Blog post #7 | Antiwar & obscure websites

I have to search obscure websites for strong antiwar voices because having wars helps economies, even if they are not directly affiliated with the war. Take World War Two, for instance, when economies boomed because all countries worked hard to win the war. There was a huge increase in federal and defense spending, with an increase in nominal GDP. 

This concept still applies today. Businesses in the resource industry have profited greatly from the Russo-Ukraine war. I believe it is difficult for an average person to make an argument against war when important people profit from it. Those important people have the leverage in society to suppress entire voices which offer contrasting opinions on controversial global events, which shine a poor light on what makes the important people money. 

Since those important people have the leverage to suppress voices, they have to go to more obscure publishers to have their articles put on the internet and be seen, like the ANTIWAR.com website. The other thing is that the obscure websites are not very user-friendly. When I first opened the ANTIWAR website, I was overloaded with the amount of text compressed into an area which tests the drive of a person to find the news which goes against what is put on mainstream media. The American Conservative is more user-friendly, but still, it does not show all their articles on the home page, which I feel does not help them convey their articles and news.

Additionally, I believe that the concept of the big stick policy still applies today. The big stick policy was coined by Theodore Roosevelt, and it refers to a country's ability to have a strong military power while pursuing peaceful negotiations. You may argue heavily and heatedly with a normal kid, but would you argue and criticize someone without care so much if they had a bigger stick, aka military, than you? People want to be in the country that has the biggest stick, and the only way to test that is with war. If you win the war, that belief is confirmed and you have patriotic pride. I believe this mindset goes along with why antiwar voices are suppressed. People who believe that violently ending war is wrong can be seen as unpatriotic citizens because they do not side with their government's decision to contribute to the conflict. 

Also, I feel like antiwar voices go against political agendas. I do not have an example or references to source, but if I were a greedy politician who profits in some fashion from warfare, I would want to call any favors I could to keep antiwar voices off of mainstream media. Additionally, those antiwar voices would be calling greedy politician me out for being a greedy politician who wants the war to continue to stay rich, so I would want to suppress them because those voices would call for me to be taken out of office or not be re-elected. Overall, antiwar voices do put pressure on politicians and governmental authorities, so I can imagine they would want to suppress voices which shine a negative light on them.