It’s tough to claim opposition to the concept of war on one hand while being supportive of the means through which war is funded and stockpiled on the other. This is a lesson one of the most, if not the most, rhetorically dovish members of the United States’ Senate, Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), is either ignoring or hasn’t contemplated in a critical manner as it relates to his support for a company called Oshkosh Corporation.
Before proceeding, it’s important to clarify just what the hell Oshkosh Corporation is. In its own words, located prominently on its website, “Oshkosh [Corp. is a] leader…in every truck market in which we compete, including defense…[and] hauling.” According to its webpage, Oshkosh Corp. earned a profit of $5.3 billion in 2009 and employs over 12,000 people worldwide. In short, Oshkosh Corp. is Wisconsin’s appendage of the military-industrial complex, and makes scores of trucks for military use in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Bear in mind that’s a hefty profit and those are numerous employment opportunities in bad economic times. While domestically the majority of our population is suffering from the nearly $1 trillion our government wastefully spends per year on “defense,” the war contractors love every minute of it. Nothing smells better than a fresh batch of cash, even if it comes at the expense of blown-off limbs, razed villages, dead civilians and flag-draped caskets coming home.
In a Feb. 12 press release written to celebrate the $3 billion contract signed between the Army and Oshkosh Corp., Feingold said, “Today’s decision is great news for the Oshkosh Corporation and its employees, who work every day to produce high quality vehicles and products for our armed forces. Wisconsinites are rightfully proud of Oshkosh Corporation. The Army’s decision shows that this Wisconsin company is the best company to provide these essential vehicles for our service members.”
This is an odd statement from the same man who, back on July 24, 2009, in The Nation Magazine accurately stated the Obama administration was “whistling past a graveyard” on the issue of mindlessly sending thousands of more troops to Afghanistan .
Despite this rhetoric, Feingold somehow applauds the funding of this company, when, according to his rhetorical opposition of the war on multiple occasions, he should be speaking in opposition to Oshkosh Corp — for without companies like it, the war wouldn’t be possible to begin with. Opposition to war in name only isn’t enough. Deeds are equally, if not more important. As it stands, Feingold’s applause of Oshkosh Corp. also qualifies as “whistling by the graveyard.”
It’s a shame because Feingold has a cult-like following, and when he says things, by-and-large his progressive constituents support and advocate for him. So I say with respect, and not disdain, that Feingold needs to step it up big time when it comes to true opposition of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The antiwar movement is desperate for a guy like Feingold to use the bully pulpit and speak in opposition to Oshkosh Corp.
Many more productive jobs for society, which are much less deadly, could be created with the money we spend on waging war, so the argument that to oppose Oshkosh Corp. is to oppose Wisconsin workers doesn’t hold its weight in a debate. With that same money we could employ people to build a national rail line that would help save the environment; we could be putting more money into improving our schools and paying teachers higher salaries; we could be opening factories to mass-produce electric cars. The point is, there are few jobs less productive and more dangerous for society than working for a war contractor, and those same bodies could be used to do things that actually enhance humanity rather than diminish it.
However, let’s not forget, this isn’t only Feingold. Wisconsin’s left hasn’t been pushing him to step up and lead the charge against Oshkosh Corp. I’d even venture to say few of his liberal supporters have even heard of it. The left hasn’t been pestering him about it at his listening sessions, they haven’t been lobbying him or his staff in his offices about it and they haven’t been badgering his offices with calls about it. Although he could take some initiative on his own since he is one of the few in Congress who has spoken out against the wars, a little nudge on the side appears compulsory at this point.
It will take both citizens and Feingold working together hand-in-hand to stop the government’s funneling of money to Oshkosh Corp. Doing so would be a huge symbolic step in ardent opposition to the organization, and a big win for the antiwar movement’s ultimate goal — ending the wars and bringing home our troops as soon as possible.
Steve Horn ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in political science and legal studies.
