[cambraceres]

This cabinet member was merely pointing out the fact that intellectuals are important in what they can accomplish for their patrons. When he says that the intellectuals provide rationalizations which account for and justify the proliferation of weapons he is merely stating the needs of his employer. The gov't needed or felt they needed the security of an over inflated military, and so they used intellectuals to say why, and put their names behind those reasons.
This is less an issue in private industry however, as intellectuals are not exploited in the same way. Copanies of today do not need a validating pronouncement, whereas dubious social and military programs do.

I tend to side with H.G. Wells on the role of intellectuals, that they should be exalted and tapped for the general betterment of mankind. Oligarchy was scary effective for the spartans. By their constitution and it's strength no spartan woman saw an invading army for 900 years. Eventually the world changed around them, and their static system was finally found to be insufficient. Who should have told them it was going to happen?

In the US, our system seems to be working, but who is it who should speak up if it's not?

Intellectuals are people, and it is not uncommon for them to submit to power, or money. What the rest of soiety can do to help is find a way to allow the intelligent to tell what they find, and not be frightnened or rewarded into complacency by the powers which neccessarily support them.

Cam