Bob Giaquinta for Congress

Welfare State vs. Warfare State

The condition of the US at this time, including uncontrolled debt, loss of civil rights, threat of terrorism, loss of lives in Iraq and Afghanistan, and being despised by most of the other peoples of our planet, can be explained fairly easily. If we step back and clear our minds of preconceived ideas, and look at the history of the past sixty years, several trends of our government may seem to make sense or nonsense, depending on your view of the plan that was formulated. With the Freedom of Information Act we are able to see what our leaders were discussing, behind closed doors, in the years 1945-1952. Couple this with the historical events that happened in the past sixty years, and it is easy to decipher what has really been happening. Both of our "Property Parties", Republican and Democratic (they are both right wing parties), have been equally responsible for both our domestic and foreign policies. We should come to realize that we are not really a Republican Democracy, but rather an Oligarchy, controlled by several hundred people, with socialism for the super rich and free enterprise and taxes for the masses.

In the1940s and 50s the US government, the State Department, Council of Foreign Relations, and National Security Council (NSC), developed plans for the post war world. The New World Order was formulated, however it was the same as the way things had been run for centuries, perhaps with different players (monarch and aristocrats being replaced by the faceless rich), but the same. The objective was to keep the financial order the same, the super rich controlling and being subsidized by the masses. Secretary of State Dean Acheson, in NSC 68 sought to have high military costs at the expense of social programs. George Kennan, a member of the NSC, presented Policy Planning Study 23, which was designed to trumpet idealized slogans, but in reality keeping the world order intact, by being on a wartime economy. This was done to squelch the idea that government has direct responsibility for the welfare of its people. Anything that was not in line with this policy was called "communism".

I don't think that the architects of this plan were inherently evil. We must remember that that for fourteen years prior to our entrance into WWII our nation was entrenched in the Great Depression. WWII had made the US the richest nation in the world, and none of our national infrastructure was destroyed, as was the rest of the world. I would assume that our government did not want the depression to happen again. They were probably pressured by the large corporations into keeping the military/industrial complex intact, and operating at the same level. There were millions of returning soldiers, where would they be employed? So this plan was adopted to avoid another depression. After several years these large corporations were getting too powerful, which was recognized by President Eisenhower. In his farewell speech he alluded to keeping an eye on the military/industrial complex.

Com.mun.ism- definitions

1. Dictionary - An economic system characterized by collective ownership of property and the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members. Rule from the bottom up.
   
2. As defined by the top US policy makers - Any government that acknowledges and acts on the responsibility for the welfare of the mass of its peoples, whether Democracy, Monarchy, or Dictatorship.
   
3. As interpreted by most US citizens - The totalitarian governments of Russia and China under Mao, Lenin and Stalin
   

In 1949 in order to help implement the New World Order policy and to make this policy more easily acceptable, the "War Department" was renamed the "Department of Defense", which, public relations wise, was much more politically correct. Some of the rules of PPS 23 were;

1. Never negotiate with the USSR, they were to be the "ultimate threat".
   
2. Develop the H- bomb, so that when the USSR had a bomb the fear factor would intensify, and we would have an enemy that we could blame for our sustained military buildup.
   
3. Rapid development of conventional armed forces.
   
4. Increases in taxes to pay for military expenditures.
   
5. Mobilize the American society to fear and fight Communism.
   
6. Set up a strong alliance system (NATO).
   
7. Make peoples of USSR allies through propaganda.
   

Immediately following WWII, in Europe we hired many ex-Nazis into the OSS (the precursor of the CIA), many of them war criminals, to help stop the threat of communism. In Korea we hired the Japanese to kill hundreds of thousands of peasants who wanted reform. Power in Europe and Japan had to be returned to the Right, fascism. The true threat to the US was the peasant/worker resistance. The Nazis and Japanese lost the war, but militarism and fascism won. The Marshall Plan was put into effect to help reconstruct the devastated countries, with about one third of the money coming back to US corporations. The US gave the money to the state/ private sector throughout the world, usually Right wing fascists. Post war Italy and Greece showed signs of reform after the war, and both had partisan armies. These armies were disbanded, mostly by force, and the countries were occupied by the US and British until "representative" governments could be put in place. When Italy was almost sure to vote communist, a plan for Sicily to become a territory of the US was initiated, in cooperation with the Sicilian and US Mafia. This notion was not so far fetched, remember that Hawaii, which is approximately the same distance from the US as is Sicily, is a state in the United States of America. The communists did not win the elections, so the idea was scraped. General Mac Arthur was democratizing Japan, he was removed from control. The US gave Japan a free hand to control their empire, under US control. The trump card that the US has over Japan is that we have veto power over the oil exported to Japan, lack of which Japan could not survive, they were held economically hostage.

The US's sphere of influence was now the whole world. We had brutally kept the Americas under our thumbnail since the institution of the Monroe Doctrine, which was really written by John Quincy Adams, in the early 1800's. This doctrine implies that the US considers only its own interests in the western hemisphere, regardless of what other American nations want, and could unilaterally use force to impose our will. We could now enforce this throughout the world. Any government that showed social and financial reform, were now considered Communist. Since WWII, every war, police action, civil or guerrilla war, assassination or economic embargo backed, openly or covertly, by the US had one goal, the US must set an example of rebel states, those who put their citizens benefits above big business profits. If even one area, which was controlled by a population with the masses benefiting, could succeed, the idea might spread. It didn't matter what form of government, democratic, socialist, communist, monarchy, etc., the world order would not be disrupted. So the US consistently "set an example". In 1983 we invaded Grenada, which had no strategic or economic importance, but they were controlled by a socialist government. We had to set an example. The US used the excuse of rescuing medical students from their captives. The students were not captive and didn't fear for their lives until the US invaded.

Rather than subsidizing the needy, the US subsidizes the rich. This subsidy is partly through the military. The government pays for high-tech research and development, it then turns the fruits of this labor (usually arms) over to the "private sector", to reap the benefits. The only US businesses that succeed in the global open market are those granted government subsidy. Energy companies are given tax write offs for searching for new oil and gas resources, the agribusiness are given subsidies to grow less food. The $8-10 trillion deficit, which the US enjoys, has been mostly brought about by our "Defense" budget. Over the past sixty years we have spent 1/2 to 2/3's of our monies, both collected from the taxpayers and from borrowing from other countries (most notably from Japan and China), on defense. The amount of money spent on thousands of nuclear ICBMs, wars, imperialism, and CIA and NSC covert operations is incalculable. If we had a true defensive nature to our foreign policies more than 80% of these monies would not have been spent, and we probably would not be despised by most of the world. That would have left monies in Average Joe's pocket to spend as he saw fit, a prosperous economy, with benefits for all. Instead of one use artillery shells and bullets, nuclear silos (which have no use except possible elimination of the world as we know it, the US now has 30,000 weapons, there aren't that many cities in the world to eliminate, we would have to bomb hamlets), US troops stationed throughout the world (about 700 military bases in foreign countries to keep our imperial state secure), etc. we could have had a strong and modern infrastructure, healthcare benefits, housing for the indigent, etc. What a trade off, decided by our "democratic" leaders. Did you ever contemplate why Japan and Germany are the two most successful nations (excluding nations who are wealthy because of natural resources, such as Saudi Arabia), after almost total destruction in WWII? They have no DEFENSE PROGRAMS! We have taken over as the world protector and/or controller. The only way that we can win economically is by military intervention. Our top engineers, industry, etc. are working for our military superiority, other countries scientists are working on making better cars, etc. How can we compete! The British Empire, which was the previous imperialist empire, could not last because its military (navy) cost too much, why can't we learn from history?

The US goal is to stop the nationalism of the Third World Countries. Any government that suppressed labor and preserved foreign investment received aid, no matter how bad the civil rights of their people were, or which leader was getting rich. Foreign governments must respond to US business, not their indigenous people. US aid goes to governments that serve the wealthy and privileged, not the people. Coups, killings and torture are OK. The standard protocol of control by the US in other countries is actions by the police, then the army, then coups, assassinations, then, if everything else fails, occupation. These actions are called by some nice names- Internal Security really means war against your peoples, liberalization of economic rules means foreign investors have their way, usually through the International Monetary Fund (European) or World Bank (United States). This usually means that farmers are forced to grow exportable items, and are not allowed to grow staple foods for themselves and their countrymen to live on. For instance, in Brazil most of the clearing of the Amazon jungle is to grow soy products, which is shipped to Europe to feed livestock. This happens in a country where one third of the population is starving. The Gross National Product of these countries soars while the living conditions of the populace declines. If NAFTA, which has been in effect for about fifteen years, is helping the inhabitants of Mexico with free trade, then how do you explain all the illegal immigrants flocking to the USA? This program allows corporations to produce products in Mexico more cheaply because of less strict environmental restrictions, cheaper labor, etc. There are beautiful industrial plants surrounded by the omnipresent worker shantytowns. Boise Cascade is stripping Mexico's forests, with the protection of the Mexican Army, industrial plants dumping toxic wastes into streams, etc. The corporations can legally shift monies across borders to take advantage of NAFTA tax laws and incentives, thus more profits for the corporations and squalor for the workers. And we ask why we have the influx of undocumented immigrants.

Since WWII we have had direct intervention in the following countries: Iran-1953, Guatamala-1954 and 1963, Dominican Repiblic-1963 and 1965, Brazil-1964, Chile-1973, Panama 1989, Haiti-1993 and 2003, Afghanistan-2002, Iraq-1991 and 2003, with Iran not far behind. We have backed the Contras in Nicaragua, government terror squads in El Salvador, Chile, and Guatemala, all murdering, dismembering, and torturing their own populace.

More specifically, some examples are;
El Salvador- In 1980 the Catholic Archbishop of this country sent a diplomatic letter to the US begging them to stop sending arms to the controlling junta. He was assassinated a few weeks later, attracting little media coverage in the US. Peasants were then slaughtered at a greater frequency. The junta promoted Duarte to the " Civilian Presidency". The opposition newspapers were destroyed, and Jesuit Priests, who were organizing the populace against Duarte, were murdered. The Salvadorian Army was being trained by US advisors, using SS indoctrination. The slaughter intensified.
Nicaragua-The Somoza family ruled for generations, a dictatorship under the influence of the United Fruit Co. The Sandinistas, who were for reform for the peasants, were winning the battle in the early 1980s. The Somoza family fled to protection in Miami, with most of the country's bullion. After the Sandinistas took control, Reagan backed the old guard with the Contras and economic warfare (remember the Iran-Contra scandal? Reagan used the dictum of "plausible denial" to escape further embarrassment or impeachment). We compelled the world banks to stop funding the Sandinista government. By backing the Contras we forced the government to divert money for the rebuilding of their country to fight the Contras. A devastating hurricane, Joan, plummeted Nicaragua in 1988. We sent no aid. The Treaty of 1988 included a delay in the next elections, while US economic sanctions were still in force. Propaganda and control of the elections netted 40% for the Sandinistas. They were gone.
Chile- In 1973 the CIA backed the overthrow and murder of the duly elected president, Allende. He was not seving the interests of ITT and Anaconda Copper.
Guatemala- In 1944 a revolution deposed the US puppet government. The new government was doing quite well, which put fear into the United Fruit Co. A CIA backed coup toppled the government in 1954. Through the 1980s 170,000 people were killed.
Panama- In 1968 Omar Torrijos led a coup and took over the government. He proceeded to take some power away from the elite. In 1977, he and Carter signed a treaty for the canal's turnover to the Panamanians. In 1981 Torrijos was killed in a suspicious plane crash, and was replaced by Noriega. Noriega was a known drug smuggler and CIA operative. The US knew of his illegal operations from 1972, yet he was only indicted in 1988, he was working for the US for those sixteen years. Bush the elder was appointed CIA director in 1976, he exempted Noriega's drug deals from intelligence reports, and as US Vice President, in charge of the drug war, did the same. Noriega was a supplier of arms to the Contras, along with drug smuggling, in the mid 1980's. Noriega stole the elections in 1984 and 1989. The US tried to oust Noriega with economic sanctions, and a failed coup, and finally invading in 1989, he was becoming too independent. The canal was to be turned over to Panama, administratively in 1990, and totally in 2000. The US couldn't afford to have a "loose cannon" in charge of our vital canal. So, the US invaded in 1989. The government was turned back over to the elite. One billion in aid was given to them after the war. Half of this amount was given as incentives to US business, to pay private loans, and to pay back corporations, not to help the Panamanian people. Approximately 4,000 civilians were killed, in Operation Just Cause. The puppet government, using the US military, jailed opposition leaders, without charges for years. The government, which took over the drug trade, changed the constitution to outlaw a Panamanian Army. Since there was no local Army, the US passed a law that the US would protect the canal. Torrijos' son became president in1999, and the Panamanians made $2.2 billion operating the canal in the first year , which was more than the total that they had made in the previous 85 years.
Vietnam- The Viet Minh, after defeating the US backed French (France had no money after WWII), ignored foreign investing and wanted independent development. The US blocked a political settlement and blocked a plebiscite vote (which was mandated by the UN), which would have united Vietnam, because the US knew who would win such an election. Increasingly we backed state terror, until there was all out war. The reason given was the "Domino Theory" which stated that if one country fell to communism the surrounding nations would fall shortly later. If this theory was valid, then why did we establish relations with China, the most populated and totalitarian communist country, just as we were pulling out of Vietnam? After the war we blocked all aid to Vietnam, and backed the Cambodian Khmer Rouge to fight them. Although we did not win the war, it will take decades for them to recover. So we did teach them a lesson. We now trade with and invest in them, profit rules.
Indonesia- Suharto's coup in 1965, and subsequent killing of 700,000 people, thus crushing the only mass based party, was seen as a great thing by the US. The invasion of East Timor in the 1970's, which had just gained independence after the collapse of Portuguese colonialism, is a highlight, because of its oil reserves. Ford and Kissenger were in Indonesia the day before the invasion and gave Suharto the OK to use US supplied arms in the invasion of East Timor. Previously, the arms were only to be used for defensive purposes.
Afghanistan- yes, it was a training ground for terrorists, but the protection of an oil pipeline from the Caspian Sea that crosses this country and is never mentioned. The country went from a 10% share of Heroin production to 80% since the invasion.
Iraq- Our goon, Saddam, stepped on the wrong toes. He didn't understand that he couldn't use force to replace rule of law, as the US is allowed to do. In early 1991, after enduring harsh economic sanctions, Iraq wanted to withdraw from Kuwait, using "backdoor diplomacy". That wouldn't do, we had to punish Saddam, so we attacked under the guise of the UN. Another reason for the invasion was that Saddam was contemplating changing the petrodollar to the petroeuro, which would have been disastrous to the US. The US had taken the dollar from the gold standard to an oil standard in the 1970's. The dollar would not be worth the paper it was printed on. We did allow him to eliminate the Kurds and Shi 'ites, after the first Gulf War, nationalism had to be controlled. The Kurds and Shi'ites thought that Bush I would help, as he alluded to in his speeches, but he left them out to dry. We wanted an Iraqi junta that we could control, without Saddam, but there was no coup, he was too strong. (We had to reinvade to get rid of him, and have control of the oil) Saddam's crime of disobedience was worse than his war crimes against his own people, which the US ignored for over twenty years.
Pakistan- 2007 - General Musharraf, who took power by a coup in 1999, declared Marshall Law, arresting lawyers and judges after Pakistan's judiciary ruled that his election to the presidency was illegal. He is considered an ally on the war on terror, so Bush didn't even slap his hand, no less stop millions of dollars in aid. Bush promotes democracy and doesn't stop aid, the alternative might be worse. The US has painted itself into a corner. Pakistan has approximately 30 nuclear weapons. This situation is much more explosive than Iran, which is years away from possession of WMD. The Taliban and Al Qaeda are tolerated in/or control the western tribal areas of Pakistan. If civil war breaks out between Musharrif and Bhutto (Bhutto has since been assassinated) they may be able to pick up the pieces and get control of these WMD. The US must try to broker a deal to eliminate this threat.
Haiti- From 1915 to 1934 Haiti was occupied by the US. The population was taxed by corvee labor, they were not owned as in slavery, but had to work for no pay. In 1993 Clinton removed Aristide, their elected president, and removed him to the US. He returned and was elected president again. In 2004 he was again removed from office by the US, which he says was against his will, and sent to Africa. Jamaica offered amnesty to him, but Condelezza Rice said that he could not return to the Caribbean area. Due to lack of media coverage, very few people in the US were aware of this event.

The Cold War was a war for political and economic power, not military power. It proved advantageous to the two superpowers. They used each other to justify repression, taxing and violence of their own peoples. The USSR intervened, mostly in Eastern Europe, whenever the masses got organized. This helped them entrench their military/bureaucratic cartel. The US was allowed to intervene in its spheres of influence. It used the fear factor to subsidize military industry. The Cold War allowed the US and USSR to control their worst enemy, their constituents. The collapse of the Soviet Union was due to the decline of oil prices in the late 1980's, they have large oil reserves, which were funding the military budget to compete with the US. With the ending of the Cold War other enemies had to be invented.

"It's the leaders of the country who determine the policy (war,) and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along…All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to greater danger." This is a quote from Hermann Goring at the Nuremberg Trials!

Drugs were the first new fear. The war on drugs was announced in 1989, coincidentally just after the demise of the Cold War and the Communist threat. Our client states need money to stop the drug problem, but it is really used to control their constituents. It gives reason for military presence, distracts the public, and allows for repression and loss of civil liberties. Tobacco and alcohol kill more, exponentially, than illegal drugs. These products are two of the greatest exports of the US. Is it a coincidence that drug trafficking increases in direct proportion to CIA involvement? Could it be an "under the table" financing of the CIA?

Terrorism is now the newest fear factor that legitimizes our wartime economy. Osama Bin Laden, the US's comrade in arms in the 1980's USSR/Afghanistan War and possibly in the 1990's Balkan wars, produced the present reason for fear needed by our government to perpetuate our wartime economy. Bush II was enabled to use this premise to invade Iraq (even though he had planned to invade before 911). What is even more ludicrous is the "privatization" of this invasion. In past conflicts servicemen had units to supply, cook, provide security, etc. In this war private corporations supply, cook, hire mercenaries to protect, etc. Instead of paying members of our Armed Services to provide these services we pay "contractors" ten to twenty times as much money for the same jobs. There is no accountability as to the price of the meals served, and there are no rules or enforcement control for the mercenaries, they answer to nobody. The other motivating factor for the "contractors" is that if they were not involved. there would have to be a conscription draft. The "powers that be" learned from the Vietnam War that the populace would organize against this and thus sticks with a "volunteer" military. This was all done with no-bid contracts with these large corporations. This new concept increases the military/industrial complex profits even more, and the citizens have no recourse.

Some real definitions of words as used by the US Government:
Democracy- The public are to be spectators, they are to ratify the decisions of the elite. If the masses organize it is a crisis for democracy. The government allows the majority of US people to live fairly well, and dupe them into financing large corporations. One of the most frequently used ploys is to divert attention from major problems to minor problems such as gay rights, intelligent design, and abortion. Free Enterprise - Is public subsidy and private profit of and by large corporations, corporatocracy. A welfare state for the rich is the real objective of this program. In 2005 the energy bill gave billions of dollars in subsidy to oil companies, just as the oil companies had the largest quarterly profits ever recorded. This "free market" industry is controlled by OPEC, and other groups, that control oil production and prices. So much for being a free market! The government is lax in imposing "windfall taxes", which can help control the inordinate profits of these companies. At a Senate energy hearing in late 2005, chairman Senator Stevens of Alaska, who is said to be in the pocket of the oil companies, refused to swear in the representative of the oil companies, against the wishes of others on the committee. This basically allowed the corporation's representatives to lie without fear of perjury.
Internal Aggression - is the reason for overt aggression.
Peace process - The US will get what it wants.
Special Interests - Corporations = national interests
Conservative- Powerful government, interference in economy and social lives, enormous expenditures, less civil liberties, no inspection or responsibility to or by the people.
Socialism- is the control of production by the workers, not the owners and managers. The USSR was a socialist country, a totalitarian state, ruled from above. Lenin destroyed the factory councils and the Soviets soon after taking power. The Socialist system was a labor force with one leader. The word "socialist" draws a good connotation from the word "socialism".
Free Trade- is using slave-like labor and raping the resources of other countries.

In 1914 the US became the top creditor nation, loaning money to other countries. This lasted until 1985, when we became a debtor nation, and at this time we are the leading debtor nation. Almost 50% of our treasury notes are owned by foreign nations. We are borrowing about two billion dollars a day, mostly for our defense and war budgets, and to pay the interest on previous loans. Have you noticed that, in our most recent wars, we don't really try to win? It seems that prolonging wars is much more profitable for corporations, after all, the people are paying for their protection, both with their lives and finances. The longer a conflict lasts the more money the corporations make. The median US citizen works into the first week of July to pay the portion of his salary that goes to taxes. That is more than half his salary being paid out to fund projects that he has no say about, most of which is military in form. This redistribution of wealth goes from average Joe to the super rich. At this time every US citizen, man, woman, and child, owes about $25,000 to pay off the national debt.

Although nobody wants to pay taxes, it is a necessity. The infrastructure and defense of our country needs to be taken care of. Rather than using most of our monies to perpetuate our empire it should be used for projects that benefit the populace. We have become a country that is petroleum addicted. There are ways to cure this addiction; solar, wind power, etc. that should be technologically explored. If the top scientists and engineers were working on these projects rather than "Star Wars" and other military projects, we could probably become energy sufficient in a decade or so. People would live better, have more money to spend, and the environment would be less stressed. If we withdrew all of our military forces from around the world our imperialist nature could be reversed, and the peoples of the world would be safer. There would be less reason for terrorist attacks on our soil. Our military should be truly defensive in nature.

The American attitude of "My country right or wrong" or "the US is the greatest country in the world" is not hard to understand. The propaganda espoused by the media and schooling, from birth to the grave, has put blinders on our peoples. The US media services the Corporatocracy, after all most of it is controlled by them. Six corporations own most of the media, and their advertisers are huge corporations. The "free press" is no longer. When I was 5 years old I thought that the Indians were the bad guys. When I was ten I thought that the Commies were the bad guys. When I was twenty I thought the Viet Cong were the bad guys. Through diligent inspection over the many years since then, I have reversed these views almost 180 degrees, in spite of the daily propaganda.

We do have the power to change things, but not in our present two party system. Most Americans are apathetic towards voting. This apathy might be from our subconscious minds, we know that nothing will change, so why vote. Look at the 2004 Presidential Election. In reality, we had two choices. Both were from privileged backgrounds, went to Yale at about the same time, and were members of the Skull & Bones fraternity. They differed on none of the major issues, differed on "smoke screen" issues such as abortion, and did not question the path that the US was on. What kind of choice is that? These personal issues need attention, but we have larger problems to work on. Our legislators are mostly of the same ilk. They all took advantage of "earmark spending", cannot balance a checkbook, gave in to the terrorism fear, etc. Their only goal is to get re-elected and they don't care about people that can't vote. Much of their time is spent collecting donations for the next election. They talk about God, which should not even be mentioned in politics (any discourse can be halted by an injunction to Gods authority, how can one reply to such a statement?), and do everything that goes against natural/Godly law. The Christian / Judeo / Muslim God is the same. Call him El, Yahweh, Jehovah, or Allah. He's the same one. He's against killing, stealing, rape, etc. Isn't that what war is? The Torah tells farmers to set aside a portion of there fields so that the poor can be taken care of. Jesus constantly preaches about helping the indigent. The Koran also teaches to help the poor. Islam means peace! I don't know too much about the Hindu religion, but Ghandi was Hindu, and he non-violently freed a nation. I have never heard of a modern religion that preaches to kill. Our country, which was founded on freedom of religion, takes no heed to the preaching of all major modern religions… …………DO NOT KILL and HELP THY NEIGHBOR

No leader of the US has ever acknowledged these hidden occurrences and philosophies with a sufficient forthrightness. The errors of omission by our media, has kept the public in darkness. It is time that we reconcile our internal conflicts and divisions, and should understand the errors that have been made. We must work together with other nations and corporations to alleviate the stresses of our planet that can be overcome. The economic system that we use needs war, and therefore war is inevitable. We must concentrate on the good strengths of the US, and speak with honesty and regret about the shameful episodes in our history. America's strength is rooted in its most stable asset-its values, if we lose them we are not the America we thought we were.

Return to Issues