ABSTRACT
This chapter begins by discussing the distinction drawn by Pattison between contingent and deeper objections. The difference between contingent and deeper objections, according to Pattison, is that contingent objections may be neutralized through proper institutional regulation, while deeper objections apply even in the presence of optimal institutional regulation. Pattison masterfully catalogues these objections in a three-pronged framework: those directed at the employees who serve as contractors, those directed at the employers who rely upon contractors, and those directed at the international system in which contractors operate. The chapter considers four deeper objections to military privatization, stemming from worries about the financial motivations of contractors, the chickenhawk behavior of collectives who hire contractors, the infiltration of markets into military service, and the diminishment of communal bonds that may result from privatization.
