![]() |
Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
![]() |
#1 | ||
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: former British colony
Posts: 2,013
|
![]()
It is generally true that liberals only feel comfortable attacking the Right on matters of war if they attack from the right. So, Hillary Clinton has been attacking Bush for not clamping down hard enough on civil liberties (i.e. Homeland Defense), John Kerry has been attacking Bush for not using the right tactics in launching its attack on Iraq, and generally the Democratic Party will not utter a word in opposition to Bush's war mongering unless it is to complain that he is not waging war correctly or enthusiastically enough. There are exceptions to this rule, notably Barbara Lee, the only person in congress who voted against the Patriot Act, but these exceptions are far in the minority. In general, the liberals have nothing but praise for war, unless it is not being carried out with the correct amount of hypocrisy and deceit.
I was particularly struck by this article in the semi-official journal of American liberalism, The New Republic. This fine journal has been noted for its fervent support of the Contra terror war, the NATO dismemberment of Yugoslavia, and its slavish adherence to state propaganda in the Vietnam War and Gulf War I. And now Gulf War II. The propagandist Lawrence Kaplan, a lover of war if ever there was one, writes about Powell's speech (pack of lies) at the U.N. He writes, Quote:
Kaplan then resorts to that all-purpose method of hyping up a war--jingostic nationalism, by denigrating the French and Germans for not seeing the light. No doubt, the French and German state managers are slimy, despicable politicians seeking to grab the right share of the pie, but this is not what concerns Kaplan. Rather, he is disgusted that the "allies" are not slavishly following U.S. orders. But, it gets better. Kaplan finishes his excoriation of those irrational opposers of war with this: Quote:
The hypocrisy is just mind-boggling. So, Iraq complies with every demand to open its country to the most intrusive inspections in history, has had 2/3 of its country under U.S./U.K. occupation, and makes repeated calls for a peaceful solution, while the U.S. continues to seek out excuses for war, and it is Iraq that is to blame, and the U.N. even more for not supporting the U.S. war drive. This is quite typical of American liberalism, which has always supported U.S. imperialism's wars. The point is that the opposition to war does not now, nor has it ever, lie with liberals or the Democratic Party. In seeking to ingratiate itself to that ever-elusive "progressive" wing of the bourgeoisie, opponents of war shoot themselves in the foot, and act in ways that are counter-productive to stopping war. Only by class struggle can imperialist war be stopped. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 5,047
|
![]() Quote:
...burrrrrrrrrrp. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 638
|
![]()
Liberal office holders are scared to speak out against this war because they know that in the end Bush will get his way and they feel their best chance for re-election will be to wait and critisize the chaos his war will cause.
Spineless cowards. |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: WV
Posts: 4,369
|
![]()
I agree with Moon and commend him on being able to stand to continue reading and listening to the corporate lies. I listened to the majority of Powell's speech yesterday, it was practically dripping with evil. (Doublespeak, capitalism equals democracy etc, very Orwellian.)
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|