>>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