Why Economist Thomas Piketty Has Scared the Pants Off the American Right

[happyslug]

98. And Communism raised so much fear, massive armies were raised

Such armies required the draft to provide the men needed for them, and for the draft to work the people being drafted MUST feel they would be fighting for a just cause. Thus Capitalists had to make a better place for such soldiers, for fear that they would turn their weapons against the Capitalists.

Notice, the issue for such draftees was fair treatment, they would accept being underpaid while in the Service, but would NOT accept the continuation of the poor getting poorer and the richer getting richer which had been the norm in the 1800s.

In the US, we have had more use of the Military to put down labor then any other country, Britain is #2. The reason for this is simple, except for brief time period, both countries employed mercenary armies (often called "Volunteers" or "Regulars&quot as opposed the the Universal Service Armies of the European Continent. With Universal Military Service, the people and the army become one and the same, and as such the Army becomes something useless to put down labor or popular unrest. The most recent example of this is Egypt. The Egyptian Army basically refused to shoot Egyptians who wanted Mubarak out. Once the Egyptian Police could not contain the revolt, Mubarak was out for the Army could NOT be relied on to put down the revolt.

Now, with the overthrow of Morsi, was different from the overthrow of Mubarak. Yes, you had a protest that lead to the overthrow, but it was clearly one produced by the Army leadership who wanted to regain control of the Government. Once the coup took place, the Army leadership re-instituted the Police and used the Police to put down any resistance, along with elite formations from within the Army. Army troops were sent around as a show of force, but NOT used to put down the protests against the Coup (Instead the Police and elite forces did that job).

The reason the protests continued so long, was the Generals could NOT rely on their troops to put down the protesters, instead to resorted to the Police which had been suppressing revolts since the time of Nasser. The present government of Egypt is unstable for it has no support among the people or the enlisted ranks of the Army.

When the Soviet Union was dissolving and the members of the Warsaw Pact overthrew their Communists Governments, all were peaceful for the Army of each country was "Draftee" and as such reflected the will of the people. i.e. if the people were for the revolt, so were they. The only exception to the peaceful revolts was in Romania. In Romania the Communist leadership tried to use its Police Force to stay in power, sending it out to suppress the revolt of the people of Romania. At that point the Army intervened, rejecting the order of the Government to support the Police, instead supported the People, for that is what the enlisted ranks wanted to do, and you really can NOT send in a modern army to do something it does NOT want to do.

In the US and to a lesser extent Britain, the desire for an army loyal to its paymasters, not the people was what was wanted and starting in the late 1960s you see that desire come again as you started to have problems with the US Army in Vietnam, as the people went from supporting the war in Vietnam to opposing the war (this happened in the summer of 1968, before that time period, polls has always shown the American People supporting the war in Vietnam, it is only in 1968 that polls starts to go the other way, and with the move in the polls, the effectiveness of the US Army in Vietnam went down hill).

The US Army in Vietnam was a draftee Army and as such tended to be one with the people of the US. After Vietnam, the US went to a "Volunteer" army, an army that gets its recruits by paying them (in other words a mercenary army, but no one likes that name, so it is called a "Volunteer" Army). A mercenary army is loyal to is paymaster, and thus even as most Americans opposed the War in Iraq, the US Army went and fought.

Please note the switch from a Draftee Army to a Mercenary Army is the same time when post WWII movement to fairer share of the income of the US, ended and the US resumed its pre-depression norm of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. Yes, the opposition to the Vietnam war was one of the reason for ending the draft, but the people who authored the change had been for that change since WWII, on the grounds they wanted an army capable of suppressing domestic unrest, which a mercenary army does quite well.

Thus, while the post WWII era saw "bones" being thrown to the 99% to keep them from revolting, the post 1972 saw those "bones" being withdrawn and a build up of an army that can be used to suppress internal revolts. Such an army can also be used in overseas actions opposed by the American People, as it has been used in Iraq and Afghanistan. The US Army has been in Afghanistan longer then it was in Vietnam. The US Army is NOT going through the deterioration in fighting ability it went through between 1968 and 1972. The reason is the deterioration in fighting ability between 1968 and 1972 reflected opposition to the war by the American people, for the American People and its Army were one and the same (in mind and to a lesser degree body). In Afghanistan and Iraq the US Army is more concerned about its paymasters then the people of the US, and as such does what its paymaster wants.

Thus the shift from a Universal Service Army (more commonly called a Draftee Army) reflects fears by the ruling elite that such an Army will do what the American People wants done, not what they want done. The ruling elite wanted to stay in Vietnam passed 1972, but the Army enlisted ranks prevented that by just not enlisting and those drafted going through the motions instead of during what was needed. The ruling elite blamed everyone but that they were fighting an unpopular war. Worse I lived in that time period and they were discussions about what would happen in five to ten years if things were bad. they were looking for riots everywhere. Thus in many ways the move to a mercenary army was driven by the large protests of the Civil Rights movement and later the peace movement NOT the Vietnam war itself.

Just a comment that the present make up of the US Military is ideal for use to suppress any revolt by anyone the ruling elite does not want to protest. That was NOT true of the US Army of the 1960s and that is part of policy not accident.