By Bill Shein
January 28, 2011
The glowing reviews by local politicians of a new General Dynamics contract with the U.S. Navy all fail to note that the project – and its promise of “up to 500” Pittsfield-based jobs over five years – is in support of an expensive, out-of-control American war machine.
Tragically, we’ve reached a place in our nation’s troubled economic life where elected officials have nothing but praise for a deal to build weapons of war in our community. Our economy has been so thoroughly undermined by corporate greed and public policy warped by campaign money that good, decent people must now rely on the booming business of state violence to feed their kids.
Let’s be clear: These jobs are not an investment in our children’s future. They will not build a sustainable local economy. They will not provide real, long-term security – economic or otherwise. They will, though, make our community even more reliant on the war economy.
Lou Von Thaer, the president of General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems, said last week that the Navy is already negotiating with foreign nations that want to purchase its littoral combat ship that features combat systems developed in Pittsfield. Which means Berkshire County may soon play a larger role in the United States’ troubling habit of arming the world. Not something you’re likely to read about in a Berkshires tourism brochure.
General Dynamics’ Michael Tweed-Kent, Cmdr. Michael B. Riley, Gov. Deval Patrick, U.S. Sen. John Kerry and Mayor James Ruberto mark General Dynamics’ contribution to naval defense and bringing jobs to Pittsfield. iBerkshires photo
In any event, shouldn’t Pittsfield – former home of thousands of General Electric jobs – be wary of history repeating itself? General Dynamics is already one of the region’s largest employers but could leave at any time, chasing profits wherever it finds the best deal. Sound familiar?
Note, too, that the company’s Jan. 3 press release announcing the contract said it “could create as many as 500 jobs.” Not surprisingly, those cheering the deal glossed over the words “could” and “as many as.” That’s because during this time of economic distress, military contracts are political gold to elected officials – including those who say they oppose a violent foreign policy but routinely vote to fund the infrastructure that enables it. Then they blithely describe these jobs as “high-tech” and “manufacturing,” as if the product itself is irrelevant.
To their credit, many local officials, especially Pittsfield Mayor James Ruberto, have worked long and hard to bring new economic activity to a region devastated by the departure of G.E. – another military contractor. Pittsfield has expanded its cultural economy, but has so far failed to create enough self-sustaining local commerce to employ all its residents. Thus the unqualified cheers for the Pentagon contract by Ruberto and others.
Many argue that if we don’t seek these jobs, other cities will. Sadly, this is absolutely true. Military spending is so deeply woven into the fabric of our economic system that few communities are able to say “no thanks.”
This connection between politicians, war and jobs has never been clearer. Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick boasted of a full-court press by state and federal officials to secure the contract for General Dynamics. No doubt it was easy to build the team.
For example, Rep. John Olver, considered among the most liberal members of Congress, accepts PAC contributions from General Dynamics, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, and other defense contractors. In fact, according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics (opensecrets.org), nearly 28 percent of the $863,992 that Olver raised during 2009-2010 came exclusively from business and defense PACs. So don’t expect him to take a leadership role in efforts to dismantle the military-industrial complex.
If we can’t rely on a liberal member of Congress, in a safe seat for two decades, to challenge this dark nexus of money, politics and war, who can we rely on?
Of course, Olver is not alone. Without exception, the Berkshires’ state and federal officeholders – from Sens. John Kerry and Scott Brown to State Sen. Benjamin Downing – had nothing but praise for the Navy contract and its promised economic benefits.
At a festive Jan. 24 luncheon at General Dynamics attended by Patrick, Kerry, and others, the Navy contract was celebrated with a giant cake in the shape of a warship. The dessert may have tasted sweet, but the unquestioned embrace of military spending as a growing source of Berkshire County jobs should leave us all with a foul aftertaste.
