Bacevich is scathing regarding the national security apparatus: The “national security state” continues, he says, “because, by its very existence, it provides a continuing rationale for political arrangements that are a source of status, influence, and considerable wealth. Lapses in performance by this apparatus might logically raise questions about whether or not the United States would be better off without it. Instead, failures inspire new efforts to reorganize and reform, which almost invariably translate into further institutional expanson. The more the national security state screws up, the more sprawling it becomes. In the meantime, presidents occupy themselves with cultivating ways to work around, ignore, or subvert these institutions.”
Peter Leithart
Peter J. Leithart is President of Theopolis Institute. He is the author of numerous books on theology, literature, and culture, including Theopolitan, Defending Constantine, and Baptized Body.
More from Politics
Continue reading related articles
Political Gospel
The gospel isn't an apolitical message that happens to have political implications. It’s not a message of private salvation with downstream public consequences. Exactly the opposite. The gospel is public and political truth with personal consequences. All the vocabulary of the gospel is political. The Greek word for “gospel” –…
When Idolaters Move In
What should Christians do if we discover there are idolaters living down the street? Lots of tangles in the question. For better or worse, the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom of religion. We can debate whether or not the Framers intended the Constitution to protect Hindus and Muslims. In actual legal…
Free Speech
Free speech is a fundamental value of liberal politics, an expression of John Stuart Mill's promise that we can do and say anything , so long as we do no harm. It's a false promise. Absolute free speech was always a ruse. Speech has never been entirely free. It can't…
In Medias Res
Your weekly digest for all things Theopolis.