>I don't know how many people are doing international antimilitarist
>work; less than in the 80s, I suspect. But the antisweatshop and
>globalization work is another kind of internationalist. What's your
>point? This is long-haul work.
Anti-sweatshop & anti-globalization work seems to me to be a mixed bag, with a return of America-First populism. Where is anti-militarism in there, except maybe anti-militarism against the armed forces of America's official enemies?
>I do not run togoether what you wrongly call "Stalinist-baiting"
>with the argument that the US government's favorite dictator-to-hate
>of the month is bad enough to justify whatever awful thing the
>government wants to do. In fact, I have found in decades of
>practical experience that it only helps and does not hurt our
>organizing efforts to make clear that we, the organizers, have as
>much contempt for Saddam Hussein or whoever as the government,
>indeed more, since we opposed them before it was fashionable and
>never supported arming them, etc. In fact, defense of Saddam or
>Milosovic or whoever is harmful, because it makes you look like a
>nut, besides being wrong.
You say you do not support Hussein, but opposing the Gulf War in fact supports Hussein, whatever your intentions; your opposition to the Gulf War says to Hussein that you think it's OK for him to invade Kuwait and any other country for that matter, whatever your protestations to the contrary. And if you are against Hussein, why should you be against the U.S. government trying to overthrow the present Iraqui regime through covert actions? We are only supporting the Iraqui opposition. What's wrong with the UN "inspection" to make sure that Hussein will never develop "weapons of mass destruction" again? Why complain about the embargo? If Hussein wants, he can use the UN-sanctioned limited oil trade to buy food for his people, instead of making his cronies rich. Such is the argument of the dominant ideology.
>In any case, rejection of Stalinism, by which I do not mean the cult
>of personality, worship of the Father of Peoples, but rather support
>for the kind of political system that he and his epigones created,
>is not "baiting." It is a moral and political necessity. That system
>is not worth fighting for. It was worth fighting against--I mean by
>the workers. The grounds and means on which the US and the other
>capitalist powers opposed it were different and themselves
>contemptible.
The Korean War was a necessary evil if not a good thing, the CIA support for the LDP has made Japan the most democratic and prosperous country in Asia, etc. It's a moral and political necessity to oppose Stalinism by any means necessary & nip it in the bud if possible. Compare the prosperity of South Koreans with tree-bark-eating North Koreans. Let's congratulate ourselves. No, in fact, we haven't thanked our veterans enough; it's been a "Forgotten War," and we have to remedy this neglect by more medals & memorials. In the case of the CIA support of the LDP, it didn't even kill anyone -- it only made Japan richer than otherwise. Against such a good result, criticizing the "grounds and means" of U.S. policy is rather silly, no? Such is an argument of the dominant ideology. In fact, as far as the Korean War is concerned, unlike the Vietnam War, most Americans would be on Brad's side, I'd imagine.
Yoshie