profligacy

Andrew Bacevich’s argument is that US foreign policy in the Middle East motive is to sustain American profligacy, and not  to combat terrorism. The American way of life is constructed upon unrestrained material consumption and has a heavy dependence on availability of cheap oil and a smooth international marketplace. Therefore , war is in the interest of economics and not security. “In fact, the Long War has never had anything to do with defending the United States against terrorism. It has always had to do with supporting a broken style of life that has little to do with the ideals Americans claim to revere” (Bacevich) In other words, American foreign policy exists in order to maintain America’s special economic status, not to defeat terrorists. 

Bacevich sees the American empire to be linked to freedom, Americans define freedom largely in the right of unlimited consumption. So to sustain this consumption model of freedom, the United States has built and defended an informal empire overseas, especially in the Middle East. The empire insures the availability of resources to sustain material plenty among Americans.  “The exercise in empire-building has been primarily about creating and protecting a global order conducive to American materialism — to our version of freedom, defined by the accumulation of ever more stuff” (Bacevich). That means, American freedom at home depends heavily on controlling or influencing key parts of the world abroad.

In my opinion there is a way out but the change has to be very big. First of all, they have to change the belief that freedom is unlimited material consumption because I don’t think what they are doing right now  would last forever and whether they want it or not  I believe there will be change. So they have to change their belief freedom and get comfortable with another belief.