What I saw from my brief involvements in the MIC is that companies I worked for
very often didn't fare well getting government cooperation, eg, export permission.
To those who would claim that they control government via political donations,
I say the burden on them is to show how much to whom. It's not info I have.
Campaign finance reform could exacerbate the problem. If power is taken from
one entity (companies in the MIC), this enhances power of others, eg, the
media. Note that news organizations do a whole lotta unregulated advocacy,
& they have great influence regarding war. Their record is mixed...sometimes
portraying war in a rousing way...other times making it look miserable.
Control would be in a continuum ranging from
minor influence to direct payoffs for actions.
Does anyone have evidence for the control they claim?
Is it significant relative to voters & politicians seeking war?