<THREAD> An insane president able to launch nuclear weapons. An incoming SecDef paid millions by weapons contractors. Both big problems. Both just the tip of the iceberg. I tried to unpack it all here. Let me try to summarize in a few tweets. responsiblestatecraft.org/2021/01/06/why…
Austin's ties to the firms he will now oversee is part of the strategy of weapons corporations to dominate America's defense policy. They sell weapons like Kellogg’s sells cereal. It’s not a question of whether we need the product; they just need to convince us to buy it. 2/
They do this in three ways. "The first is a pitch that relies on product differentiation, a way to sell essentially the same goods in a variety of shapes, sizes, and packaging. You like shredded wheat? Then maybe you’d like it frosted, or bite-sized, or both." 3/
"The second is control of the market. These firms dominate in ways that Kellogg’s could only dream of doing. Corporations have thoroughly penetrated the military services generating the weapons requirements through decades of revolving doors and increasing dependence...4/
"...on contractors for core analysis, communication, and even administrative functions. The same is true of the civilian departments that purchase and oversee the weapons development and productions programs." 5/
“The truth is,” says Senator Elizabeth Warren, “our existing laws are far too weak to effectively limit the undue influence of giant military contractors at the Department of Defense.” 6/
The third is to do what Facebook and Amazon do: eliminate the competition. Contractors have basically absorbed or bought off institutional threats to their programs. They place subcontracts in most or all 435 Congressional District, supplemented by big campaign contributions. 7/
Coupled with the fear establishment Democrats have for appearing “weak” on national security, this system of contracts, contributions, and campaigns has effectively gutted meaningful congressional oversight. 8/
Contractors over the past few decades have also constrained the formerly independent analytical establishment. Just as the fossil fuel industry muted criticism of climate change and established alternative experts, when the Cold War ended... 9/
... and movements to eliminate nuclear weapons arose, weapons firms flooded think tanks and universities with grants, compromising their independence. Over the past 5 years, they pumped at least $1 billion into the top fifty think tanks in America. 10/
It worked. Strategy is now a thin veneer of justification for a collection of legacy systems and new programs promoted for corporate financial profit and political advantage. The entire process is guided by an army of 775 (!) defense lobbyists in Washington. 11/
The mental instability of the president has revealed the insanity of a system that gives one human being the power to destroy in minutes what humanity has created over millennia. Our current strategy justifies $2Trillion in planned new weapons but puts us all in grave danger. 12/
This should not be a cause for despair, but for recalibration. All of us - journalists, think tanks, NGOs and @JoeBiden - can fix this. We can restore integrity to America's security strategy. I outline some of the steps here. I hope this helps. END responsiblestatecraft.org/2021/01/06/why…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
