Showing posts with label war profiteering. Show all posts
Showing posts with label war profiteering. Show all posts

Sunday, December 02, 2007

Gangster America

Spoiler Alert: I discuss some background about the feature film American Gangster of which you may not be aware before seeing the film. I myself wasn't fully aware of it, nor that the film dealt with it so, I wanted to forewarn readers who might wish to see the movie and enjoy finding out for themselves the many levels this excellent movie traverses.

There are a number of films this year being touted as Hollywood's reaction to the war and political crisis in Iraq and here at home. Most notable among these perhaps are Lions for Lambs, Rendition, and Charlie Wilson's War. The films critics and commentators probably will not and as of yet have not included on this list is Ridley Scott's American Gangster. Starring Denzel Washington, American Gangster is the story of Frank Lucas, heir apparent to Harlem organized crime leader Ellsworth "Bumpy" Johnson. Lucas would establish a heroin distribution network that outstripped any existing in the U.S. at the time, baffling New York police, federal narcotics enforcement, and competing organized crime operations.

It is not the story of Frank Lucas himself however, but its backdrop that warrants American Gangster's inclusion in, and placement at the top of the aforementioned list. It is the America of Vietnam and Nixon. An America still reeling in the wake of the civil rights struggle and the upheaval of national Jim Crow and international Jim Crow in the form of colonial rule. It was also an America led by an individual who by accounts of close advisors as well as his own audio recordings was perhaps the most powerful, drug/drink-addled paranoiac of the modern age. A man whose attempted heist of the U.S. presidency would precipitate his downfall. America was a gangster on foreign shores being led by no less than a gangster.

Through Lucas' story, we are reminded of Major General Smedley D. Butler, USMC, who wrote I was a racketeer. A gangster for capitalism. We are haunted by the warnings of former President and General Dwight D. Eisenhower who stated in his farewell address we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. Lucas' ascendancy to dominance of the Eastern U.S. heroin trade was facilitated by the U.S. military presence in southeast Asia during the Vietnam Conflict. In that way, legitimized gangsterism opened the path to more nefarious gangsterism. Exchange Abu Ghraib for Harlem housing projects, water-boarding for no knock warrant, BlackWater for Special Investigation Unit, War on Terror for War on Crime. Where war-making ends do war crimes begin, or is war-making itself the war crime?

The irony of Frank Lucas' story lies in its conclusion. The heroic efforts and character of Richie Roberts, New Jersey Detective and co-prosecuter in Lucas' case, ultimately brought Lucas to justice. Despite the years they spent as adversaries the two found more in common with each other than their respective peers. They bonded, and together uncovered and brought down one of the nations biggest police corruption scandals. Strangely enough, Robert's first case as a defense attorney would be that of Frank Lucas, defending Lucas against the very crimes for which he'd originally prosecuted him.

I hearken back to the whistle-blowers of the late 90's and early 00's. Their own steadfast integrity, crises of conscience, or both, coupled with herculean struggle called to account some of our country's most powerful organizations including Enron, WorldCom, big tobacco (ironically featured in another Russel Crowe film, The Insider), and the FBI. It is a parallel I can only hope and pray continues into our present day as another gangster presidential administration winds to its own conclusion. If only that means we too will conclude our collective chapter as American Gangsters. That the Lucases and a Roberts, or other Insiders within us will come to the fore. Maybe then can we finally enter our own second act and call to account the gangsters whom we as a nation - in politics, business, military, religion and other global affairs - have ourselves supported and/or created.

Thursday, May 17, 2007

Destroy the Draft...

...and replace it with something better.

I've been thinking about lifelong dreams and how to achieve them. Some of them, you can keep quietly to yourself, and through your own hard work, see come to fruition. Others, need the power of the whole cosmos to make it happen. Draft for Peace. I feel like this is one of them.

Why is it, that the only opportunity has to serve one's country, get trained, fed, clothed, and paid for it is through the military. There programs and organizations like The Peace Corps, AmeriCorps/CityYear, and TeachForAmerica. But neither individually nor combined do these programs have the span, the reach, nor the spending of the U.S. Military.

To think that when men and women were drafted for WWI and WWII, it wasn't just to serve as soldiers. Farmers were drafted to grow crops. Workers were drafted to build ships, vehicles, armaments, and other wartime supplies. So that the draft was not defined solely to place men in the battlefield.

I got to thinking. Why can't there be a similar selective service, draft, and for that matter full-fledged service corps to serve our society's needs and obligations (to democracy, social justice, and liberty) domestically and globally during peacetime? Is it only when our government fails - vis a vis failed foreign policy that creates the necessity for war - that we can find the funds, resources, and wherewithal to mobilize people to action?

Why is it that there should be any shortage of manpower to renovate schools, to update public utilities like bridges or sewer systems, to maintain a park, or sweep up a sidewalk? Why should non-profit public service organizations struggle to find willing capable individuals to help with projects or even operations?

I bet if you asked a young person if they would like to get paid to learn logistics and communications and give them the choice between implementing for civilian support (disaster and recovery, public events, recreational safety) versus battlefield support, the majority would choose civilian support.

The demand I'm certain is there. Where are the opportunities? Where is the communication and coordination that internet connectivity has enabled? I'm not the first person to have thought of this. The existence of the Peace Corps, Doctors Without Borders, and CityYear speak to the need for such citizen service. However, the recruiting, development, and maintenance of a standing citizen service corps is until now and for the foreseeable future no match to that of the military's.

Yet when we talk of defending Democracy, we immediately think war, guns, tanks, fighter jets, battleships, bombs, and waves upon waves of young soldiers. Yet the defense of Democracy takes place every day in civilian citizen actions, that far outnumber and outstrip any actions taken in aggression. This is what separates Democracies from Military Juntas and Dictatorships, yet to look at the investment our government and our economy makes in military aggression you would think that we as a nation defending a junta or oligarchy instead of a democracy.

Why do we fight? When there is so much work to be done? Soldiers do what they can, and in the desperate situations we place them in, they do what they must. But hammers are near useless with a phillips head screw. And it's plain to me that we are desperately short on phillips head screw drivers. And if that's the case, what really is there left for a tank or a gun to save?