World Blog by humble servant. War Profiteering, Civil Unrest, and Constitutional Violations in Contemporary Politics Smedley D. Butler and the Critique of War as a Racket

Report: War Profiteering, Civil Unrest, and Constitutional Violations in Contemporary Politics

Smedley D. Butler and the Critique of War as a Racket

In 1935, Major General Smedley D. Butler, one of the most decorated Marines in U.S. history, published War Is a Racket, a scathing exposé of the economic motives behind warfare. Drawing from his 34-year career across conflicts like the Spanish-American War and the “Banana Wars,” Butler argued that war is a “racket”—a criminal enterprise orchestrated to enrich a select few at the expense of soldiers, civilians, and taxpayers. His critique, rooted in firsthand experience, remains a foundational text for understanding the Military-Industrial Complex.

Butler outlined three phases of the war racket:

Lobbying for War: Business elites—bankers, arms manufacturers, and industrialists—pressure governments into conflicts to protect or expand their overseas markets and investments.

Profiteering During War: These interests reap massive profits by supplying weapons, munitions, and loans, funded by taxpayer dollars, while soldiers and civilians bear the human cost.

Profiteering After War: Post-war settlements grant corporations lucrative concessions, resource rights, and loan arrangements, further enriching elites while burdening defeated nations with debt.

Butler’s examples, drawn from his service in Cuba, the Philippines, and Central America, showed how U.S. interventions directly benefited corporations like United Fruit and major banks. He exposed the stark disparity between war profits and human suffering, noting, “Out of war nations acquire additional territory… exploited by the few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war.” His solution was radical: make war unprofitable by limiting profits, conscripting wealth to fund wars, and restricting military deployments to U.S. soil. He also proposed that only those eligible for frontline service should vote on war declarations.

Critics argue Butler oversimplifies wars by focusing solely on economic motives, ignoring ideology, nationalism, or legitimate security threats. However, his emphasis on corporate influence and profiteering remains relevant, particularly in modern conflicts like the proxy war against Russia, where economic interests often intertwine with geopolitical strategies. Mainstream media, as seen in the Spanish-American War driven by Pulitzer and Hearst’s yellow journalism, continues to sensationalize conflicts for profit, amplifying war narratives.

Contemporary Political Dynamics and Civil Unrest

The dynamics Butler described resonate in today’s global and domestic tensions. In Europe, NATO and the EU are perceived by some as undermining peace efforts in Ukraine, particularly in opposition to policies associated with former President Donald Trump. This resistance is framed as part of a broader agenda to maintain geopolitical and economic dominance, echoing Butler’s warnings about elite-driven conflicts.

Domestically, political polarization fuels civil unrest, with accusations of constitutional violations. In California, Governor Gavin Newsom’s policies are criticized for prioritizing non-citizens over Americans, particularly in the context of immigration enforcement. Critics argue that Newsom’s opposition to federal immigration policies, including Trump’s deportation plans, violates his oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution. They contend that his actions amount to reverse discrimination, denying American citizens equal protection under the law while granting undue privileges to undocumented immigrants, who lack voting rights or legal employment status.

This critique draws parallels to historical constitutional battles. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 dismantled segregation and voter suppression in the South, leveraging federal enforcement and Supreme Court rulings (e.g., Heart of Atlanta Motel v. U.S., South Carolina v. Katzenbach). These laws upheld constitutional protections against discrimination, setting a precedent for addressing systemic violations. Critics argue Newsom’s policies could face similar legal scrutiny, potentially leading to lawsuits, federal fund restrictions, or even criminal charges for violating civil rights.

Economic Motives and Political Opportunism

Butler’s insight that economic motives underpin conflict and unrest applies to these modern issues. Immigration debates are often framed as moral or partisan, but economic interests—cheap labor, corporate influence, and political power—play a significant role. Similarly, resistance to peace in Ukraine may reflect economic stakes in prolonged conflict, such as arms sales or energy market control, as Butler might have predicted.

The report concludes that Butler’s War Is a Racket remains a vital lens for analyzing war, civil unrest, and political actions. While not the sole driver, economic motives—whether in war profiteering or domestic policy—persist as powerful forces. Newsom’s policies, like global conflicts, highlight the tension between constitutional fidelity and political agendas, urging scrutiny of who profits and who pays the cost.