Militarization also aids

Militarization also aids and abets the concentration of economic power, which is inconsistent

with economic freedom. In societies with vastly unequal distributions of wealth and income, if

the rich do not actually run the government, they certainly exert disproportionate influence on

its policies and actions. They are ordinarily in a position to see to it that the instruments of

control and repression at the disposal of the government ― including military force ― are used

to protect and reinforce their own positions of economic privilege. This may be accomplished

through the unapologetic use of brute force, or through the simple enforcement of “rights” or

laws structured to their advantage.

In militarized, authoritarian societies, it is not difficult for those who wield concentrated supplyside

economic power to covertly encourage or directly arrange for the use of force to intimidate

their workers or their smaller, less influential suppliers or rivals. Special tax breaks and

government subsidies, all too easy to arrange even in liberal democracies, are that much easier

to come by in societies whose inequalities and concentrations of power make the granting of

further privilege to the rich and powerful almost a matter of course. All this greatly distorts

markets, interferes with economic freedom, and impedes economic development.

The inherently undemocratic and hierarchical structure and values of militarized societies also

make them unlikely to support any policy that works to counter the concentration of wealth and

economic power. Neither redistributive tax and income transfer policy nor aggressive antitrust

policy is likely to find a sympathetic hearing. There is little or no incentive for those few who sit

on top of the economic or political pyramid to encourage a wider distribution of either

economic or political largesse, beyond the minimal point that might prove necessary to forestall

riots in the streets.

If war and militarization create so many obstacles to development, it is logical that peace and

demilitarization can help to remove them. Even negative peace avoids the destruction and

disruption of war, making it possible for people to engage in the ordinary activities that support

production and consumption without constant fear of getting caught in the cross-fire or seeing

all that they worked long and hard to create reduced to rubble in a matter of minutes. Positive

peace implies a more equitable distribution of political power and economic power, both of

which are important in encouraging real political and economic development.

When there is peace and demilitarization, there is less compulsion to divert enormous amounts

of productive economic resources to support the buildup and use of military force as a means of

exerting power and influence in the world. Resources freed from this economically noncontributive

use become available for the kinds of contributive production and investment that

are crucial to economic development. The demilitarization of a society supports political

freedom by reducing the availability of repressive force to those who might be tempted to use it

to concentrate political power in their own hands, as well as by de-legitimizing the use of force

for such purposes.