Isn’t the military-industrial complex usually tied to capitalism? They are at least related: Northrop-Grumman, for instance, is a corporation, has shareholders, operates in the private sector, etc. I understand your point (and Ike’s), yet the public cannot really take on corporate power, nor are they usually qualified to do so. The problems with the massive defense budgets are systemic; yes, it’s a massive bureaucracy, but at the same time tied to US corporate power. Galbraith discussed this issue in his discussions of “oligopoly”: a sort of melding of socialist (even stalinistic) state power and corporate, monopolies. That oligopolic structure includes not only defense contractors/corporations, but oil companies, automotive biz, finance etc. The US economy’s like a collusion between Northrop/Boeing/Lockheed, the Exxon/Chevron mob, Ford/Chevy execs, financiers, some Fed boys, and maybe Ho-wood moguls.

There’s little citizens can do against that, unless rewrite the Constitution, or like wave a hammer and sickle (or perhaps swastika). However, I believe that the current USA economic structure would offend not only a Madison or Jefferson but Adam Smith himself: Smith was quite in favor of govt. regulations to prevent monopoly or hoarding situations (ie, the oil crisis), and his econ. ideas are more socialistic than some might imagine (as are Keynes). Alas, barring radical or revolutionary action, I doubt any substantial econ. reforms will occur in the USA: as Nietzsche said, “Menschliches, Allzumenschliches” (Human, all too human)

When Northrop, or Mc-D, Lockheed, etc. want to build Stealths, supercarriers, or Earth-Incineration-Beams, most Cali politicians and citizens approve, regardless if it’s a few billion or so. Even DiDi Feinstein approves. It feeds off some strange mass-paranoia perhaps, but it’s not like Russia and China are laying down their swords or satellites either.