The shit I wrote or the shit I was referring to?
>> Rhetorical excess? Hitler parallels. Credulous cross-posting?
>>
It is clearly a problem foregoing rhetorical excess and hitler parallels when what is in question is genocide, or at the least the mass killing of innocent people because of their ethnicity.
I have to wonder what people think they are accomplishing by spamming us with stuff from capitalist media, which we are never supposed to believe except right now, or stuff from clearly biased Serbian sources, or from anonymous Serbian communists who say they've captured a U.S. pilot when the dude is probably having a submarine sandwich somewhere in Germany right now. I could have posted an appeal from "the workers of Kosovo" I've seen on the net, but I regard it as having equal credibility as the foregoing, namely zero.
<< See Financial Times article below. Ad hominem argument? Distilling hundreds of years of regional history into a single demon, Milosevic. >>
The bankruptcy of the Clinton Administration's intellectual case, well established by Chomsky, is as much a distraction from what's important as an indictment of the policy.
<< Hackneyed doctrines? The arsenal of democracy, killing for peace, etc. >>
As I've said repeatedly, as far as I'm concerned the US/NATO's stated case, as well as their standing to offer any such case, are utterly lacking. Every time I hear a new official accusation I get more suspicious. I wish others had the same skepticism about information that supports their position. I have to admit I am overly exercised at the easy invocation of the doctrine of revolutionary defeatism in the shadow of potential genocide, more so than by the predictable pap coming out of Albright's mouth. I don't expect many people here to take what the Administration says at face value, so that does not appear to be worth as much attention.
<< Fact is that very few people on any side of the issue know the region's history or politics very well, much less have any idea what to do about the situation. Me, I'm just relying on a prejudice that anything involving B-52s is very bad business. >
Sure, and me, I'm bummed out by the thought of ditches filled with dead bodies of non-combatants. This is a fog that's difficult to see through, much less form a judgement about in confidence. We just have to do the best we can.
Some people are revolted by the Hitler Test because it reminds anyone who isn't a fool that there can be something much worse than Western imperialism. It would seem to be a great exception to an otherwise strong analysis, but in fact there are many additional examples on a smaller scale.
In other words, there are cases where use of force by a capitalist state -- for whatever motives -- proved to make for a positive outcome, relative to what might have been expected otherwise. I mentioned one yesterday -- use of Federal troops in the South for integration. Nathan noted the Civil War. On a much more mundane level, I think the Haiti policy has been a net positive, though nothing to throw parties over.
How about law enforcement? Should the certifiably awful Giuliani regime indict the cops who shot the African 41 times? Should the Feds have indicted the police who beat Rodney King?
You can say in all these cases, whenever anything arguably positive results, it is never based on positive motivations, and I wouldn't necessarily disagree. But that doesn't get us off the hook of always being obliged to consider whether or not the state (or the states, as in NATO) merits support. Automatic rejection, especially in this case, is untenable.
Some people here are in constant attack mode. Never post material contrary to their position. Never question what they do post, no matter how absurd or even racist. Never doubt the universal applicability of their position in every time and place. Refuse in principle to betray any concern for the Kosovari or criticism of Milo & co. Never grant the possibility of good faith among those with whom they disagree. Like bureaucrats without bureaucracy -- a bureaucratization of the mind. A vivid illustration of how revolutions come to grief, or never get started.
mbs