Hi Billy, On Nov 4, 2011, at 9:27 AM, [email protected] wrote: > We also live in an empire. So the question is whether we are realistic > about it or not. As I see it, most Anarchists want us to destroy > our own empire and become, ultimately, 50 republics, if not 150. > The next war and we lose. This course is suicidal. > > This is what is at stake. And to assume for one minute that our > enemies will not take advantage of our weaknesses, well, that would > be naive ^ 2. That is, we are, after a fashion, Great Britain in the > 19th century, a benign empire. But better, we are a democratic empire. > My view is "make the most of it." > > Ernie does not think this way, or not usually, as you may have gathered. > But about such matters we often agree to disagree. Besides, he brings all > kinds of knowledge to the table that all of us find valuable.
I haven't explicitly considered the empire argument. There certainly is a moral case to be made for a Pax Americana, like it or not, which I haven't had time to digest. However, I'd like to point out a possible point of agreement. You were the one who told me that "War is usually a sign of failure somewhere else", I think. Perhaps you and Kevin are actually in agreement -- if we ran our empire "rationally" rather than based on myths, perhaps we could maintain and promote the kind of "human rights hegemony" we all want without having to be overtly militaristic. That is, we conquer sneakily and (mostly) bloodlessly. What do you think? -- Ernie P. > -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
