I like Daniel's statement, but I can think of another, less important reason -- how imperialism deforms imperial societies. Both victories and defeats have negative consequences.
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 10:48:25PM +0100, Daniel Davies wrote: > I'm a Western leftist (of an admittedly rather odd sort) and surely the > main, the only reason for being opposed to Western imperialist wars is that > they kill people, in their hundreds of thousands, for no good purpose > whatever. I would and have spoken in favour of the cause of not invading > some of the very worst regimes on earth, including Omar al-Bashir's Sudan, > because the consequences are invariably to make things much worse. > > In related news, Louis is surely right to suggest that the controversy over > Iran is entirely related to the fact that people really can't bear to be > told that night is day and black is white. If there were no Israelis online > always pretending that Israel was a lovely place, the Gaza strip would be a > minor conflict that few outside the middle east cared about. Conversely, if > there were a vocal community of Sudanese expats pretending that Khartoum was > progressive, Darfur would never be out of the news. > > best > dd > > -----Original Message----- > From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Yoshie > Furuhashi > Sent: 25 October 2006 22:37 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Response to Stan Goff > > > The way Western leftists talk about the rest of the world, those who > hear them (if anyone hears them) would probably think, hey, why not > let Washington invade any country it likes anyhow? There is nothing > there to defend. > -- -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com
