Posts
The Defense Machine
Eisenhower Warned Us. The Word He Removed Tells You Everything.
THE ENDLESS FRONTIER: Public Money, Private Empires — Post 5 | February 2026
"Different Frontier. Same Extraction. Since 1850."
Post 1: The Pattern — 200 years, one mechanism
Post 2: The Railroad Theft — 175 million acres, the birth of extraction
Post 3: The Oil Extraction — The 1872 law still giving away public resources today
Post 4: The Internet Heist — DARPA built it, the CIA funded Google, Silicon Valley owns $11 trillion
Post 5: The Defense Machine ← YOU ARE HERE
Post 6: The Space Grab — The biggest extraction in human history, happening now
Post 7: The Same Players — How public wealth compounds into private dynasties
Post 8: What Breaks the Cycle — Three attempts, one possibility
The Word He Removed
Eisenhower's farewell address went through at least 21 drafts. His speechwriters Malcolm Moos and Ralph Williams worked on it for over a year. The speech was carefully constructed — every word deliberate.
In the penultimate draft, the key phrase read: "the military-industrial-congressional complex."
Eisenhower removed "congressional" himself. His explanation: he thought it "not fitting for a President to criticize Congress."
But his instinct was precisely correct. Congress was — and is — the third leg of the extraction mechanism:
- Military: Creates demand (identifies weapons, systems, infrastructure needed)
- Industry: Fulfills contracts (builds weapons, manages cost-plus extraction)
- Congress: Authorizes spending (appropriates funds, approves contracts, protects contractors in their districts)
Without Congress, there are no defense appropriations. Without defense appropriations, there are no contracts. Without contracts, there is no extraction.
And Congress is not a passive participant. Defense contractors deliberately place production facilities in as many congressional districts as possible — ensuring that canceling a contract means eliminating jobs in dozens of states simultaneously. A senator who votes to cancel an overrun defense contract is voting to close factories in her own district. The political cost is immediate. The savings to taxpayers are abstract and distant.
This is the most sophisticated regulatory capture mechanism in American history. Railroads bought Congress with stock. Standard Oil bought it with campaign contributions. Defense contractors bought it with jobs — placing economic interests directly in the constituencies of the legislators who must vote on their contracts.
Eisenhower saw this. He removed the word. The mechanism continued.
ORIGINAL DRAFT PHRASE:
“The military-industrial-congressional complex”
FINAL SPEECH PHRASE:
“The military-industrial complex”
WHY HE REMOVED IT:
“Not fitting for a President to criticize Congress”
— Eisenhower’s explanation (documented in speech drafts)
WHAT THE REMOVED WORD DESCRIBES:
• Congress authorizes all defense spending
• Contractors place facilities in congressional districts (capture through jobs)
• Legislators can’t vote against contracts that employ their constituents
• Political cost of canceling contract: Immediate (job losses in district)
• Savings to taxpayer: Abstract and distant
THE LEGISLATIVE CAPTURE PATTERN ACROSS ALL FRONTIERS:
• Railroads: Land grants required congressional authorization → bought with stock (Crédit Mobilier)
• Oil: Mining Act 1872 → written by industry, never reformed despite 37 years of attempts
• Defense: Jobs in every district → can’t cancel even 630% overrun contracts
• Internet: Platform regulation → 25 years without major legislation (lobbying)
• Space: Commercial Space Act 2015 → asteroid mining rights given away with no public debate
EISENHOWER’S ORIGINAL PHRASE WAS MORE ACCURATE.
The word he removed is the word that explains everything.
Congress is always the third leg. Always has been. Since 1850.
How the Defense Machine Was Built (1940-1961)
Before World War II, the United States had no permanent defense industry. When war came, civilian factories converted to military production — as they had in every previous conflict. After the war ended, they converted back.
This was the historical pattern: temporary militarization during conflict, demobilization after.
World War II broke the pattern permanently.
The scale of WWII mobilization — 16 million Americans in uniform, the entire industrial economy redirected to weapons production — created something new: a defense industry so large, so specialized, so embedded in the American economy that dismantling it after the war was economically and politically impossible.
By 1945, companies like Lockheed, Boeing, Northrop, Raytheon, and General Dynamics had been restructured entirely around defense contracts. Their workers had specialized skills. Their facilities were defense-specific. Their executives had built relationships with Pentagon officials. Their lobbyists had established congressional relationships.
When the war ended, they didn't go away. They lobbied for continued contracts. The Cold War provided the justification: the Soviet threat demanded permanent military readiness. The "peace dividend" of demobilization was reframed as dangerous weakness.
Eisenhower watched this happen during his presidency:
- 1950: Military budget — $13 billion
- 1953 (Eisenhower takes office): Military budget — $52 billion (Korean War peak)
- 1961 (Eisenhower leaves office): Military budget — $47 billion
Eisenhower — the general who had commanded the largest military operation in history — tried to hold the line on defense spending throughout his presidency. He was called weak. He was accused of leaving America vulnerable. The defense contractors and their congressional allies pushed constantly for more.
He delivered his warning three days before leaving office. He had spent eight years watching the machine he was warning about grow larger every year. He knew it could not be stopped. He could only name it.
PRE-WWII MODEL:
• No permanent defense industry
• Civilian factories convert to military production during war
• Convert back after war ends
• Historical pattern: Temporary mobilization, full demobilization
WWII BREAK POINT:
• Scale unprecedented: 16M Americans in uniform
• Entire industrial economy redirected to weapons
• Companies restructured around defense (can’t easily convert back)
• Pentagon-contractor-Congress relationships permanently established
COLD WAR LOCK-IN:
• Soviet threat = permanent military readiness justified
• “Peace dividend” = reframed as dangerous weakness
• Defense contractors lobby for continued contracts
• Jobs in every congressional district = political protection
EISENHOWER’S LOSING BATTLE:
• 1950: Military budget $13B
• 1953 (takes office): $52B (Korean War peak)
• 1961 (leaves office): $47B (tried to cut, failed)
• Delivered warning 3 days before leaving
• Spent 8 years watching machine grow despite his resistance
RESULT:
First permanent non-wartime military-industrial complex in U.S. history.
Embedded in economy. Protected by jobs. Captured Congress.
Never dismantled. Budget today: $886 billion/year.
Cost-Plus Contracts: The Engine of Extraction
The mechanism that turned defense spending into private wealth extraction is called the cost-plus contract.
Under a fixed-price contract (the model for most commercial transactions), a contractor agrees to deliver a product for a set price. If the contractor delivers efficiently, it profits. If it overspends, it loses money. The incentive structure rewards efficiency.
Under a cost-plus contract, the government pays all costs incurred plus a guaranteed profit margin. If the contractor overspends, the government pays more. If the contractor inefficiently manages the project, the government pays for the inefficiency — and the contractor still gets its profit margin on top.
The incentive structure of cost-plus rewards spending, not efficiency. The more you spend, the more absolute dollars your profit margin represents. There is no financial penalty for overruns. There is no reward for delivering early or under budget.
Defense contractors embraced cost-plus contracts because they converted public defense spending into guaranteed private profits with no risk. The contractor could not lose money — the government covered all costs. The contractor was guaranteed a profit — regardless of performance.
The result, documented across 70 years of defense contracting: systematic, massive, repeated cost overruns on virtually every major defense program.
The F-35 program — the most expensive weapons system in human history:
- 2001: Program launched, estimated total cost $233 billion
- 2024: Projected lifetime cost $1.7 trillion
- Overrun: 630% over original estimate
- Contractor: Lockheed Martin (receives $60+ billion in government contracts annually)
- Accountability: None. Lockheed Martin's stock price increased throughout the program's overruns.
- Congressional response: Program offices in 46 states = politically untouchable
The F-35 is not an anomaly. It is the rule. The GAO (Government Accountability Office) has documented cost overruns as a systemic feature of defense contracting for decades. The average major defense acquisition program runs 40% over its original cost estimate.
40% average overrun. Every program. Every year. For 70 years.
This is not incompetence. This is the designed outcome of a contract structure that rewards spending and guarantees profit regardless of performance.
FIXED-PRICE CONTRACT (commercial model):
• Agree to deliver for $1B
• Deliver efficiently for $800M: Profit $200M ✓
• Deliver inefficiently for $1.2B: Loss $200M ✗
• Incentive: BE EFFICIENT
COST-PLUS CONTRACT (defense model):
• Government pays all costs + guaranteed 10% margin
• Spend $800M: Get $880M from government (profit $80M)
• Spend $1.2B: Get $1.32B from government (profit $120M)
• Spend $1.7T: Get $1.87T from government (profit $170B)
• Incentive: SPEND MORE
THE F-35 DOCUMENTED CASE:
2001 estimate: $233B
2024 projection: $1.7T (lifetime)
Overrun: 630% ($1.467T over estimate)
Contractor: Lockheed Martin
Lockheed accountability: None. Profit guaranteed by contract.
Lockheed stock (2001-2024): Up ~2,000%
SYSTEM-WIDE (GAO documented):
Average overrun on major defense acquisitions: 40%
Programs with cost growth: Nearly all
Contractors held accountable: Essentially none
Annual defense budget 2024: $886 billion
Average 40% overrun on $886B: ~$354B/year in overruns
THIS IS THE DESIGN. NOT A BUG.
Cost-plus removes downside risk for contractor.
All risk transfers to public (taxpayer).
Profit is guaranteed regardless of performance.
This is the railroad bond guarantee model applied to weapons.
The Revolving Door: Documented, Systemic, Ongoing
The cost-plus contract is the financial mechanism of defense extraction. The revolving door is the political mechanism that protects it.
The revolving door works in both directions:
Pentagon to contractor: Senior military officers and civilian Pentagon officials retire and immediately join defense contractor boards and executive teams. They bring: classified relationships, insider knowledge of procurement processes, access to former colleagues still making contract decisions, and credibility with congressional appropriations committees.
Contractor to Pentagon: Defense industry executives move into Pentagon leadership positions. They bring: industry perspective that influences what gets procured, relationships with contractors who were recently their colleagues, and institutional resistance to reforms that would hurt former employers.
The numbers, documented by the Project On Government Oversight (POGO):
- Between 2008 and 2018, the top 20 defense contractors employed more than 645 senior government officials (generals, admirals, senior executives)
- In a single year (2018), the top 5 contractors employed 1,718 former government officials, military officers, members of Congress, and senior executives
- Lockheed Martin alone employed 529 former government officials in 2018
- Average time between Pentagon retirement and contractor employment: Under 2 years
There are laws governing this. The "cooling off period" requires former officials to wait one to two years before directly lobbying their former agency. But the cooling off period doesn't prevent employment — only direct lobbying. A retired four-star general can join Lockheed Martin's board the day after retirement. He just can't formally lobby the Pentagon for one year. He can advise on strategy, provide access, and lend credibility — all of which are worth far more than formal lobbying.
DOCUMENTED BY PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT (POGO):
2008-2018: TOP 20 CONTRACTORS
Former senior government officials employed: 645+
2018: TOP 5 CONTRACTORS ALONE
Former officials, officers, Congress members, executives employed: 1,718
LOCKHEED MARTIN (2018):
Former government officials employed: 529
Government contracts received (2018): $50.5 billion
Ratio: ~$95M in contracts per former official employed
HOW IT WORKS:
• Official retires from Pentagon/Congress
• Joins contractor board or executive team
• Brings: relationships, insider knowledge, credibility, access
• Cooling-off period: 1-2 years from direct lobbying only
• Can: advise, strategize, provide access, lend credibility (immediately)
• Result: Institutional capture of procurement process
THE STADIUM AUTHORITY PARALLEL:
Stadium authority boards: Politicians who want NFL → Approve favorable lease terms
Pentagon revolving door: Officials who want contractor jobs → Approve favorable contracts
Same mechanism. Different asset. Same outcome: Public risk, private profit.
THE RAILROAD PARALLEL:
Crédit Mobilier: Gave stock to VP, Speaker of House, future President
Defense contractors: Give jobs to generals, admirals, Pentagon executives
Different payment. Same capture. 160 years apart.
The Congressional Capture: Jobs in Every District
The most sophisticated element of defense extraction is the congressional capture mechanism Eisenhower identified but couldn't name publicly.
Defense contractors deliberately distribute production across as many congressional districts as possible. The F-35 program has components manufactured in 46 states. Not because 46 states is the most efficient way to build a fighter jet. Because 46 states means 92 senators and nearly all 435 representatives have constituents who work on the program.
When a senator proposes cutting the F-35 program budget, she is proposing cutting jobs in her own state. When a representative votes to cancel an overrun program, he is voting to close factories in his district. The political cost is immediate, visible, and personal. Workers in the district will know. They will vote.
The savings to taxpayers are abstract. Nobody in the district can point to money they saved when the F-35 comes in on budget. But workers in the district absolutely can point to jobs lost when the program is cut.
This is the most elegant capture mechanism in American political history: the contractor doesn't need to bribe anyone. It doesn't need to give anyone stock (as Crédit Mobilier did). It just needs to employ enough people in enough districts that canceling the contract is politically impossible.
And Congress responds predictably. The GAO has documented instances where Congress appropriated money for weapons systems the Pentagon didn't want and didn't request — because the systems were built in key congressional districts and the political cost of canceling was too high.
Public money. Spent on weapons the military didn't request. Because defense contractors employed workers in enough congressional districts.
— Senator John McCain, during Donald Rumsfeld's confirmation hearings. Cited in analysis of Eisenhower's farewell address.
The Pentagon didn't ask for it. Congress added it anyway. Because the contractor employed workers in enough districts.
This is why Eisenhower originally wrote "congressional" in his warning. He had watched Congress add programs the Pentagon didn't want, protect contractors the Pentagon couldn't cancel, and appropriate money the Treasury couldn't afford — because the defense machine had successfully distributed its economic interests into enough congressional districts to make reform politically impossible.
The Defense Machine as Template
Post 5 is the bridge post because the defense machine didn't just extract from the defense budget. It created the institutional template — cost-plus contracts, revolving door, congressional capture — that every subsequent frontier has used.
Cost-plus → Internet: When Silicon Valley needed government contracts, it used the defense contracting model. The CIA's $600M AWS contract, DARPA's research grants, NSF's funding of university research — all structured as cost-plus or cost-reimbursement contracts. Public funds cover costs, private companies keep the IP.
Revolving door → Tech: The tech industry's regulatory capture of the FCC, FTC, and congressional committees has used the same revolving door mechanism. Google, Facebook, and Amazon have employed hundreds of former government officials. The result: 25 years without major platform regulation.
Congressional capture → Space: SpaceX and Blue Origin deliberately distribute jobs across key congressional districts and states. SpaceX's Starbase in Texas (Senator Ted Cruz's state), Falcon 9 launches from Florida (Senator Marco Rubio's state), Starlink ground stations distributed nationally. The same congressional capture playbook, applied to a new frontier.
The airmail contracts precedent (Boeing's origin):
Before WWII established the permanent defense industry, the federal government's airmail contracts of the 1920s-1930s funded the development of commercial aviation. Boeing was one of the primary beneficiaries. Public contracts to carry mail funded the development of aircraft technology that became the foundation of both commercial aviation and military aviation.
Public airmail contracts → Boeing develops aircraft technology → WWII military contracts → Boeing becomes permanent defense contractor → Commercial aviation monopoly → Defense + commercial aviation empire worth $100+ billion.
The same chain: public contracts fund private development, private company captures the technology and the market, becomes dominant across both government and commercial sectors.
DEFENSE MECHANISM → INTERNET APPLICATION:
Cost-plus contracts → CIA AWS deal, DARPA grants (public funds costs, private keeps IP)
Revolving door → FCC, FTC, Congress (Google/Facebook/Amazon employ hundreds of former officials)
Result: 25 years without major platform regulation
DEFENSE MECHANISM → SPACE APPLICATION:
Cost-plus → NASA SpaceX contracts ($38B+ with guaranteed profit margins)
Revolving door → FAA, FCC, NASA (space executives rotate to/from agencies)
Congressional capture → Jobs in Texas (Cruz), Florida (Rubio), national distribution
Result: No meaningful space extraction oversight
BOEING ORIGIN STORY (Defense Machine Template Applied):
Federal airmail contracts (1920s-30s) → Boeing develops aircraft tech
WWII military contracts → Boeing becomes permanent defense contractor
Commercial aviation + military contracts → Boeing empire ($100B+)
Pattern: Public contracts fund development → private captures technology + market
THE INSTITUTIONAL INHERITANCE:
Every frontier since defense has inherited:
1. Cost-plus (or cost-reimbursement) contract structure
1. Revolving door between regulator and regulated
1. Congressional capture through job distribution
1. “National security/interest” justification for opacity
The defense machine didn’t just extract from defense spending.
It industrialized extraction and exported the model to every frontier after.
The Numbers: 70 Years, $886 Billion Per Year
Let's state the scale clearly:
The United States 2024 defense budget: $886 billion.
This is more than the next ten countries' defense budgets combined. It is approximately 40% of all global military spending. It represents approximately 13% of the entire federal budget.
Of this $886 billion, approximately 50-60% goes to private defense contractors through procurement contracts. That's $440-530 billion per year in government money flowing to private companies.
The top five defense contractors in 2023:
- Lockheed Martin: $65.5 billion in revenue (nearly 90% from government)
- Raytheon Technologies: $67.1 billion in revenue (majority from government)
- Boeing: $77.8 billion in revenue (significant portion from defense)
- General Dynamics: $42.3 billion in revenue (majority from government)
- Northrop Grumman: $36.6 billion in revenue (nearly all from government)
These five companies alone: approximately $289 billion in annual revenue, majority from government contracts.
In 1950, the military budget was $13 billion. Today: $886 billion. A 68x increase in 74 years — far outpacing inflation, GDP growth, or any other economic measure.
Eisenhower warned about a budget of $47 billion. We now spend 19 times what alarmed him.
BUDGET ESCALATION:
1950: $13B (Eisenhower’s starting point)
1961: $47B (what alarmed him enough to warn the nation)
2024: $886B (19x what alarmed Eisenhower)
Growth since 1950: 68x (adjusted defense budget)
WHERE THE MONEY GOES:
Total 2024 defense budget: $886B
To private contractors (procurement): ~$440-530B/year
Top 5 contractors revenue: ~$289B/year
TOP 5 CONTRACTORS (2023 Revenue):
Lockheed Martin: $65.5B (90%+ from government)
Raytheon: $67.1B (majority government)
Boeing: $77.8B (significant defense portion)
General Dynamics: $42.3B (majority government)
Northrop Grumman: $36.6B (nearly all government)
COST OVERRUN SCALE (GAO documented):
Average overrun on major programs: 40%
F-35 alone: $1.467T over original estimate
Systemic overruns: Every year, virtually every program
WHAT PUBLIC RECEIVED:
Military capability ✓
National security ✓ (debatable at this scale)
Jobs (distributed to congressional districts) ✓
WHAT PRIVATE RECEIVED:
$289B+/year in revenue for top 5 alone
Guaranteed profit margins (cost-plus)
Revolving door employment
Congressional protection from accountability
Technology IP built on public R&D
Eisenhower warned about $47B. We spend $886B.
Nobody listened. The machine grew 19x anyway.
The Bridge: From Defense to Space
The defense machine is Post 5 — the bridge post — because it connects every earlier frontier to every later one.
Going backward: The defense machine used the same structural elements as railroads (congressional capture through jobs, just as railroads captured Congress through land grants) and oil (cost-plus extraction, just as Standard Oil extracted from public mineral rights).
Going forward: The defense machine created the institutional template that Silicon Valley and space companies used to capture public resources.
The most direct bridge to space:
In 2006, Boeing and Lockheed Martin — the two primary WWII defense contractors, both grown to dominance on public cost-plus contracts — created United Launch Alliance (ULA). This was a joint venture that held a monopoly on U.S. government rocket launches for nearly a decade. No competition. Fixed prices. The government had no alternative.
ULA charged the U.S. government approximately $380 million per launch. SpaceX, when it entered the market, initially charged $90 million per launch.
For years, ULA collected $380 million per government launch — because it was the only option, because Boeing and Lockheed had used their defense contract relationships and Pentagon revolving door access to maintain their monopoly.
This is the railroad monopoly model. This is the Standard Oil monopoly model. Defense contractors used the defense extraction playbook to extend their monopoly into the new space frontier.
Then SpaceX arrived. Not to end the extraction — to participate in it. SpaceX now holds $22 billion in active government contracts. It is building on the same public subsidy foundation, using the same cost-plus and cost-reimbursement contract structures, and is capturing the same orbital monopoly position that ULA held before it.
The defense machine didn't end. It evolved. Boeing and Lockheed built the ULA space monopoly on their defense machine foundation. SpaceX displaced ULA by offering lower prices — and is now building its own extraction empire on public contracts.
Different company. Same machine. New frontier. In Post 6, we document where it's all going.
KEY SOURCES FOR THIS POST:
Eisenhower speech: National Archives (farewell address primary document), Wikipedia (21 drafts, congressional complex history), EBSCO Research Starters, World Policy Journal (2001 analysis “Eisenhower’s Warning: Forty Years Later”), Spartacus Educational (full draft history), History.com. Defense budget figures: historical U.S. defense budget data, GAO reports on cost overruns. Revolving door: Project On Government Oversight (POGO) annual revolving door reports. Contractor revenue: company annual reports and defense industry analyses. F-35: GAO Selected Acquisition Reports, Congressional Budget Office projections. ULA/SpaceX: publicly reported launch contract prices, GAO competition analysis.
THE SMOKING GUN IN THIS POST:
The removal of “congressional” from Eisenhower’s speech — documented in the Eisenhower Presidential Library archives (January 7, 1961 draft with handwritten editing) and confirmed in multiple scholarly analyses — is the single most revealing fact in this post. Eisenhower didn’t remove the word because it was wrong. He removed it because saying it publicly would have been politically explosive. The original phrase is more accurate than the famous version. The word he removed describes the constant in every frontier extraction documented in this series.
WHAT COMES NEXT:
Post 6 (The Space Grab) documents the current, active extraction happening right now in space — the $38B to Musk, the orbital monopoly being built, the 2015 asteroid mining law, and the ISS replacement. This is the frontier where the pattern is most visible because it’s happening in real time.
No comments:
Post a Comment