A flurry of responses addressed a recent Wespeak by Kevin Young suggesting that the University divest from U.S. weapons manufacturers. “Wesleyan needs to support America” was the gist of their argument. They couldn’t be more right.
Argus editor Matt DiBlasi explains that, contrary to Young’s view, it is socially irresponsible if we do NOT invest in these well-intentioned conglomerates. Not all of the companies’ manufactures go to the war effort, after all, so why bias against a fine corporation because of a minor issue like the Iraq quagmire?
Despite my support for DiBlasi’s view, I must say that he forgot to mention other socially responsible aspects of these investments. We get the honor of helping build weapons for export to the world’s other noble conflicts. Historically, these companies built arms for the socially responsible civil wars in Africa and South America. Today, we get good karma by sending weaponry offshore for Israel’s occupation of Palestine, for Ethiopia’s invasion of Somalia, for Pakistan’s regular human rights abuses, for Colombian military action against coca-growing villagers, and a host of other indisputably ethical causes. Not to mention the necessity of maintaining a strong military-industrial complex for some reason or other, which as civilians we are certainly in no place to question.
The Iraq War, the military-industrial complex, global civil wars, and foreign state repression—all of this is just a bonus on top of the hefty cash dividends we get from investing in the flourishing war sector. Mr. Young, how could you and your pinko friends ever question such a well thought out, socially responsible University investment? In the end, is there really anything more socially responsible than proliferating weapons?
Leave a Reply