Friday, February 24, 2006

Why We Fight (**3/4)


 A partly successful attempt to document the growth of the “military-industrial complex” that President Eisenhower warned of in his 1961 farewell address.

Documentary filmmaker and college professor Eugene Jarecki calls himself an Eisenhower Republican. His new movie takes its name and subject from Frank Capra’s series of World War II propaganda films, but its inspiration from Dwight Eisenhower’s 1961 farewell speech. Despite having leveraged his war-hero status into a two-term presidency, Eisenhower warned of the danger of what he termed the military-industrial complex. Jarecki has assembled a wide variety of voices, experts like Senator John McCain and ordinary folks like a retired New York cop (whose son perished on 9/11) and a young army recruit. These voices, also including Eisenhower’s son and granddaughter, are worth hearing, and Jarecki doesn’t limit his experts to leftist types, or even to those who you’d expect to agree with him. (Bill Kristol and Richard Perle are among the hawkish.) The movie’s a little haphazard in its structure, but suggests that politicians, corporations, and employees alike amount to different cogs in the giant wheel of the MIC, a wheel propelled by inertia as well as the economic interests of those players. Though he conceived his film before the Iraq war, that becomes his case study.

Jarecki isn’t a rabble-rouser like Michael Moore; though not admiring of the current administration, he sees the president (and not just the current one) as another cog. Both Democrats and Republicans have ignored Eisenhower’s warning; the USA outspends the next dozen nations combined on its military. The jobs provided by building unnecessary weapons systems become the justification for them, and few in Congress will challenge them at a financial cost to their constituents. I kind of already believed this, yet I still wasn’t entirely sold by Jarecki. There was a lot of explanation, and if the idea of the MIC is new to you, this isn’t a bad place to learn. But I think the film’s primary audience will be those already familiar with the idea, and I was looking for specifics as well as talking heads. For example, the film only gives one dollar figure to illustrate the above point about weapons systems bringing money to an individual congressional district, though we’re told generally that military dollars flow very widely. The cop’s changing outlook is interesting, but it’s only an illustration, only one guy. Finally, the intense media coverage of the Iraq War makes some of Jarecki’s movie (like the details about Vice President Dick Cheney’s ties to Halliburton) redundant, even if he’s trying to make a larger point.

No comments:

Post a Comment