>first quoting myself:
>>>I was against the widening of the war to economic targets and I am against
>>>this further widening. But I would say to the many sincere, intelligent,
>>>informed , and committed left-wing subscbribers that it is not enough
>>>merely to oppose everything that western governments do as a matter of
>>>course.
>>
>>Not as a matter of course, no.
>I think for some in marxism space that was the position. And it has a lot
>to be said for it but it is not a tactical position.
>>>It is necessary to oppose them on the basis of a wider strategy
>>>challenging their claim to be the hegemonic arbiters of international
>>>justice
>>
>>Which has been a theme here from about day two, no?
>No. I think many correctly pointed to hypocrisy, as you do too in this
>post. But what do you expect the armed forces of exploiting classes to be
>if not hypocritical?
>I agree that blunderbuss peace enforcement is violent. Strategic bombing
>is not going to look good after this, but there is a difference between you
>and me.
>I see a process of world government coming about through an intermediary
>stage simlar to how the nation states were formed after a stage of robber
>barons fighting for power and legitimacy. This is not a war for the
>repartition of imperialism, this is a war of total hegemonism.
>I think the whole energy of the left should go on reforming that movement
>for world government, not just opposing it on the many points on which it
>shows itself to imperialist, oppressive, and exploitative.
>So I think Carter's reasoned criticisms from within the bourgeois camp are
>more effective pointer to what can be achieved now, than total
>denunciations of the hypocrisy of imperialism.
>Chris Burford
>London