Julien writes:
>Marxists of course subscribe to a
>kind of crude economic determinism which makes them often see economic
>things as more important than they are (I'm going to be flamed for this
>gross
>oversimplification :-).
Ahh,... just remind your detractors that you were talking "baby talk" to me,
in order to get me to understand what seems so obvious to them. Thanks for
your patience in translating the concepts into gross oversimplifications so
that you could share them with me.
It was also written and responded to:
>U.S. activists must keep the
> >government out of the political affairs of other people. The U. S.
> >government clearly means no good.
Of course from everyone's standpoint except the US, it seems fairly clear
that our "government clearly means no good." I would not dispute a large
amount of our policy being catagorized that way. <--- please note I said
that, ... please.
However, those who demand the US out and back to our 200 years of isolation
must provide SOME intellectual honesty by presenting a more constructive
pathway that plugs the "vacuum" left by keeping US out of "the political
affairs of other people." At the moment there is no realistic proposal on
the table, beyond the vague hope that some socialist, altruistic force will
magically appear to solve the problems left over from the legacy of the 20th
Century,(regardless of who created those problems: US idiots, Global
Capitalists, butchering second & third-world thugs, somnambulent
governments, or fanatic fundamentalist zealots) .
I am going to risk a bit of "honesty" here, to see if we can move the list
forward. I fully expect ONLY flames, namecalling, and some clever ways of
turning "baby talk", and "naive" back against me, as well as some acerbic
observations about my non-marxist parentage. Go ahead if you must, I am
prepared.
>From my personal perspective(<--- please note I said "personal" there.) here
are some factors that stand in the way of keeping US out of "the political
affairs of other people.":
1) It is true enough that I am selfish enough to want to be in control
rather than trusting someone else to be. I see no more trustworthy persons
on the horizon, although I am willing to examine the cause of anyone who is
willing to step forward and ask for that control. I do NOT see that
willingness to examine other causes than their own from many other Crashlist
members at the moment.
The idea of there being NO ONE in control is too mature for any of us as
yet. Later ... maybe, after the Crash has demonstrated the folly of my
position as well as those of others in opposition. (Let us try to remember
that a certain amount of our attention should be given to the "Crash" in
crashlist.)
2)Not ALL US policy is based upon capitalism, or even imperialism. Unless
this is understood, there is little hope of a realistic understanding of
alternatives. As bad as many of you hate it, we still tend to act
occasionally from a sense of morality, as skewed and misapprehended as it
seems. The most common mistake when looking at US foriegn policy from
outside is to overlook that factor and attribute darker, capitalistic
motives everywhere, even where they do not exist, although
capitalists/imperialists may benefit from those policies.
3)In the US we no longer trust this "Go away and leave us alone"
prescription for Europeans dealing with global issues that begin in Europe
or are so provoked in asia. Simply ... we have been burned too many times by
doing so. The lessons we have drawn from the 20th century make us think
presently that to withdraw from that particular world stage leads to mass
graves, and it saddens us to keep sending forensic teams in to verify that
the unmarked graves contain young innocents murdered simply for their
genetic heritage. (It is allowable to say "Poor naive Americans, what do we
care for their sadness?" as long as you realize that our retaliation to that
cosmopolitain viewpoint is measured in smart-bombs, regardless of
justification.) It only reinforces our resolve to hear others deny the
existence of the graves or attempt to justify them. It does absolutely no
good to point out either the irrationality or the cognitive dissonance of
our viewpoint.
Detractors may say this is me simply falling into line with the Zionist
"Never Again" philosophy, but mine is a more fundamental objection. It is
simply true on the strategic/tactical levels that SOMEONE will fill the
vacuum, at at the moment our experience of the last century leads us to
believe in the haphazard collective security agreements of NATO and the UN
-- rather than any other alternative or any other SOMEONE. Staying out of
the "political affairs of other people" means that EVERYONE must do so, and
this will never happen. It is our hubris that we think we can do it better.
It is YOURS that you ignore that reality must creep into the conduct of
nations from time to time. ALL OF US ARE AT FAULT THAT WE FIND LITTLE COMMON
GROUND TO COOPERATE.
If we wish to examine the crash, understand it, and perhaps move together to
mitigate its effects, we must find that commonality here on the list, don't
you think?
If any of you simply wish to bash me for being an uneducated
swallower-of-imperialist-propaganda, that moves the list's discussion not
one cm in any direction except toward hostility. Better to deal with the
argument, not the name-calling, please. Return the respect I give others.
However, feel free to flame away. ;-)
Tom
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
