[was: Re: [PEN-L:11382] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Economic Terrorism---Michel
Chossudovsky]
Brad wrote:
>Why should pointing out that there are apologists for the
>would-be-genocidal neo-fascists of Serbia cause "trouble"? It seems to me
>that people need to hear *more* about "ethnic cleansing"--whether by the
>Serbian government, the Croatian government, Kosovar Albanian guerrillas,
>or others--not less.
We should hear more about all crimes against humanity (not just "ethnic
cleansing"), even those encouraged or committed by the U.S. government,
Brad's former employer. But do we need to hear about them _on pen-l_? We
need to have a clarification of what the purposes of pen-l are. It doesn't
seem to me that yelling about how horrible this or that government is plays
a big role in the goals of pen-l, unless that government is one that we
have some control over or speaks in our names or has some major impact on
the world political economy.
One thing pen-l should avoid is moralism. For example, awhile back, I was
talking to a colleague about Serbia's policies in Kosova/o. I'm not a fan
of Milosevic or his government, but I was trying to explain that it seemed
to me that the policy toward Kosovo/a was a pretty standard
counter-insurgency (sort of like what the Macedonian government is doing
now) until about the time that the NATO/US strategic bombing of Serbia
began. Please don't jump in to agree or disagree with this opinion, since
my point of bringing in this opinion is not to defend it.
Rather, the point is that my colleague jumped in with moral issues -- i.e.,
that we can't say that just because the U.S. engaged in bloody
counterinsurgency in Vietnam that it's okay for Milosevic to do so (two
wrongs don't make a right) -- before I could finish my analysis. He wanted
to jump on the bandwagon against Milosevic without any historical or social
context. This is moralism, the denouncing of others' deeds without any
reference to the constraints and the context under which they operate. It's
like blaming the starving person for stealing bread.
Even from the point of view of policy-making by the U.S. government,
moralism seems a disastrous policy. However, it does make sense in terms of
propaganda: if you're the biggest and most powerful country in the world,
you can try to impose your interpretation of moral standards on the world,
while sweeping aside any accusations of hypocrisy.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
