The article provides an analysis of the militarization of scientific research and the scale and consequences of military and defence-related research on university campuses in the United States and United Kingdom. It achieves this through an analysis of the historical background to the complex forms of articulation which have developed between the military, industry and university research. Particular consideration is given to developments in the United States from 1940, including concerns expressed about the impact of an expanding military-industrial complex on the conduct of research in universities. Drawing on critical social and historical research, the article analyses the relationship between universities and colleges and the institution of the military in the United States and the United Kingdom, the symbiotic relationship between neoliberalism and militarism, and, in addition, the consequences for the conduct of research in the natural sciences and the social sciences within universities.
Department of Defense (2015) ‘Program History and Overview’, Minerva Initiative, URL (consulted 19 Feb. 2015): http://minerva.dtic.mil/overview.html
25.
DerridaJ. (1983) ‘The Principle of Reason: The University in the Eyes of its Pupils’, Diacritics13(3): 2–20.
26.
DochertyT. (2015) Universities at War. London: Sage.
27.
EisenhowerD.D. (1961) ‘Farewell Radio and Television Address to the American People’, 17January. In: Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower: 1960–61: containing the public messages, speeches, and statements of the president, January1, 1960, to January20, 1961: 1035–40, URL (consulted 16 Oct. 2015): http://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/ppotpus/4728424.1960.001/1087?page=root;rgn=full+text;size=100;view=image
28.
EpsteinK.C. (2014) Torpedo: Inventing the Military-industrial Complex in the United States and Great Britain. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
29.
FosterJ.B.HollemanH.McChesneyR.W. (2008) ‘The US Imperial Triangle and Military Spending’, Monthly Review60(5).
HorowitzI.L. (ed.) (1967) The Rise and Fall of Project Camelot: Studies in the Relationship Between Social Science and Practical Politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
45.
Hossein-zadehI. (2009) ‘Social vs. Military Spending: How the Escalating Pentagon Budget Crowds out Public Infrastructure and Aggravates Natural Disasters – the Case of Hurricane Katrina’, Review of Social Economy67(2): 149–73.
46.
HrubyJ.M.ManleyD.K.StoltzR.E.WebbE.K.WoodardJ.B. (2011) ‘The Evolution of Federally Funded Research and Development Centers’, Public Interest Reportspring: 24–30, URL (consulted 5Nov. 2015): https://fas.org/pubs/pir/2011spring/FFRDCs.pdf
47.
InglisF. (2014) ‘Today’s Intellectuals: Too Obedient?’, Times Higher Education, 28August.
International Network of Engineers and Scientists for Global Responsibility (2011) ‘Commit Universities to Peace, Reject Research for the Military: It Is Time to Act’, 26 Jan., URL (consulted 25 Feb. 2015): http://www.inesglobal.com/commit-universities-to-peace.phtml
50.
International Network of Engineers and Scientists for Global Responsibility (2012) Commit Universities to Peace: Yes to Civil Clauses!, with the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms, URL (consulted 3March2015): http://www.inesglobal.com/download.php?f=c2a8afcf8066173b1646ce5d928d6ce4
51.
JoasH. (1999) ‘The Modernity of War: Modernization Theory and the Problem of Violence’, International Journal of Sociology14(4): 457–72.
52.
JoasH.KnöblW. (2013) War in Social Thought: From Hobbes to the Present. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
53.
KaysenC. (1989) ‘Can Universities Cooperate with the Defense Establishment?’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science502(1): 29–39.
54.
KirpD.L. (2003) Shakespeare, Einstein, and the Bottom Line: The Marketing of Higher Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
55.
KistiakowskyV. (1989) ‘Military Funding of University Research’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science502(1): 141–54.
56.
KoistinenP.A.C. (1967) ‘The “Industrial-Military Complex” in Historical Perspective: World War I’, Business History Review41(4): 378–403.
57.
LangleyC. (2005) Soldiers in the Laboratory: Military Involvement in Science and Technology – and Some Alternatives, edited by ParkinsonS.WebberP., Scientists for Global Responsibility, URL (consulted 19 Feb. 2015): http://www.sgr.org.uk/ArmsControl/Soldiers_in_Lab_Report.pdf
LangleyC.ParkinsonS.WebberP. (2007) ‘More Soldiers in the Laboratory: The Militarisation of Science and Technology – An Update’, Scientists for Global Responsibility, URL (consulted 19 Feb. 2015): http://www.sgr.org.uk/ArmsControl/More_Soldiers_in_Lab_Report.pdf
60.
LongF.J. (1986) ‘Government Dollars for University Research’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists3(6): 45–49.
Perlo-FreemanS.SolmiranoC. (2014) ‘Trends in World Military Expenditure, 2013’, SIPRI Fact Sheet, April, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute: 1–8, URL (consulted 4 Feb. 2015): http://books.sipri.org/files/FS/SIPRIFS1404.pdf
77.
PinkerS. (2011) The Better Angels of Our Nature: The Decline of Violence in History and its Causes. London: Allen Lane.
78.
PriceD.H. (2011) Weaponizing Anthropology: Social Science in Service of the Militarized State. Oakland, CA: AK Press.
SlaughterS.RhoadesG. (2010) Academic Capitalism and the New Economy: Markets, State and Higher Education. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
WeizenbaumJ. (1979) ‘Once More: The Computer Revolution’, in DertouzosM.L.MosesJ. (eds) The Computer Age: A Twenty-year View. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
94.
WilsonD.A. (1989) ‘Consequential Controversies’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science502(1March): 40–57.
95.
Wright MillsC. (2000 [1956]) The Power Elite, with a new Afterword by Alan Wolfe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
96.
Wright MillsC. (1967 [1958]) ‘The Structure of Power in American Society’, pp. 23–38 inHorowitzI.L. (ed.) Power, Politics and People: The Collected Essays of C. Wright Mills. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
