The Term Pentagon Capitalism - Article Example

Part I 3. Pentagon capitalism When the ‘profit-maximising capitalism’ faced a decline, the industrial engineer Seymour Melman introduced the term ‘Pentagon Capitalism’ to describe the new existing economic situation. It referred to the military control over the natural resources to power rockets, space shuttle missions and other technological inventions, which ultimately led to decreased choices for other state programs. The military contractors had contracted the reliable contributors of the economy like IBM, Boeing, Lockheed etc. The years involving the wars influenced the priorities of countries like US and Soviet Union for example, in technological terms to be more diverted towards developing means of destruction. Pentagon capitalism’s importance is paramount, since no other force other than military helped define and change the course of the technological history. The times in 1890s can be envisaged without the presence of much technological inventions in empires, but the importance of Pentagon capitalism is so much that we can not imagine the era of 1990s without nuclear weapons, other military related technologies used in warfare and also the internet. It was the military who launched the rockets, the satellites which ran the space programs (Misa, pg 190). 4. Scientific mass-labor: Scientific mass-labor refers to the large number of people needed to synthesize and patent new dyes in the German Chemical industry resulting in taking in many scientists in the industry. Scientists went to universities and made discoveries in the laboratories contributing to the rise of Germany during the second Industrial revolution. Examples include Hoffman leaving London for University of Berlin and Caro leaving from Manchester to work with Bunsen in Heidelberg, Adolf Baeyer researching into natural products like indigo in Gewerbe Institute in Berlin, setting up of Hoechst dyeworks, commencement of alizarin factory. German’s were able to dominate and leave behind British people in the race of this second industrial revolution because they had a deeper understanding of the basics of science. Their works, researches and discoveries resulted in improvement of technologies which ultimately led them to rule over the world market. It led to the stabilization of innovation of technology (Science and Systems 2014). 5. U-235 During the Second World War, two atomic bombs were being developed. Uranium- 235 was the most essential raw material for the Manhattan Project. It was utilized as fuel for reactors and its enriched form was used in the atomic bomb. The Gun-type fission atomic bomb involved the use of U-235. The work involving the separation of U-235 isotope and U-238 isotope was carried out in Oak Ridge, Tenesse (Means of Destruction 2014). U-235 has an important role in the history of technology. According to a military historian, Martin van Creveld, both the adversaries maintained their competence in terms of technological innovation and no one had an edge due a war winning weapon (Misa, pg 194). What turned around the events was the advancement in technology by leaps and bound: the use of U-235 to develop an atomic bomb which was dropped on Hiroshima, causing vast amount of destruction. Group A There was an attempt to stabilize the already existing large scale technological systems in the United States between years 1880 and 1930, rather than invention of new ones on the whole. The first component involving the stabilization of large scale technological systems were the financiers. In the industries which required large amount of money to be invested, like building railroads, steel and chemical and also electrical manufacturing industries, financiers like J.P Morgan and Lee Higginson put an end to the competition where innovations in technology were being done unconcerned with rules or conventions. This way, they played an integral role in introducing stabilized and organized capitalism. U.S Steel was a strong advocate of stability and it stopped its two important innovations in steel making. It included the oversized H-Beam mill of Henry Grey and the experiments regarding rolling of thin sheets (Misa. Pg 148). Another important component of stabilization was the presence of engineers and scientists who worked hard to adjust in the already existing systems. They immersed in solving technical problems which were essential for the industrial stability. Before the 1870s, these professions only required them to build canals, railways and roads. But during the second industrial revolution, engineering established itself as a profession. The societies which were formed included ones by chemical engineers in 1908. The content of engineering was taught in Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1900. The engineers valued achieving stability during this period, since the instability would lead to hindering the development of the regional electrical transmission systems which were in their growing process and hence they would not safely develop. Later in 1916 when MIT had grown in popularity with its programs to offer, MIT contributed towards stabilizing large scale technological systems through its curriculum, Technology Plan and its other educational offerings (Misa. Pg 153). Group B World War I was referred to as the ‘Chemist’s War’ because it involved a lot of use of poisonous gases through gas cylinders and Nitrogen during the warfare (Misa. Pg 134). As the Germans began to dominate the second Industrial revolution, they established their dominance in areas of chemical discovery Fritz Haber introduced the Haber-Bosch process for manufacturing ammonia shortly before the war. The discovery helped quit the production of nitrogen products like explosives which were used in the war, being made from natural deposits like that of sodium nitrate (caliche) when its Chiliean supply was cut off (Science and Systems 2014). On the other hand World War II is referred to as the ‘Physicist’s war’ since now along with using weapons like Sturmgewehr 44 (Storm Rifle) which was the first assault rifle developed by Germans in 1944, atomic energy was being used as a source of massive destruction. The research and developmental project, ‘The Manhattan Project’ was carried out in which the first atomic bombs were made. Different Universities like University of Columbia, Berkeley and Chicago were working on different projects for example isotope separation etc in order to produce the atomic bombs. Different physicists which were involved included Enrico Fermi who first initiated artificial chain reactions and ultimately his success led to Robert Oppenheimer, the scientific director at Los Alamos National Laboratory designing the atomic bombs (Misa 2004). A famous physicist in 1939, Leó Szilárd wrote a letter to the US president in order to warn about the eminent dangers of the powerful bombs being developed. The letter was signed by Albert Einstein. Office of Scientific Research and Development being built also led to physicists to involve in numerous engineering projects (Means of destruction 2014). Part III I agree with the modernist approach that social change occurs with the intervention of science based technologies (Misa, pg 261). If social progress is described as improvement in quality of life or improving society as a whole, it can be linked with technological development, but not necessarily. Sometimes technological development can also negatively impact the progress of the society. Social progress for example would involve improved healthcare, improved security, better education, faster and easier communication and many other things where indeed technology has played its important role contributing to social progress. But if we take examples like different revolutions, civil right movements which enhance democratic rights of a common man, which is also a social progress, technology is completely unrelated in this regard and we can conclude social progress cannot be necessarily linked to technology. Improved incomes, more leisure time with family, high rate of employment and many things which contribute to the progress of society do not depend on technological inventions but political initiative. The fast paced world owing to technology have required people to perform their jobs, in the race of development people are working for increased hours for their companies which decreases their leisure time which is not social progress. Technological catastrophes have been many. Where weapons of mass destruction have been developed owing to the technology, war ridden countries need to develop themselves for decades in order to get stable again. This is certainly not social progression but social regression. The nuclear destructions, thalidomide deforming babies are just few of the devastating examples where technology has in turn deteriorated the situation. Part IV The presentation on ‘Machine Guns in World War I’ provided an in depth insight that how the new weapon technology influenced the tactics undertaken during the war whereas the presentation “World War II: Bone Grafting in Nazi Germany” also covered the information about the topic in a detailed manner. The presentation regarding machine guns started off with covering the main points in a succinct fashion, describing what will be later discussed in their presentation. They dealt with defensive as well as the offensive combat mechanics separately, providing good detail on how machine guns, barbed wires, continuous barrage fire contribute to good defensive techniques. The offensive techniques were described in the same manner. The soldier’s perspective was presented thoroughly and the video that was showed helped engage in the presentation even more yet providing a good insight on the topic. Incorporating the comparison of the World War I weaponry and the weaponry used presently also provided a good comprehension of the situation to the students. Bone grafting presentation did a good job in explaining students every little detail like the definition and benefits etc. The incorporation of statistics also provided a valuable insight like the table corresponding to reduction in unemployment in Germany. While the students used references from books like ‘No Man’s Land: Combat and Identity in World War 1’ to describe about weaponry in World War I, students presenting the bone grafting presentation cited websites as their references frequently. Assignment 2 The existence of “Blitzkrieg economy” was largely accepted by all the historians until lately. It was believed that the Nazis had planned on these short conclusive wars beforehand because that was the only extent to which Germany’s resources would allow it and it also feared the political outcomes that would emerge as a result of marshaling the whole population. But research in this regard disagrees with the accepted story of the “Blitzkrieg economy”. Neufeld explains it with the example of priority battle for Peenemunde when the arms procurement was in a state of disorganization, as well as the economy of the war because power structure was divided in the third Reich. There was hardly any planning regarding the course of the war because the system is said to have been “polycratic” or “polycentric”. The system involved many conflicted groups and people governing it, organized around a lot of political and social centers, yet presided over by one man: Hitler. After attacking Poland, Hitler amassed hostilities with the western powers which eventually had to lead to an incompetent attempt at mobilizing the whole population. The attack led to warfare earlier than planned years of 1942-1944, ultimately there was a shortage of arms. There was no evidence of a planned Blitzkrieg economy because the priority battle reflects that there was no priority determination in German war economy as well as in the procurement of arms. Weak leadership, incompetency of Goring as an economic dictator, Keital and Thomson not providing good tri-service coordination resulted in a poor priority and procurement system (Neufeld 1993). Misa describes how Hitler wanted to carry out the four year plan, rearming itself quickly and making itself fully prepared for a major war. He realized that German’s early rearmament will give them a technological and military edge. References Misa, T. (2004). The Means of Destruction 1936-1990. In Leonardo to the internet: Technology & culture from the Renaissance to the present (p. 190). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Science and Systems 2014 [PowerPoint slide] Means of Destruction 2014 [PowerPoint slide] Science and Systems slide 7 2014 [PowerPoint slide] Misa, T. (2004). A War of Innovation. In Leonardo to the internet: Technology & culture from the Renaissance to the present. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Means of Destruction 2014 slide 6 [PowerPoint slide] Machine Guns in World War I 2014 [PowerPoint slide] World War II: Bone Grafting in Nazi Germany 2014 [PowerPoint slide] Misa, T. (2004). In Leonardo to the internet: Technology & culture from the Renaissance to the present (p. 261). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press Neufeld, M. (1993). Hitler,theV-2,and the BattleforPriority,1939-1943 (Vol. 3, pp. 512-538). Read More