I have recently seen the revival of an absurd old paranoia from the 60's and 70's, the idea that a cabal of arms manufacturers and others is conspiring to push governments into wars to help their bottom line. Given supposed respectability by being dubbed the "military industrial complex" in the 70's, it has largely been ignored during the 90's, but this conspiracy theory is seeing a new revival. First, of course, was the Halliburton theory, that Halliburton drove us to war to make money. Then a number of works of fiction started to appear centering on international arms makers driving nations to war. And now I see posters on the political left arguing that McCain is being financed by arms manufacturers who want to drive us into a new cold war with Russia.

This is just absurd. I cannot say it more clearly. It is paranoia of the first order. It is sickening that anyone even takes it seriously. It is as bizarre as claiming doctors are out there spreading disease to improve their bottom line, or that Ruger subsidizes criminals to sell more guns for home defense.

Let us start with the obvious. The claim is that arms dealers make money by war, so they would have an interest in starting wars. But is that true?

Well, yes, in a way. But it is true of almost every profession, they make money by solving a problem, so they could make more money by creating that problem. Doctors could spread disease to improve their bottom line. mechanics could make money by going out and sabotaging cars. Contractors could burn down houses to increase their demand. However, because a problem would increase demand, it does not logically follow that companies are covertly causing the problem. Does anyone believe the Mayo clinic is hiding radium in people's homes to drum up new cancer cases? Then why give this absurd story the time of day?

Second, who says war is good for the bottom line of arms manufacturers? Most often in wartime, industry is nationalized and the manufacturers' profits are controlled by law. If the US were forced into a large scale war it would probably be bad for arms manufacturers, not good. Nor, conversely, has peace been bad for arms merchants. Perhaps when Clinton tried to spend the supposed "peace dividend" it was not the best time to be a supplier to the US army, but other than that, contractors, manufacturers and R&D firms have done quite well for themselves in peace time. It isn't as if weapons are not bought and new arms developed in peace time. There is plenty of money for manufacturers during peace, they hardly need a war to make money.

Lastly, it isn't as if there is ever a time there is  no war in the world. Arms dealers do not need to start wars, there is always a war without any outside pressure. If the arms dealers really need a war to make money, they will always have one. And it seems unlikely any of those nations which find themselves at war would turn down a source of supply. So if the arms dealers are truly looking for a source of revenue, and need a war to get one, they should have no shortage of customers, even if they do nothing to inspire conflict.

So, why does this absurd lie continue to revive year after year?

Most likely it is because it combines the two great demons in the liberal universe, industry and the military. Look at Hollywood and ask yourself who are the villains in most movies. Either evil military men or evil businessmen, and this theory combines the two. Better yet, it has the allure of all conspiracy theories, providing a simple explanation for all the complexities of the world while at the same time giving believers the feeling they know something no one else does. That is the reason most buy into conspiracy theories, and this one is no different. Whether it is Zionists, the military industrial complex, illuminated masters from the hollow earth, neo-Nazi cabals, the Priory of Sion, or the Justified Ancients of Muu Muu, a conspiracy theory is at heart appealing because of both its reductionism and its elitism, those who could never understand the whole truth, and who will never join any kind of elect can do both with conspiracy theories. And that is their appeal, even when they are as patently absurd as this one.

POSTSCRIPT

The term "military industrial complex" comes from much earlier than the 1970's, but it wasn't until the 70's that it was used in the conspiratorial sense, rather than to describe something much less sinister.

UPDATE

I have written before about conspiracy theories. Rather than clutter this essay with links, I will simply post a list of the most relevant articles below:

Bill Clinton Murdered Leon Trotsky!
Dismissing Conspiracy Theories
Our New Paranoia
Isn't History Enough?
The Appeal of Conspiracy Theories
A Shortcoming of Conspiracy Theories
Absurdities on Oil

You can also read most of my recent posts on the scapegoating of oil speculators and "Big Oil", as that has all the hallmarks of a conspiracy theory as well.