Dwight Eisenhower, Changing Diapers and Our New Barbados Parliament

Daddy On Duty…

I worked nights yesterday – or was it today? The human body is not naturally set up to handle these kinds of changes in our daily sleeping schedule. The only reason I know it is Tuesday is because I have been looking forward to the Thrown Speech. 😉

Sleep will have to wait because I’m doing the diaper changes this morning while my woman takes a much-needed break. (Side note to all the guys out there – make sure that mommy gets enough time off for herself. You think that work is stressful? Try staying at home with a house full of stinky diapers all the time!)

While the girls left early this morning to do the rounds, the little one and I played a few games like “Daddy pick up whatever I throw on the floor” and “Watch how many times I can fill my diaper in an hour!”

Yup, I fully understand why some women go crazy.

Cruising The Internet

I love random surfing… just following the links and discovering little tidbits that you wouldn’t normally see. The zombie at the keyboard (that’s me!) stumbled upon the January 17, 1961 “Military-Industrial Complex” speech of President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

President Ike’s words are well worth reading because although we don’t have a “Military-Industrial Complex” in Barbados, we do have a few groups that come together in a nexus of political and economic power that often thinks about power and money first, and what is good for Barbados and Bajans second.

On the day that our new Parliament opens, Bajans would do well to consider who these groups are in Barbados and how we citizens need to be ever vigilant – no matter how we voted or our faith in the folks we elected.

Here’s a few lines of wisdom from Dwight D. Eisenhower…

Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial 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. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during 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 scientifictechnological 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.

… taken from Dwight D. Eisenhower’s 1961 Military-Industrial Complex speech (link here)

China’s Rising Military-Industrial Complex

The last Barbados government kept silent about Communist China’s human rights abuses – which include slave labour camps with millions of slaves. I have no doubt that this new DLP government will do much the same.

I would like to say otherwise, that our government will at least have the guts of the German and Canadian leaders who have criticized China’s deplorable human rights record while continuing to do business with them. In a less than perfect world, at least that is something.

The fact that we still struggle with our history of slavery yet remain silent about China’s slaves is something that boggles my mind – especially with no sleep. I don’t have the mental fortitude to write more eloquently about the issue this morning, so I’ll leave you with a link to an editorial in the Taipei Times…

Taipei Times: Beijing’s Deadly Trade Policy

(Only a couple of more hours to go and then sweet sweet sleep. See you later friends.)


Filed under China, History, Political Corruption, Politics, Politics & Corruption, Slavery

6 responses to “Dwight Eisenhower, Changing Diapers and Our New Barbados Parliament

  1. Red Lake Lassie

    Marcus you are a gem. Where can I find a man like you?

  2. Pingback: » Did Fidel Castro send Cubans to Torture US Senator McCain? Keltruth Corp.: News Blog of Keltruth Corp. - Miami, Florida, USA.

  3. Green Monkey

    If China is such a threat, its truly unfortunate that in order to keep feeding the appetite of the same Military-Industrial Complex Eisenhower warned some 55 years ago not to let get out of control, the US has to go into increasing debt to China. As the conservative, libertarian commentator, Justin Raimondo, explains in a recent article:

    We are borrowing from the Chinese in order to pay the costs of our Middle Eastern empire, but what will we do when they no longer buy our debt? When they dump our securities, our “empire” goes down the tubes – and the warlords of Washington know it. Unlike the Roman, the Spanish, and the British versions, the American Empire will have a very short life, and our enemies are looking forward to the collapse….


  4. Did The Nation Print The Entire Throne Speech?

    About five or six years ago one of the newspapers reprinted the entire throne speech. Is the nation carrying the entire speech today? Has anyone seen?

  5. Green Monkey

    Should you happen to visit General Eisenhower’s last resting place at the Eisenhower Center in Abilene, Kansas, and you notice a loud, persistent hum from underground, it is probably just old Ike spinning in his grave (I figure, probably about 30,000 rpm by now).


    By Bill Gallagher, Niagara Falls Reporter


    Bush’s proposed 2009 budget, a record $3.1 trillion, would raise military spending to inflation-adjusted levels not seen since World War II. The plan is to spend three-quarters of a trillion dollars, more than the combined military spending of every other nation on earth. Yet again, Bush’s budget does not include the $140 billion needed to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for another year.

    While troops fighting in those wars have had to cope with lack of armor and equipment shortages, and medical care for a disabled soldier is often inadequate, no money is ever spared for fat-cat military contractors.

    I refuse to call them “defense contractors,” because the term supports the myth that pouring billions of taxpayer dollars into their corporate coffers necessarily adds to our national defense and security. It doesn’t.

    Last Thursday, National Public Radio’s Guy Roz did an excellent report slugged “What Drives Record Spending on Defense?” With the kind of in-depth reporting you’ll rarely find in mainstream media broadcasting, Roz examined the reality of the Pentagon budget and the political forces behind it. He used the F-22 fighter jet as an example of the kind of boondoggle that seems to live on forever. The plane costs $300 million a pop, and Lockheed-Martin, the nation’s biggest military contractor, is still churning them out.

    Over the last 25 years, Lockheed has raked in $60 billion producing the F-22. Many members of Congress argue we need this weapon to keep us safe from Muslim jihadists. In fact, the F-22 has not been involved in one sortie in either Afghanistan or Iraq.

    Miriam Pemberton, a research fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, told NPR that many weapons systems “have no real value for any counter-terrorism operations. You know, al-Qaeda and the Taliban have no fighter jets and they’re never going to get any. So these big-ticket items drive the budget and become, de facto, our security priorities when they don’t, in fact, enhance our security.”

    Lockheed-Martin’s political action committee has pumped millions of dollars into Republican campaigns, along with quite a few Democratic campaigns. The return on the investment is enormous.


  6. I am a 2 tour Vietnam Veteran who recently retired after 36 years of working in the Defense Industrial Complex on many of the weapons systems being used by our forces as we speak.

    Politicians make no difference.

    We have bought into the Military Industrial Complex (MIC). If you would like to read how this happens please see:



    Through a combination of public apathy and threats by the MIC we have let the SYSTEM get too large. It is now a SYSTEMIC problem and the SYSTEM is out of control. Government and industry are merging and that is very dangerous.

    There is no conspiracy. The SYSTEM has gotten so big that those who make it up and run it day to day in industry and government simply are perpetuating their existance.

    The politicians rely on them for details and recommendations because they cannot possibly grasp the nuances of the environment and the BIG SYSTEM.

    So, the system has to go bust and then be re-scaled, fixed and re-designed to run efficiently and prudently, just like any other big machine that runs poorly or becomes obsolete or dangerous.

    This situation will right itself through trauma. I see a government ENRON on the horizon, with an associated house cleaning.

    The next president will come and go along with his appointees and politicos. The event to watch is the collapse of the MIC.

    For more details see: