This essay argues in favor of the U.S. weapons industry as essential to our survival. It counters the points made by the Coalition for Mutual Liberation (CML) and certain letters from Nick Wilson and Eric Lee to the editor of the Cornell Sun.
Whenever American troops are sent into harm’s way, a debate arises, and young people fall into three camps. Most youth align with the overarching national objective and support our troops including working for the weapons manufacturers. At the other extreme are young people who join forces with the nation’s adversary, and in the middle are conscientious objectors who neither bear arms for our country nor support its adversary.
Examples of the first group are Cornell students who sign up for ROTC, enlist in the armed forces, or take jobs in the defense industry. The second group consists of less than 100 Cornell students currently protesting over companies that sell weapons to Israel, and in the middle are people who condemn all violence out of principle, perhaps planning service as conscientious objectors or careers in the healthcare industry.
The COVID epidemic may offer an explanation for the views of current Cornell students. Rather than living during military conflicts posing an existential threat, these students grew up with a low level of international conflict and no military draft. The one common fatal enemy was the COVID virus that the entire world faced down in unity. COVID headlines overshadowed any news about Russia, China, Iran, or North Korea as a threat to our country.
So, this generation of students constructed a false moral high ground for themselves, framing all conflict in terms of “oppressor” vs. “oppressed” and “colonialism” vs. “indigenous populations.” They argue for casting aside self-interest to advance “equity and social justice” for all the world’s peoples. If most people reject their views, their response is the chant of “No justice – no peace.” Their views play into the hands of adversaries who would welcome the unilateral disarmament of America.
History has shown that civilizations and nation-states compete to survive. The reason that the U.S. grew across the continent at the expense of Native Americans was that the U.S. civilization and technology enjoyed advantages over indigenous cultures. The settlers had Ithaca Guns, while the Native Americans had bows and arrows. The settlers had scientific agriculture, private property and capitalism, while the Native Americans were hunter-gatherers sharing common land under a form of socialism. The result was that the U.S. displaced the indigenous population, perhaps with cruel outcomes.
The question is, if China were to gain economic and military advantage over the U.S. at some point in the future, would the remaining American population expect any better treatment from conquering forces? History says “no.”
Although World War I claimed to be “the war to end all wars,” the aftermath was horrible. Empires and colonial boundaries shifted, and economic deprivation visited defeated countries such as Germany. Hence, the post-war suffering set up the pre-conditions for World War II.
After World War II, only one nation had the atomic bomb as well as the economic strength to lead the world. The United States had the wisdom to use the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe and Japan. It attempted to put a world order in place to create lasting peace without vanquishing its former adversaries. This was a notable exception to the historic pattern.
Whatever peace we have experienced since World War II has been the result of the strength of the U.S. economy, including our industrial base, technological advantage, and weapons systems. It would be foolhardy to give that up unilaterally.
The Ithaca economy was long supported by the Ithaca Gun Company as well as by donations to Cornell from companies (or their executives) such as Curtis Wright, Northrup – Grumman, and Microsoft. Cornell’s post-World War II Physics Dept. was built by recruiting from the Manhattan Project. The CML might demand that Cornell separate itself from the “oligarchs” of the weapons industry or investments in weapon manufacturers. Yet, if the members of the CML really objected to that, why did they come to Ithaca to study at a university so intertwined with the weapons industry?
John Walker Lindh By Alexandria Sheriff’s Department, Alexandria, VA.
There are Cornellians fighting in Ukraine and in Israel. It is conceivable that the protesters could leave Cornell to join the Hamas forces in Gaza. Before these ideological purists live by their ideals, they should take a lesson from the American Taliban, John Walker Lindh, who joined the Taliban prior to 9-11. Ultimately, Lindh was captured, convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison. In each conflict, idealists volunteer to fight for the side which they feel is righteous. Volunteers fought in the Spanish Civil War and in the Russian Revolution. All of this was against the U.S. national interest as defined by our government at the time. At least these people acted upon their sincere beliefs. That is better than continuing performative protests that fail to move the needle on national policy regarding the Mideast.
Perhaps CML hoped that its actions would influence the Nov. 5 elections. Now, the verdict of the voters has been delivered, and the nation remains committed to a strong national defense.
Guernica By Pablo Picasso
If the CML is motivated by world peace, it should consider whether peace is achieved through strength and deterrence. If so, the CML should drop its demands for divestment and/or recruitment boycotts of weapons manufacturers. Even if CML could somehow convince all of the Cornell community to agree, it is clear from the Nov. 5 election results that the nation as a whole does not.
Apparently, the Student Assembly got the message and, on October 10, killed a resolution calling for Cornell to divest from weapons manufacturers.
Perhaps the certainty of the CML comes from a false sense of well-being. Anyone who has lived through September 11, 2001, the Six Day War, the Vietnam War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, or the Korean War may better appreciate the threats facing this nation and the fragile nature of peace.
