Western war on Russia: America relies on war for jobs? (VIDEO & TEXT)

For starters, it’s necessary to understand that the US production capacity has long exceeded the nation’s ability to consume, a direct result of unrestricted capitalism’s tendency to concentrate most generated wealth at the top of the social pyramid, leaving the rest of the population with relatively little tangible income.
..
This fact prompted US ruling circles to rely on three economic stratagems to solve these recurring  “market realization crises.” One was the adoption, in the 1970s, of what had been anathema to conservatives, a Keynesian approach to patch the consumption gap via government expenditures. The government largely chose to do this by deepening the Cold War with the USSR and purchasing enormous quantities of war materials, all of it extravagantly priced. Over time, this approach —”a form of “military Keynesianism”—became a normal and indispensable prop for the US economy, as, from the standpoint of the rulers, it satisfied most major immediate goals:
..
(a) It allowed for some socioeconomic stabilization (creation of a comparatively mediocre number of jobs in the so-called “defense industry sector”);
..
(b) It pumped supernormal profits into the pockets of the arms industry owners and its hanger-ons, including a small but combative sector of the labor “aristocracy”, which quickly became minor partners in the scheme. 
..
This situation alone provides a built-in vector for constant wars and “security threats” in the US political system, as war is grotesquely profitable and from the standpoint of this constituency, and the rest of the corporate class, war is almost always preferable to peace.  This, in simplified form, is what gave rise to the nefarious “Military-Industrial Complex”, which, deeply embedded in the American state, is not likely to recede any time soon, especially absent a tough, well-informed mass movement capable of taking on the US government and its myriad mechanisms of neutralization and repression. 
…
A third aspect of this long-term “income stabilization” program by the US ruling circles was the early creation of a national and later global consumer finance system designed to bridge the gap between what the workers were getting in their paychecks and their relatively inadequate capacity to consume at the projected level necessitated by a healthy capitalist economy.
..
It is in that manner that private debt became a problem to politicians and social managers in the US (a debt now in the many trillions, not to mention that the US government itself borrows money from private sources to finance some of its more stupid and criminal enterprises without demanding additional taxation). The solution, such as it is under the contorted rules of the capitalist model is clearly fraught with social toxicity and essentially fragile. For one thing the capitalist system has an inherent tendency to periodic crises due to the profound income inequality built into its lopsided class structure. During these crises, large numbers of people lose their jobs and many become permanently unemployed (just think about offshore manufacturing, and constant job elimination via automation).
..
All of these issues would quickly cease to exist if the US economy —or any economy—were simply run on fair, democratic and egalitarian principles of ownership, production and distribution, but this argument presupposes the existence of true democracy in the United States, which is a cruel fantasy carefully packaged for suckers to imbibe. Endless wars, therefore, and preparation for war, will continue until this abject system is finally overthrown by a population that has reached its tolerance limits. —Patrice Greanville