Business leaders against U.S. militarism (Camille, too)

Rakesh Bhandari bhandari at phoenix.Princeton.EDU
Wed Apr 14 08:58:28 PDT 1999


Camille Paglia wrote:


>"Political leadership means prioritizing in a world of endless crises.
>America has much more to fear from a turbulent Russia and a rising China
>-- whose leaders cannot guarantee the security or aim of their nuclear
>weapons -- than Europe does from a minor local despot.

Oh, I don't think anyone doubts that a tubulent Russia is the chief concern; the lesser turbulent power China is now being checked by Indian missle tests 'coincidentally' carried out during the Premier's Big North American Tour. There is surely little greater human perversity than an arms race in Asia which the US officially criticizes but welcomes sub rosa for the pressure that India can put on China, making both dependent (as well as Pakistan) on the West and the conditions it imposes. For all you Nation editors out there, when will Michael Klare be commissioned to write some analysis of the global arms race as it stands today?

As for Russia, isn't NATO setting the precedent (attack on a sovereign nation that has not engaged in aggression outside of its borders) and extending itself precisely to intervene at the 'necessary' point in a turbulent Russia? It's almost comforting at times to think our leaders are just wasting money on beating up poor old Milo and other medieval despots to make a cynical humanitarian statement or just to give contracts to the defense industry or just for the personal agendas of Clinton (wag the dog) or Albright (childhood memories); it's much more discomforting to think they are preparing and ready to embark on policies for solid reasons of geopolitical control that could have the forseen consequence of provoking a war of nuclear annihilation.

As with most of Paglia's opinion pieces, this one has the wit and style of radicalism but all the banality of the obvious. And her comment about Albright's blow to women's emancipation seems to rely on assumptions about Albright's power as a woman or perhaps a jew to manipulate the situation on the basis of some kind of wiliness. In other words, it's a garbage comment in an other piece by one of our great public intellectuals whose impoverished discourse is a mirror image of the corruption of American social and poltiical life.

rakesh

ps thanks to Barkley in particular for the updates and analyses; they have been singularly informing.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list