Quote:In 1961, on his way out the White House door, President Dwight Eisenhower gave his Farewell Address. Or what has come to be known as the “Military-Industrial Complex” speech.

It became thusly known because historians are almost entirely Leftist. Leftists don’t like the military. And Leftists like (while only selectively presenting) what Eisenhower had to say about it:

“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.”

This was Eisenhower warning about the military sinking into the Swamp. With its leaders becoming slaves to the Deep State. Very, very prescient.

Our military procurement process has largely transmogrified from what’s best for the nation’s defense to what’s best for weapons-makers. And what’s best for the most powerfully bribed members of Congress — many of whom have obsolete military bases in their districts.

And our military advancement process has gone from merit-based to “woke”-based. The more Leftist you are, the higher up the ladder you go. Traditional military personnel who believe in original military priorities are now actually driven out of the armed forces.

Our Leftist historians stopped there in Eisenhower’s speech. Eisenhower did not:

“Akin to and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial military posture has been the technological revolution during the recent decades. In this revolution, research has become central. It also becomes more formalized, complex and costly.

“A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by or at the direction of the federal government. Today, the solitary inventor tinkering in his shop has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields.

“In the same fashion the free university – historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery – has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

“The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.

“Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

“It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system-ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.”

This is Eisenhower being even more visionary than he was about the Deep State Swamp military. But because he preemptively outs several Leftist takeovers of major US institutions, our Leftist historians never, ever mention it.

We often warn of Leftist money warping and poisoning. Government money is worse. Government money pretends to be non-partisan. But as we’ve seen for many decades, it is almost always pro-Left — and is ALWAYS pro-government. Government will only spend government money on things that expand government.

Eisenhower first warns of government money in science — which has now politicized and thus ruined science. And with it the colleges and universities where much of our scientific research is conducted.

Decades of government money have poisoned entirely the science well.

“Global Warming” — oops, I mean “Climate Change” — is a quintessential example. Government self-justifies getting bigger when “Climate Change” research says this fake problem is real. So guess which “Climate Change” research and researchers get government money — and which do not?

We are only now beginning to emerge from a year-plus of titanically stupid government lockdowns in fear of a flu. This happened in large part because We the Sheeple entirely outsourced our thinking to these unimpressive, corrupt, government-funded “scientists.” Who keep saying things that are obviously wrong — and imposing policies that are obviously antithetical to Reality.

With these fake scientists providing “justification,” government mass-expanded its powers — and We the Sheeple suppliantly submitted. Even now, after delivery of the Donald Trump vaccines, government still refuses to give up the powers it grabbed.

And Eisenhower foresaw government poison spreading to poison the private sector. Again:

“(W)e must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”

A “scientific-technological elite?” Big Tech, anyone?

As if we are living in a Godzilla movie, government poison has spawned all sorts of massive private sector monsters. Amazon and Google, Apple and Microsoft, Facebook and Twitter. Big Tech has now nigh entirely captured our society — and its public policy.

Government doesn’t make a move unless and until that move is pre-approved by our Big Tech elite.

Section 230 is the massive-cronyism government poison that created these beasts. So of course these beasts will never allow it to be altered in any way — let alone be ended.

Big Tech gets the trade and immigration policy they want. They get to export as many jobs as they can — and import cheaper foreigners to fill the ones they can’t.

Big Tech gets the tax policy they want. They often pay literally ZERO tax — while insisting upon tax increases for We the Sheeple.

And, of course, the area where Big Tech most dominates our public policy is its domination of our public discourse. Speech precedes deeds. Before Congress does something, it hears about it from We the People.

Not anymore. If Big Tech doesn’t approve of your speech, your speech is erased by Big Tech. If Big Tech doesn’t like you, you are erased by Big Tech.

Real news that is damaging to Big Tech’s preferred policies and political candidates is erased. Fake news that helps Big Tech’s preferred policies and political candidates is amplified.

And when Big Tech erases you, you are as good as gone. Ask Parler. Because Big Tech is now the gatekeeper on all things speech.

Google dominates 92% of the Web Search and attending advertising market. And Google doesn’t like conservatives — so their Search results don’t return conservatives.

I’m sure this isn’t outsized influence of our public policy….

Here’s How Google Can Shift 15 Million Votes Without Anyone Realizing It

Big Tech takes news outlets’ content — and with it their audiences and revenue. Before you read a news story, you see it on Big Tech. (Unless, of course, Big Tech decides you shouldn’t read it — Hunter Biden’s laptop, anyone?)

Many conservative people and groups looking to…speak pay Big Tech billions of dollars to run ads to acquire Follows and Likes. And then Big Tech rewrites its algorithms and nigh all traffic to these pages instantaneously evaporates. Bait and switch, anyone? But Big Tech keeps the money. Because of course.

Dwight David Nostradamus Eisenhower predicted all of this Big Tech-Government dominance of our public policy. And warned us about it.

If only We the Sheeple had listened.

Link

Historical writings by Ike...the stuff Democrats would like us not to know...

There's nothing wrong with wanted to have a strong military but we don't have to be in every part of the world.

I agreed with Trump's isolationist policy. We'd save a lot of money that way.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...gins-china

An article from the far left Guardian along the same line. Are even the woke becoming red pilled? We can only hope.

"There was a time when the Covid pandemic seemed to confirm so many of our assumptions. It cast down the people we regarded as villains. It raised up those we thought were heroes. It prospered people who could shift easily to working from home even as it problematized the lives of those Trump voters living in the old economy.

Like all plagues, Covid often felt like the hand of God on earth, scourging the people for their sins against higher learning and visibly sorting the righteous from the unmasked wicked. “Respect science,” admonished our yard signs. And lo!, Covid came and forced us to do so, elevating our scientists to the highest seats of social authority, from where they banned assembly, commerce, and all the rest.

We cast blame so innocently in those days. We scolded at will. We knew who was right and we shook our heads to behold those in the wrong playing in their swimming pools and on the beach. It made perfect sense to us that Donald Trump, a politician we despised, could not grasp the situation, that he suggested people inject bleach, and that he was personally responsible for more than one super-spreading event. Reality itself punished leaders like him who refused to bow to expertise. The prestige news media even figured out a way to blame the worst death tolls on a system of organized ignorance they called “populism.”

In reaction to the fool Trump, liberalism made a cult out of the hierarchy of credentialed achievement in general
But these days the consensus doesn’t consense quite as well as it used to. Now the media is filled with disturbing stories suggesting that Covid might have come — not from “populism” at all, but from a laboratory screw-up in Wuhan, China. You can feel the moral convulsions beginning as the question sets in: What if science itself is in some way culpable for all this?...

Except there was. If it does indeed turn out that the lab-leak hypothesis is the right explanation for how it began — that the common people of the world have been forced into a real-life lab experiment, at tremendous cost — there is a moral earthquake on the way.

Because if the hypothesis is right, it will soon start to dawn on people that our mistake was not insufficient reverence for scientists, or inadequate respect for expertise, or not enough censorship on Facebook. It was a failure to think critically about all of the above, to understand that there is no such thing as absolute expertise. Think of all the disasters of recent years: economic neoliberalism, destructive trade policies, the Iraq War, the housing bubble, banks that are “too big to fail,” mortgage-backed securities, the Hillary Clinton campaign of 2016 — all of these disasters brought to you by the total, self-assured unanimity of the highly educated people who are supposed to know what they’re doing, plus the total complacency of the highly educated people who are supposed to be supervising them...."

It's not difficult to predict the future if you are a student of history.