In 2024, global arms spending reached a evidence of $2.718 trillion. $2.718,000,000.
Does that make you feel safer?
Armed Keynesism and its Fall
It might seem we should. After all, better armed not only can we defy possible invaders more effectively, but we have more power to deter attackers. Moreover, the arms race – as explained in the Cold War example – is besides beneficial for all businesses, which translate into an increase in Gross home Products, an increase in the number of jobs in industry, as well as technological advancement and innovations subsequently adapted for civilian purposes. Of course, people in the east bloc could object to the so outlined Keynesian model, typical of Western states in the period after planet War II. In the East, the transfer of the burden to arms production resulted in the failure of the first growth rate, the weakening of consumption and increasing infrastructure gaps. In the West, in peculiar the United States' fuel exchange system, yet led to the dismantling of the Bretton Woods currency system, which in turn created the conditions for the deregulation of the financial markets and the current widespread strategy of money production from dirty air, which combined with the processes of liberalisation of the global economy, the financialisation of the public sector and the expanding flexibility of the labour marketplace yet ended the Postkeynesian era, not only by eliminating the illusion of the welfare state, but besides depriving the majority of macroeconomic mechanisms to mitigate the effects of subsequent crises.
It is actual that the reinforcements took part in short-term periods of comparative economical stability, but their long-term effects consistently leveled and these transitional benefits. Even today, contrary to popular myths, arms production is comparatively low-capacity, so it does not have the effect of expanding employment, but it boils down to a technological race – and maximising profits on financial operations. We are so dealing with a fresh era of arms race – although the states are armed, not even arms producers gain from it, but leaders of the policies of the countries of supranational, globalist capital.
The Holy Law on leasing
All right, well, skeptics would say, but guns are concrete, so no substance who makes money from them – at least we get them in hand, so objectively we can feel safer, right? Well, it turns out it's not true, due to the fact that one of the apparent paradoxes of the current phase of liberal capitalism is that this system, built ideologically on the apotheosis of property – present has a fresh idol: use. If having a car or an flat is preferred present alternatively of their property rights – why should it be with tanks, airplanes and another military equipment? Process privatization of wars, known present from both Ukraine and Africa, is accompanied by the financing of armed conflicts. An interesting example of this was late revealed by a Scottish author, a erstwhile diplomat Craig Murraywho conducted a journalistic investigation into the equipment of the RAF forces providing support to the IDF attacking the Gaza Strip. Zionist aviation to improve bombing of Palestinian settlements uses RAF Airbus A330-200 MRTT Voyager, or powerful flying fuel stations for aircraft. Being equipped, which does not mean that they belong to the Royal Air Force of the United Kingdom. According to the agreement between the UK Ministry of Defence and AirTanker Ltd concluded in 2008, this company makes available up to 14 machines in leasing for 27 years, 9 of which are in RAF colours, while 5 "may besides be made available to another countries". Do you see this truly revolutionary change in the policy of arms and the conduct of armed conflicts, in which participating soldiers are not full aware, or will you not gotta make your firearm available to the enemy?
Canned
Craig Murray besides carried out a thorough analysis of the ownership structure liable for the leasing of aircraft and without surprise discovered a classical box layout in which ownership is dispersed into further increasingly anonymous investment funds: Equitix Capital Eurobond 6 Ltd, Equitix Holdings Ltd, Pace Bidco Ltd, Pace Topco Ltd, etc., until, among others, to the hedge fund Polygon Global Partners, related to Readem Griffith, contributor to Trump amusement hotel Inc. In a word – canned can, in which case Pandora can is besides an ammunition can. "The long tree of subsidiaries is not only utilized to hide the owners. At each stage, it offers an chance to avoid paying taxes and another forms of corruption, specified as consulting contracts or executive positions for indicated intermediaries between capital and politicians and high-ranking public officials. erstwhile we see Pace Bidco Ltd giving an introspective consultation to the boy of a erstwhile minister or a company registered at his address, why should this origin concern or affect the RAF?” – explains Craig, not describing circumstantial cases, but the mechanics itself.
Why pay only once?
And then there's the small thing: all costs. 1 Voyager in 2008 cost about £40 million. The yearly cost of leasing 1 aircraft is £353 million ($469 million). As confirmed by the Ministry of Defence since 2008, leasing 11 presently utilized machines cost British taxpayers £6 billion and so much went into the pockets of the mysterious owners of AirTanker Ltd. Do you already realize the modern sense of the arms race? Spending a luck on equipment and weapons that is not even the property of paying people, for which it is not adequate to pay once, but for which you gotta pay for the full lease contract period and whose usage is subject to many reservations. It is the owner, not the lessee, who can find the conditions for utilizing the equipment lent. In addition, there is an insurance issue (of course paid by the user, but with a leasing policy). As costly equipment as a combat aircraft or tank should not be exposed to the hazard of harm or destruction, and specified conduct could lead to the cancellation of the lease contract, the return of the equipment, of course erstwhile paying the full amount specified in the contract. Anyone who deleted a rented car most likely understands it better than the average old-fashioned militarization advocate.
As you can see the password “Let us not be afraid to spend on reinforcements, for our safety!” doesn't give distant the real intent of the operation. The arms race was, in principle, primarily an interest, but its implementation in the context of global liberal capitalism gives the full undertaking an additional dimension. Armourment present is only 1 of the subsectors of the global financial marketplace where hedge funds speculate in wars.
Let us remember this before we are happy to hear about the next arms contracts concluded by the 3rd Polish Republic.
Konrad Hand
