There is a common misconception that most people (here and
abroad) support nuclear weapons due to national security
considerations. The fact is that they do not. In fact, the
primary reason for apparent support for nuclear weapons lies in
economics -- fear that disarmament will mean joblessness,
homelessness, hunger, and destabilization of the economy. This
fear is addressed by Proposition One.
An important effect of nuclear disarmament through economic
conversion will be the immediate diversion of multi-billions of
dollars of resources from destructive ends, channeling those
resources into addressing human needs.
The domestic and international implications are staggering.
Rural communities whose primary employer has been a nuclear
weapons plant, such as Hanford, Washington and Savannah River,
South Carolina, and larger communities grown dependent on
military bases and industries, such as much of California, have
already been hard hit by reductions in military spending.
We have a moral obligation to help these communities heal from
environmental devastation, medical experimentation, and
continuing secrecy and lies. HR-827 could pave the way. As
Delegate Norton has said, if enough people unite behind this
idea, it could become a global reality.
The profiteers of war and the operators of the war machine
needn't be tarred and feathered or hanged. What they need is to
be convinced. Proposition One offers a way out for defense
contractors: a super-duper fund (the billions saved each year
when nuclear weapons are eliminated) earmarked for converting the
weapons industries into socially useful peacetime industries.
Scientists estimate it will take several generations to clean up
the irresponsible industrialization of our society. Here would
be a good expenditure of our tax dollars.
A new world order is looming. It seems nothing can stop it. Our most significant
choice lies in determining what the values of the new world order
THE REAL FACT IS:
* MILITARY SPENDING CREATES FEWER JOBS *
For years, Americans have been told that we can have both guns
and butter. We have been taught that military spending is good
for the economy.
According to the Joint Economic Committee of Congress,
military spending creates 6,400 fewer jobs per $1 billion than
would spending our tax dollars for bridge repair, education, or
health programs. If 35 billion dollars were transferred from the
Pentagon to domestic programs, an additional 262,000 full-time
jobs would be created. For the cost of one F-15 jet fighter 1600
teachers could be hired at $25,000 a year.The truth is that we cannot have it both ways. During the
past five decades huge amounts of income tax dollars have been spent on
military programs. At the same time basic industries have
declined, and domestic programs have been cut drastically.
The Washington Times reports that the national debt is about $5 trillion. The
Pentagon isn't saying exactly how much its nuclear arsenal cost, but some Pentagon
officials last year "conservatively" estimated that the government has spent $5 trillion
on nuclear weapons since 1945.
While we are
able to produce the world's most technologically advanced arms, civilian industries are losing their ability to compete
because of outdated and inefficient factories.
Our international competitors, on the other hand, commit the bulk of their R & D money to civilian industries. While U.S.
industrial workers are losing their jobs, Japan, West Germany and
other trade competitors are cornering the market in steel,
automobiles, textiles, and electronics. Our choice is between
investing more sophisticated weapons for the Pentagon, or
investing in a future which creates better and more productive
lives for people.
PROPOSITION ONE IS THE RIGHT CHOICE!
Proposition One will mandate
both Governments to invest in converting their
state-of-the-art weapons facilities to state-of-the-art
industries that will benefit us all. Proposition One will also
make it the law that the money formerly spent on weapons systems
must now be spent on human needs.
The Conversion Project