Military–industrial complex

The institutional and economic relationship among a nation’s armed forces, defense industries, and government. The term especially highlights how this relationship can influence public policy and military spending.

Defense procurement: Government acquisition of military equipment, services, and infrastructure from public or private suppliers. Procurement turns policy priorities into contracts and links military requirements to industry revenue.
Dwight D. Eisenhower: The 34th president of the United States and a former Supreme Allied Commander in Europe during World War II. His 1961 farewell address gave the military–industrial complex its most influential public formulation.
Military Keynesianism: The use of military spending to stimulate economic activity and employment. It frames defense expenditure as economic policy, strengthening arguments for sustained military investment.
Military dictatorship: A political system in which military leaders control the government. The complex concerns influence within a state, not necessarily direct rule by the armed forces.
Defense policy: Government decisions and principles governing military capabilities, operations, and national defense. Disputes over the complex turn on how defense priorities are set and justified.
Defense contractor: A company that supplies military goods or services under government contracts. Contractors are the firms whose commercial interests meet military demand and public spending.
Eisenhower’s farewell address: Dwight D. Eisenhower’s 1961 televised address warning about the influence of a permanent armaments industry. It introduced the phrase and urged citizens to guard against the complex’s influence.
Congressional earmark: A legislative provision directing funds to a specified project, institution, or recipient. Local defense contracts can give lawmakers incentives to protect military programs and facilities.
Military–industrial–congressional complex: An expanded version of the military–industrial complex that explicitly includes Congress as a participant. This formulation names lawmakers’ role in sustaining defense programs and spending.
Government accountability: Mechanisms requiring public institutions and officials to explain decisions and face consequences for misconduct or failure. It offers standards for evaluating whether defense decisions answer to public oversight.

Linked from 35 pages