment -- CFR
Michael P. W. Stone, Secretary of the Army -- CFR
Donald B. Rice, Secretary of the Air Force -- CFR
Franklin C. Miller, Dep. Asst. Sec. Nuclear Forces & Arms Control -- CFR
Allied Supreme Commanders:
1949-52 Eisenhower -- CFR
1952-53 Ridgeway -- CFR
1953-56 Gruenther -- CFR
1956-63 Norstad -- CFR
1963-69 Lemnitzer -- CFR
1969-74 Goodpaster -- CFR
1974-79 Haig -- CFR
1979-87 Rogers -- CFR, TC
Superintendents of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point:
1960-63 Westmoreland -- CFR
1963-66 Lampert -- CFR
1966-68 Bennett -- CFR
1970-74 Knowlton -- CFR
1974-77 Berry -- CFR
1977-81 Goodpaster -- CFR
CFR Military Fellows, 1991:
Col. William M. Drennan, Jr., USAF -- CFR
Col. Wallace C. Gregson, USMC -- CFR
Col. Jack B. Wood, USA -- CFR
CFR Military Fellows, 1992:
Col. David M. Mize, USMC -- CFR
Col. John P. Rose, USA -- CFR
Joint Chiefs of Staff:
Adm Wm. Crowe, Chairman -- CFR
Gen. Colin L. Powell, Chairman -- CFR
Gen. Carl E. Vuono, Army -- CFR
Gen. John T. Chain, Co Sac -- CFR
Gen. Merril A. Mcpeak, Co Pac AF -- CFR
Lt. Gen. George L. Butler, Dir. Strategic Plans & Policy -- CFR
Lt. Gen. Charles T. Boyd, Com. Air Univ. -- CFR
Lt. Gen. Bradley C. Hosmer, AF Inspector General -- CFR
Secretaries of Defense:
1957-59 Mcelroy -- CFR
1959-61 Gates -- CFR
1961-68 McNamara -- CFR,
1969-73 Laird -- CFR
1973-75 Richardson -- CFR, TC
1975-77 Rumsfeld -- CFR
1977-80 Brown -- CFR, TC
1980-88 Weinberger -- CFR, TC
1988- Carlucci -- CFR
1988- Cheney -- CFR
This is an older list. Nothing has changed since 1988.
If you look at the names under Secs of Defense, you will
see some familiar names.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
