Protect our freedom

In assertion of a pro-war agenda, the soundbite [we fight] "to protect our freedom" gains airtime and is widely repeated as a mantra for militarism. It bears analysis, however; that wars, although sometimes are fought to protect the freedom and liberty of the citizens its military defends, its use is not universal. Rather what it requires is a modifying word; in many cases, "wealth" serves perfectly.

Thus "we fight" [for wealth], to protect our freedom" makes far more sense: It is wealth that wars generate, via the creation of a war 'product', generating alarm in the homeland population that has the effect of "purpose convergence", further mobilizing wealth: And it is this generated wealth, not the cause itself, for which soldiers fight for; and it is this wealth that allows for the "freedom" of which wealthy societies speak.

Wealth is of course best defined as "greater relative means"; relative those in other societies. Thus any notions of equality; of sharing and seeding democracy around the world is contradictory to well known understandings of how wealth (means) works, and how it managed by the wealthier nations via private business institutions. It is the inclusion of the military means, as a background threat for socio-economic agendas, that is militarist, anti-globalization activists find disfavor with.