The Cost War
In class, we recently discussed what aspects of 1984 seem relevant to our modern society. When reading Goldstein’s book, his section on War and Peace stood out to me. Goldstein justifies endless war through his idea that war brings stability both through its consistency and economic effect. These points about war seem pertinent to the U.S. We often view wars as idealistic and productive but there is much more nuance. The Spanish-American war, for example, had an ideological justification of freeing Cuba but led to direct U.S influence in the Philippines. Other examples include interventions such as creating a revolution in panama for a canal, Guatemala to preserve fruit companies, or installing a dictator in Iran for oil companies. Most wars stretch on, and are driven by economic policy, a bit like 1984.
However, Goldstein points out that the effects of war go far beyond direct conflict.
“Even when weapons of war are not actually destroyed, their manufacture is still a convenient way of expending labor without producing anything that can be consumed. A floating fortress, for example, has locked up in it the labor that would build several hundred cargo ships.” (191)
This reminded me of news about the US military budget, which is roughly twice the combined budget of the rest of the world. This ridiculous amount of money is used to fund and acquire new arms for the military. The breakdown of spending is somewhat public and here is the 2011 programs allotted 1.5 billion dollars or more.
These are state of the art weapons. The F-35 is a 5th generation jet with advanced computers, and stealth technology. The new missile defense systems, and unmanned aerial vehicles require fast computation and physics. However, it’s disconcerting to realize that every military technology has a limited lifetime. People used to see the F-15 program as the pinnacle of technology. The production of F-15s, which dominated the air for so long, is set to end in 2022. Similarly, the patriot missiles used in the gulf war and Israel will eventually be phased out, and new technologies phased in.
Military technology will never be enough. When the U.S spends over 1 trillion dollars on the F-35, a new program will begin, and in our lifetime the F-35 will be phased out. Some of these planes never see combat, and yet are refueled, and repaired costing American taxpayers billions of dollars per year. The U.S military spending is eerily like Goldstein’s analysis of military technology.
In case you are curious, I found the spending on Wikipedia
but the citation brings you to the following archive of military spending.
Sorry for using 2011 data, it would be valuable to use modern information but this was easy to find and was enough for the post
I always knew that the US spent tons of money on the military, but I never knew it was this much!! That's crazy how we spend so much money on so much technology that won't ever be used. You're right to say that Goldstein's work reminds you of the US military budget, and how we spend all of this effort on something so useless to the country in general. It would be great if we could use the money that goes towards the military on healthcare or education, something that taxpayers benefit from directly.
ReplyDeleteIt's crazy to think about how much money is spent towards developing and building new military technology especially since you've pointed out how many of these developments will be phased out and how new programs will come to replace them. I wonder how much of the military spending is actually critical to US security.
ReplyDeleteI agree that's it's a crazy amount of money. I also wonder how much money and material is used for the wars described in 1984. The point you make about F-35 is also interesting. I think right now the military power is based on the newest technologies (which are constantly changing) instead of actual man power. However in 1984 is seems like they're not really interested in developing any type of technology, military included. It's not just that way in Oceania but also in Eastasia and Eurasia.
ReplyDelete-Anna Ondrejckova
That section in Goldstein's book about the war did remind me of our condition today, too, but I didn't realize it was this extreme. US military spending seems quite superfluous, especially considering that they might not need all this new technology if they're just going to be replaced. I wonder such excessive spending is really necessary?Personally I just think it would be more beneficial for the US if all that money could be invested in more important things.
ReplyDeleteI think you make a very important point here. As I was reading the book, I kept thinking that the extent to which they use war as a means to keep their economy and hierarchy alive was a bit extreme, but now that I think about it, it's not too far off from what we see in the U.S. We've seen the economy revive multiple times during wartime production.
ReplyDeleteThe U.S. military is a perfect comparison to the wars in 1984. Not only is this upsetting because of the wasted resources spent on unnecessary tech and weaponry, but because of the wasted money as well. Perhaps there's a bit of an agenda (similar to 1984) for powerful people and organizations to avoid spending more on things (like education, infrastructure, etc.) that would contribute to more equality?
ReplyDeleteThis was a really interesting, Ethan. Seeing the actual numbers drives home some of the consequences of war we just don't see in our everyday lives. Some of the most insightful parts of 1984, to me, were about the utility of war. There are so many real-life examples of war benefitting somebody (unbeknownst to much of the public).
ReplyDeleteI think a key difference between the expenditure on war in 1984 and in our society is motive. In 1984 the motive behind war spending is to keep people poor, while in our society, the motives other than national security have more to do with making people rich. Granted, the wealth generated by military expenditure is concentrated in the hands of a small group of people, but it is still a very important distinction to make.
ReplyDeleteYour blog post reminds me once again of the strikingly similar characteristics that the US and the 1984 world share. A dystopian novel exaggerates the flaws in society. George Orwell wrote this nearly 70 years ago. What might seem crazy right now, such as The Handmaid's Tale, might not seem to be 50 years in the future. Great post.
ReplyDelete