moonofalabama | It is indisputable that the generals are now ruling in Washington DC. They came to power over decades by shaping culture
through their sponsorship of Hollywood, by manipulating the media
through "embedded" reporting and by forming and maintaining the
countries infrastructure through the Army Corps of Engineers. The
military, through the NSA as well as through its purchasing power,
controls the information flow on the internet. Until recently the
military establishment only ruled from behind the scene. The other parts
of the power triangle,
the corporation executives and the political establishment, were more
visible and significant. But during the 2016 election the military bet
on Trump and is now, after he unexpectedly won, collecting its price.
Trump's success as the "Not-Hillary" candidate
was based on an anti-establishment insurgency. Representatives of that
insurgency, Flynn, Bannon and the MAGA voters, drove him through his
first months in office. An intense media campaign was launched to
counter them and the military took control of the White House. The
anti-establishment insurgents were fired. Trump is now reduced to public
figure head of a stratocracy - a military junta which nominally follows
the rule of law.
Stephen Kinzer describes this as America’s slow-motion military coup:
Ultimate power to shape American foreign and security policy has fallen into the hands of three military men [...]
...
Being ruled by generals seems preferable to the alternative. It isn’t.
...
[It] leads toward a distorted set of national priorities, with military “needs” always rated more important than domestic ones.
...
It is no great surprise that Trump has been drawn into the foreign policy mainstream; the same happened to President Obama early in his presidency. More ominous is that Trump has turned much of his power over to generals. Worst of all, many Americans find this reassuring. They are so disgusted by the corruption and shortsightedness of our political class that they turn to soldiers as an alternative. It is a dangerous temptation.
The country has fallen to that temptation even on social-economic issues:
In the wake of the deadly racial violence in Charlottesville this month, five of the Joint Chiefs of Staff were hailed as moral authorities for condemning hate in less equivocal terms than the commander in chief did.
...
On social policy, military leaders have been voices for moderation.
