Prøveballon(?) eller bare endnu en omgang med tommelskruerne, krigsskatten luftes af politikervældet. Hvordan var det nu – indkomstskatten blev i sin tid indført som en midlertidig krigsskat og hvor er vi henne i dag?
Næppe nogen tror på at militærudgifterne kommer op på 5%, hvilket ville være ensbetydende med voldsom beskæring af levestandard, voldsom gældsætning eller begge dele (CEPOS har regnet på det).
Den trussel der henvises til er stærkt overdrevet – David Stockman begik for nylig et lidt længere skriv om det helt absurde militærbudget, selvfølgelig med udgangspunkt i den største og mest krigeriske stat i menneskehedens historie. Her er par punktnedslag i teksten. Læs selv den hele på antiwar.com – derfor er der stadig ikke fred på jord.
Indeed, America’s ostensible “enemies” actually have no offensive or invasionary capacity at all. Russia has only one aircraft carrier—a 1980s era relic which has been in dry-dock for repairs since 2017 and is equipped with neither a phalanx of escort ships nor a suite of attack and fighter aircraft—and at the moment not even an active crew.
Likewise, China has just three aircraft carriers – two of which are refurbished rust buckets purchased from the remnants of the old Soviet Union, and which carriers do not even have modern catapults for launching their strike aircraft.
In short, neither China nor Russia will be steaming their tiny 3 and 1 carrier battle groups toward the shores of either California or New Jersey any time soon. An invasionary force that had any chance at all of surviving a US fortress defense of cruise missiles, drones, jet fighters, attack submarines and electronics warfare would need to be 100X larger.
Vi skal tilbage til 1. verdenskrig som blev startskuddet på en interventionisme der har ført til myrderier og enorme alternativomkostninger der er vanskelige at undervurdere (omend umulige at estimere! – vi kan ikke forestille os de fremskridt vi kunne have skaffet os i stedet for alle ressourcer spildt på krig og våbenkapløb).
So let us amplify on the contrafactual history upon which this proposition rests.
First, had the Great War ended in the spring of 1917 by a mutual withdrawal from the utterly stalemated trenches of the Western Front, as it was destined to, there would have been no disastrous summer offensive by the Kerensky government, or subsequent massive mutiny in Petrograd that enabled Lenin’s flukish seizure of power in November. That is, the 20th century would not have been saddled with what metastasized into the Stalinist nightmare or with a Soviet state that poisoned the peace of nations for 75 years, while the nuclear sword of Damocles hung over the planet.
Likewise, there would have been no abomination known as the Versailles peace treaty; no “stab in the back” legends owing to the Weimar government’s forced signing of the “war guilt” clause; no continuance of England’s brutal post-armistice blockade that delivered Germany’s women and children into starvation and death and left a demobilized 3-million-man army destitute, bitter and susceptible to a permanent political rampage of vengeance.
So too, there would have been no acquiescence in the dismemberment of Germany and the spreading of its parts and pieces to Poland, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, France, Austria and Italy – with the consequent revanchist agitation that nourished the Nazi’s with patriotic public support in the rump of the fatherland.
Stockman gennemgår en række afledte misforståelser og slutter af med en af de værste, nemlig at enhver despot her og der og alle vegne er den ‘næste’ Hitler eller Stalin, og derfor er intet, intet!, offer for stort i kampen for at erstatte despoten. Som regel med en despot eller situation der er endnu værre – og derfor bærer kimen til den næste intervention.
Læs hele artiklen, den tid er godt givet ud. Lad så de politikere der vil slås, gøre det, men med egne private kræfter og midler; ikke andres blod og mønt!
Staten er ikke din beskytter, ikke din ven, ‘vi’ er ikke staten, og staten er ikke os. Læs Rothbards ligssynsrapport. Når først øjnene har set hvad staten er for en størrelse kan begivenhederne omkring os bedre forstås. Det er ikke kønt.
