Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
16972138
label
Letter from Ralph Williams to Martin Teasley Regarding the Origin the Term 'Military-Industrial Complex'
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
16972138
contentType
document
title
Letter from Ralph Williams to Martin Teasley Regarding the Origin the Term 'Military-Industrial Complex'
collections
Ralph E. Williams Papers
Personal Papers
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
16972138
levelOfDescription
item
productionDates
day
28
logicalDate
1985-12-28
month
12
year
1985
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
c8afde32a4df3d88
ocrText
RALPH E. WILLIAMS 6531 JAY MILLER DRIVE FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA 22041 December 28, 1985 Mr. Martin M. Teasley Assistant Director Dwight D. Eisenhower Library Abilene, Kansas 67410 Dear Mr. Teasley: Your nice letter and enclosed materials about the Eisenhower Library were waiting for me when I got back from Williamsburg yester- day, and the answer to your main question is yes indeed, I would be delighted to meet with your representative at whatever date we can agree upon. I don't plan to set foot outside the Beltway for at least two months, so most any time during that period would be suitable to me. If time is important, my phone number is (703) 256-3305. I have always been astonished at the attention that has been given to the "military-industrial complex" portion of President Eisenhower's last speech, and agree with Pete Aurand that its true significance has been distorted beyond recognition. I am sure that had it been uttered by anyone except a President who had also been the Army's five-star Chief of Staff it would long since have been forgotten. But as things were, it became red meat for the media, who have gleefully gnawed on it for twenty five years. As to your query about the origin and source of the idea and phrase I'm sending along a Xerox copy of a memorandum which may be of some help. It is the only definitive paper I could find in my files relating to the so-called farewell address, and you arecertainly welcome to the original (which is itself a file copy) if you feel it merits a place in the Eisenhower collection. As you will immediately note, at that early date we were still thinking in terms of a State of the Union message, which made less and less sense as the sands of the Administration ran out. So at some point in its evolution it turned into a farewell message. Mac's protocol in getting the speech construction process started was to have an initial brainstorming session with Steve Hess and me, at which time each of us would toss in his ideas about what topics should go in. If they survived the ensuing discussion Mac would then ask the originator to develop a full text version for further consideration as an insert into the main speech. Some of these made it all the way to the final draft and others never got into the first--the second item discussed in the memorandum being oneof the latter. In its stead I substituted the caveat against a scientific-technological elite, which is now about as well-remembered as Edward Everett's Gettysburg Address. (It no doubt would have fared better if Ike had been a Nobel Laureate in physics). The October 31 memo is therefore in essence both a minute of the meeting and a work order to me covering the assigned topics. As you will also note, the celebrated phrase itself had to evolve only slightly from "war-based" to "military" as the initial modifier over the course of the speech's gestation. I'm sure the President never thought about either the phrase or the concept itself until Mac Moos put the first draft under his nose. I am equally sure, for reasons too lenghty to go into here, that it struck a responsive chord in his breast. Ike may not always have said the right things, but he never ever put anything into a formal speech that he didn't believe and fully intend to say, as the few hacked-up drafts you have amply testify. As to other participants in the preparation of the speech, I would say that probably only Steve Hess, in addition to the others you mentioned, would have had any substantive input. It is possible that Mac may have showed it to a few senior staff members for comment--Bryce Harlow for one-- but in general you could count on the fingers of one hand the number of people who were privy to a speech's contents prior to its delivery. Well, enough for now. I'll wait to hear from you. Sincerely Captain USN (Ret) P.S. Since you expressed an interest in what I did in The White House, I have a number OF papers -largely Cofies of memoranda I write to Mac Mess other staff members, to which The Librery 15 welcome. Your assistant can select Those 1770st appapriate when he is here- TRW