The purpose of the US strategy of establishing "Full-Spectrum Dominance":
Militarizing Space "to protect U.S. interests and investments" from the victims of neo-liberal Globalization.
The Vision for 2020 Report declares the U.S. Space Command's purpose as "dominating the space dimension of military operations to protect U.S. interests and U.S. investments."
"The globalization of the world economy will also continue- with a widening between 'haves' and 'have-nots."
"The United States will remain a global power and exert global leadership. The United States won't always be able to forward base its forcesâ€¦ Widespread communications will highlight disparities in resources and quality of life-contributing to unrest in developing countriesâ€¦The global economy will continue to become more interdependent."
Consider this "advantage" outlined in the long-range plan: "Economic alliances as well as the growth and influence of multinational corporations will blur security agreements. The gap between have and have-not nations will widen, creating regional unrest. One of the long acknowledged and commonly understood advantages of space-based platforms is no restriction of country clearances to over fly a nation from space."
Translation: Space militarization allows protection of U.S. investments without the messy restrictions of international law. All the better to ensure the "have-nots" don't step out of line.
What is neo-liberalism? Neo-liberalism is a term used to describe a range of policies and an economic philosophy that stresses international free trade, economic liberalism ( more commonly referred to as capitalism) and the promotion of such through deregulation of the economy, privatization of industry, liberalization of markets, financialization of national economies and corporatization of the remaining public sector. The term neo-liberalism is used to distinguish it from traditional economic liberalism, more commonly known as "capitalism", the major difference being neoliberalism promotes capitalism on a global scale.
The proponents of this ideology claim that this form of "free-trade" amongst international private business entities will lead to increased prosperity for the entire world. However, the results of privatization and the removal of trade barriers has had a number of negative externalities, the most apparent being the sharp increase of corporate power and influence in the world and the displacement of national governments on the international stage. Policies designed to benefit corporate interests have caused inequality to increase drastically, privatization of many formerly state-run enterprises or agencies has led to increased costs and poor performance, and countries that are otherwise rich in natural resources are shackled in debt and required to privatize their industries, which are then sold to wealthy foreign firms, as a prerequisite to receive financial aid or loans under mandated structural adjustment programs.
As a result, some opponents of these policies perceive neo-liberalism as a form of economic imperialism; a means for foreign businesses to plunder developing countries of their resources and indebt their governments to them through international trade institutions. Other opponents contend that neo-liberalism is not true "free trade" because it is managed and designed to benefit a few large corporations, and is thus in effect managed trade. Either way, the contradiction between capitalism and free markets / free trade is apparent.