Council on Foreign Relations calls for more military spending to boost US dominance
By - March 15, 2016

CFR Elites Seek Renewed Military Spending Around the World

New World Order is New World Disorder … Richard Haass, president at Council on Foreign Relations, discusses this weekend’s attacks in Turkey and the Ivory Coast and the importance of international leadership by the United States. He speaks on “Bloomberg Surveillance.” – Bloomberg

The Council on Foreign Relations is worried about US domestic disillusionment with foreign involvement including military actions.

Richard Haass, president of the CFR just appeared on Bloomberg in a much-touted video to discuss the “importance of international leadership.”

His appearance seems part of a disciplined effort to head off US “isolationism” and his campaign seems to go back at least to 2014.

In late 2014, in a voluminous article in Foreign Affairs entitled “The Unraveling How to Respond to a Disordered World,” Haass made the case that though the US would have less influence globally in the 21st century that leaders shouldn’t step away from international involvement.

In fact, he says, the US should step up its military spending around the world.

Others have also written about the “unraveling”, such as one posted at the New Yorker in October 2015 entitled “The New World Disorder.”

The United States needs to put its domestic house in order, Haass believes, both to increase Americans’ living standards and to generate the resources needed to sustain an active global role.

He’s concerned with what he calls “a perennial tension in the world between forces of order and forces of disorder, with the details of the balance between them defining each era’s particular character.”

He even frames the tension in terms of the perpetuation of civilization itself.


Sources of order include actors committed to existing international rules and arrangements and to a process for modifying them; sources of disorder include actors who reject those rules and arrangements in principle and feel free to ignore or undermine them … These days, the balance between order and disorder is shifting toward the latter.

This is a clever rhetorical device as informed critics of the US’s role in the world assert that the US’s own intelligence agencies helped create and still support various terrorist groups.

In other words, much of the “disorder” that Haass laments has been initiated via Anglosphere funding to create a crisis atmosphere that justifies the perpetuation of a variety of military-industrial complexes, especially in Britain and the US.

As John Maynard Keynes did with economics, so Haass does with issues of governance. He starts his analysis with the ADVENT of the problem, not its cause.

In other words, Haass’s global remedies do not deal with the source of the “terrorist problem” but only with its aftermath.

This allows him to present the argument as one of “order versus disorder.” He disapproves of “actors who reject … rules and arrangements and feel free to undermine them.”

It is easy to see that this can be used to justify almost any kind of US military activism abroad.

For instance, Haass brings up President Vladimir Putin of Russia and goes so far as to accuse him of supporting a “manifestation of what could well be a project of Russian or, rather, Soviet restoration.”

Interestingly, Haass also cites Europe’s Thirty Years’ War some 400 years ago, explaining that it was the result of “weak states … unable to police large swaths of their territories.” This he says, gave rise to “militias and terrorist groups acting with increasing sway.”

When researching the impact of the Gutenberg Press on European society, we came to the conclusion that this odd, endless war was prosecuted by elite powers to fend off the impact of the written word to Europe’s hitherto illiterate masses. There are parallels between it and the war in Afghanistan for instance.

In fact, we were not at all surprised by the escalating wars in Africa and the Middle East, beginning over a decade ago. It seemed these began just as the Internet reached its first flowering.

Establishment forces as personified by Haass are extremely determined and well funded (as they control the money supply).

Rhetorical arguments in support of Leviathan will always be produced to justify the regnant state.

Which brings us to yesterday’s article on Donald Trump.

Contrary to some feedbacks and letters, we have not sided with anti-Trump forces in this upcoming election. In fact, our article states toward its conclusion that we hope Trump is everything his supporters believe he is.

But we also believe that even were Trump a determined advocate for communal and personal freedom, there is little he can do to reverse the tide of history.

We do not believe in the current era that any US President can do much to affect the current downward spiral of US affairs or its increasing authoritarianism.

Politics ultimately are an extraneous solution.  Freedom begins with individual responsibility, not with casting a vote for someone who will make a decisions for hundreds of millions.

No matter who is in charge, regulatory democracy is likely to continue to be a failure. In fact, by participating in the system, people unfortunately often perpetuate it.

People need to go their own way as much as possible. They may wish to “drop out” or simply to organize among local communities in ways that are not readily apparent to the larger officialdom.

Conclusion: As we can see with Haass, Leviathan will perpetuate government funding government and activism and this will never change. Work to take control on a personal, family and community level. At least that way you have a chance to implement your own wealth-making and lifestyle solutions rather than government’s.

  • FreeOregon

    What if being the dominant killer does not mean the economy thrives?

    • Praetor

      ‘O’, it thrives, and those that thrive in the killing are the ones making the killing. Then we know which ones, to eliminate. We will have no other choice. If we wish to continue to breath oxygen, sad to say!!!!!

  • Clayton Smith

    Why do I smell a jobs bill in this announcement? Is this to reassure the Saudi’s and our other satraps that we are not going to abandon them? Is this part of the Dump Trump movement by turning his right flank? Is DARPA anxious to role out a new set weapons systems? With the Fed providing the ZIRP, can we now entertain a reality where the size of public debt is irrelevant and we can enjoy a “deficit without tears?” Can we buy both more guns and more butter? After all, the only way the entitlement promises can be kept is through money printing. World reserve currency status seems to confer upon the USG the commanding heights, at least until the next big surprise comes along, or until such time as the pain the USG inflicts upon the lesser countries of the world becomes too great to bear and the risk premiums shift in orders of magnitude and predictability. What is certain is that the future will have more corruption and false pride and less freedom.

  • Marten

    “Once a Country becomes too large, any System of Government will become oppressive, the Political infection eventually overwhelms the Hosts…the likes of cancer”

  • Such a liar.

    Here’s the root and branch of US foreign policy in the 21st Century:

  • Praetor

    Order and disorder, No such thing. There is only controlled chaos. Government is a fiction a fantasy. Government only purpose is to control the individual and the individuals action. Their worried the people are disillusioned with foreign involvement. The people were tired of it during Vietnam and here it is 40 plus years later and still more body bags, young kids with there limbs blown off. I think we will see just how wicked these people will become. I hate to say it, but we haven’t seen anything yet!!!

  • Bruce C.

    “We do not believe in the current era that any US President can do much to affect the current downward spiral of US affairs or its increasing authoritarianism.”

    I can’t tell you how much I hope “the DBers” are wrong about that.

    The good thing is the President alone does not have to do that, and is not even expected to. It is the will and the voices and the actions of the people who become the change. They can do it from within themselves as individuals each in his and her own ways. But that requires an awareness of what changes are needed, and that – it seems to me – is happening at an accelerating pace. The internet and social media have increased awareness of many issues, and in real time so people can follow the dynamics. One of the many amazing things about this Presidential election is that Trump is unwittingly exposing all kinds of hypocrisy and corruption in politics and the media and people are starting to quickly figure things out. Another surprising development is that Trump is not only appealing to people across all demographic and political “categories” but he is actually inspiring those people to actually vote, many of whom claim to have never voted before. Trump himself calls this a “movement” and it really seems to be. I went to a Trump rally last Sunday and I was impressed by how many people showed up and they ranged from every age (especially a lot of “millenials”) and race and ethnicity. It’s hard to judge a person’s political affiliation by their appearance but if I had to guess there also seemed to be a lot (maybe a third?) who seemed to “be Democrats.” My point is that – maybe just in the nick of time – the “understanding” of most of the US population is converging and the energy of that feels palpable. Everyone at that rally were super nice but also serious and concerned. Their reactions to Trump’s appearance was one of “joy” for want of a better word and relief and pride, as odd as that might sound. Clearly we all wanted to believe but we were also wary (and weary). We’ve been fooled and lied to and ignored before and we don’t want that to happen again. Trump seems like the real deal. He expresses love, and it seems genuine to me. If – and this is what I’m trying to get to – that continues there will be a critical mass of emotion that’s going to erupt and hopefully in a focused and creatively positive way. If Trump is elected with that much emotional energy it’s going to be palpable to everyone including entire levels of government. There’s so much at stake now that people can’t help not caring, even by those who normally wouldn’t, because it’s almost like a drive for survival. There is a rapidly heightening sense of intuition and attention and peoples’ BS detectors are on. That’s why so many efforts to derail Trump aren’t working. People are seeing and hearing the same old things that now sound like absurdities to them, and are making all kinds of connections. There was a radio ad I heard today – produced by the Republican Party(!) – to dissuade Trump supporters by reminding everyone that “Trump said if he weren’t her father he would want to date his daughter.” The Establishment is so tone deaf – and pu$$y whipped by the Feministists – that people were supposed to be shocked and offended by that. Instead – miracle of miracles – both women and men alike (but more women, fortunately) instead thought that sounded strong, manly and honest and people have reportedly switched their votes to Trump from that ad alone. It’s like the US population has gotten a blood transfusion or something. Maybe there really are such things as mass dream events. Anyway, I could go on, but my point is that if Trump wins the Presidency it’s going to be on a wave of postive public sentiment that is going to be way more aware and “animal-like” than perhaps has ever occurred in this country or any other. The stakes are high and the usual status quo agenda is going to be exposed, questioned and probably rejected big time. No more successful “false flags” for example because peopl will have changed their “buttons” so the old tricks don’t work. We shall see. That’s my hope and prediction.

    • bouf

      Usually I agree with you Bruce, but this post seems to me like it could have been written in 2008 and been talking about Obama and I wouldn’t have been able to tell the difference if the party names were switched. I’d respectfully ask you to check out Gary Johnson the LP candidate. Increasingly it looks like he will get to debate the Republicrats over the summer and he is the only small government politician on the national stage. His CPAC talks were pretty good and garnered no small applause from that very conservative group.

      • Bruce C.

        I know what you mean – sort of – because one could argue that both Obama and Trump spoke/speak in ways that allows the listener to fill in the details and thus “hear” what one wants to hear. However, Trump’s talking points are a lot different than Obama’s, and Obama did – unfortunately – do what he said he wanted to do, and which were also in line with the current trend of increased authoritarianism, etc. Trump’s (and Cruz’s) talking points are very different and it remains to be seen if he or anyone else can actually do what they say they want.

        Who knows? I’m actually a little tired of thinking about it, but the prospect of the US becoming more of a police state is scary as hell. Maybe it is too late to stop and change that trend no matter who is in office because they won’t be able to control the source. Other than taking care of one’s self first, it still seems worth trying and Trump seems like the best bet for that.

    • Joseph E Fasciani

      You’ve shared a lot of good insights & thoughts; at 73 I hope there are many more like you, as from my perspective [it’s not the age, but the mileage, and I’ve seen & know too much], our time for rectifying draws less & less, while the wrecking ball of imperialist Satanic usury-banking swings more and more strongly daily….

  • Harry Skip Robinson

    Yea, $600,400,000,000 annually, greater then the next 11 top countries budgets combined is not enough. Let’s see, all the other countries of the world can operate on less then $600 million, but we have to spend $600 billion. Americans must be idiots. The IRS refused to provide their authority in a formal petition for redress of grievances under the 1st Amendment in 2002 and when sued the courts refused to force the IRS to answer the questions posed in the petition. You’re paying a federal individual income tax to a federal government agency that does not appear to have the authority to administer this tax. And not a peep out of anyone when the courts denied a first amendment right.

    • kenvandoren

      Add in special appropriations, Veterans Affairs budget and a proportionate amount of the national debt, military comes to over a cool Trillion$

  • Bruce C.

    The next US President, being Commander in Chief of the US armed forces, will be an important figure in all of this.

    Trump has said that he wants to rebuild our “depleted” military ‘until it’s so strong that nobody wants to mess with us … nobody.’

    That sounds ominous given the opinion of the Council on Foreign Relations, until we consider at least one of the US Presidential candidates has to say.

    At least Trump says that, ‘if we’re going to be the worlds’ policeman then those other countries are going to have to start paying for their protection.’

    Trump says, ‘We should be glad Russia is engaging ISIS. Let them burn through a million dollars every time a bomb is dropped.’

    Trump says, ‘ We don’t win any more. Everything we do works against us. We provide protection at hundreds of locations throughout the world and we get nothing in return. Those countries are going to have to start to pay for it.’

    Et cetera.

    I can’t speak for the other candidates because they stay mum, but that political ploy isn’t going to work any more.

  • Steven Hotho

    I tend to agree with you about taking care of your own business and forming local groups of like-minded people. But I have a little trouble with your obvious pessimism about giving up on the nation as a hopeless cause. That way leads to anarchy and social darwinism. But I also believe that humans are not ultimately in control, only an illusion of it. Order exists, but we glimpse it darkly.

    • alaska3636

      In my reading, it appears that the idea of social darwinism is primarily used to promote elite memes. It is often attributed to Darwin himself or Herbert Spencer, but those attributions are entirely inaccurate. The term is widely considered to have originated with Richard Hofstadter, the, “iconic historian of postwar liberal consensus”.

      “The term “social Darwinism” has rarely been used by advocates of the supposed ideologies or ideas; instead it has almost always been used pejoratively by its opponents.”

      It would appear to be a rehashing of Hobbes’ views and Rousseau’s unsupportable claims of social contracts. Again, in my readings, the natural state of man appears to be one of spontaneous order reinforced by the esoteric and long time preference teachings of various cultures.

      Everywhere there is considerable statehood, there is considerable mischief and propaganda supporting it’s supposed necessity.

  • esqualido

    Lenin once wrote that a capitalist will sell you the rope to hang him with- but it turns out that with the U.S. Military-Industrial Complex, the capitalist warmonger will overcharge you so much for the rope that you will feel like hanging yourself. The trillions poured down the rathole in the Mideast since Bush, and somehow tolerated by the American housewife (who has time for The View, but not Greek plays like Lysistrata, where the women barricade themselves in the acropolis and go on a sex strike to persuade their husbands to stop the Peloponnesian War.) is bankrupting the nation. Haas is no patriot.

  • Nexusfast123

    The cause of the chaos is the US. A one trick pony that only knows the military with a dying economy. Keep on creating that debt and collapse is inevitable. The rest of thr world sick of the Washington degenerates.

  • I think this is appropriate here …

    “I won’t insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said.” –William F. Buckley, Jr.

  • Get you some real data here … The Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline | James Perloff

  • Zaphod Braden

    Well, the CFR can PAY for the spending……. Filthy WAR PROFITEERS used to be HUNG.

  • Zaphod Braden

    DRAFT every CFRer and stick them in the Front lines “For the Duration”
    Make’m bleed in the Hell they claim they want.

  • Joseph E Fasciani

    An excellent statement from a true conservative PoV.