<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bottomMargin=0 leftMargin=3 rightMargin=3 topMargin=0>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 08:52:49 -0700 Michael Pugliese <<A
href="mailto:debsian@pacbell.net">debsian@pacbell.net</A>>
writes:<BR>> Vidal also has a cranky, paleo-con<BR>>
side. Wrote a Forward to a book of essays by Chronicles contributor, <BR>>
Bill<BR>> Kauffman. <A
href="http://www.rockfordinstitute.org/">http://www.rockfordinstitute.org/</A><BR>>
<A
href="http://www.google.com/search?q=Bill+Kauffman+Gore+Vidal">http://www.google.com/search?q=Bill+Kauffman+Gore+Vidal</A>+<BR>>
<A
href="http://www.google.com/search?q=Chronicles+Gore+Vidal+Fleming+&hl=en">http://www.google.com/search?q=Chronicles+Gore+Vidal+Fleming+&hl=en</A><BR>>
Michael Pugliese<BR>> <A
href="http://home.salamander.com/~wmcclain/kauffman.txt">http://home.salamander.com/~wmcclain/kauffman.txt</A><BR>>
"AMERICA FIRST! Its History, Culture, and Politics" by Bill<BR>> Kauffman,
Prometheus Books 1995,<BR>> <BR>> This is a sympathetic history of
pre-WWII populist isolationism <BR>> written<BR>> by a paleolibertarian
intimate of the "Chronicles" crowd. He wraps <BR>> up<BR>> with an
analysis of the movement's rebirth in the 1990s, as <BR>> represented<BR>>
by Buchanan, Perot, Jerry Brown, et al.<BR>> <BR>> A very quick and
facinating "read". The author is often quite funny, <BR>> and<BR>> is
honest about the flaws of the characters involved.<BR>> <BR>> He lists the
tenets of American "populism" as:<BR>> <BR>> (1)
concentrated wealth and power are pernicious;
widespread<BR>> distribution is the proper
condition<BR>> <BR>> (2) war and militarism are
ruinous to the republic and to the<BR>> character of
the populace<BR>> <BR>> (3) ordinary people can be
trusted to make their own decisions<BR>> <BR>> "Isolationism", in the
tradition he writes about, means<BR>> opposition to:<BR>>
<BR>> (1) imperialism (should have left Puerto Rico
and the <BR>> Phillipines<BR>> alone)<BR>>
<BR>> (2) wars or interventions on behalf of
internationalist<BR>> principles<BR>>
<BR>> (3) institutions or treaties that transfer US
sovereignty to<BR>> international or multinational
bodies<BR>> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Here is what Lenin had to say about the sort of anti-imperialism
represented</DIV>
<DIV>in our time by the "isolationists," (from his *Imperialism: The
Highest</DIV>
<DIV>Stage of Capitalism* </DIV>
<DIV><<A
href="http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/ch09.htm">http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/ch09.htm</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<P>In the United States, the imperialist war waged against Spain in 1898 stirred
up the opposition of the "anti-imperialists", the last of the Mohicans of
bourgeois democracy who declared this war to be "criminal", regarded the
annexation of foreign territories as a violation of the Constitution, declared
that the treatment of Aguinaldo, leader of the Filipinos (the Americans promised
him the independence of his country, but later landed troops and annexed it),
was "jingo treachery", and quoted the words of Lincoln: "When the white man
governs himself, that is self-government; but when he governs himself and also
governs others, it is no longer self-government; it is despotism." <A
href="thismessage:/2" name=a2><SPAN class=NOTE>[2]</SPAN></A> But as long, as
all this criticism shrank from recognising the inseverable bond between
imperialism and the trusts, and, therefore, between imperialism and the
foundations of capitalism, while it shrank from joining the forces engendered by
large-scale capitalism and its development-it remained a "pious wish".</P>
<P>This is also the main attitude taken by Hobson in his critique of
imperialism. Hobson anticipated Kautsky in protesting against the "inevitability
of imperialism" argument, and in urging the necessity of "increasing the
consuming capacity" of the people (under capitalism!). The petty-bourgeois point
of view in the critique of imperialism, the omnipotence of the banks, the
financial oligarchy, etc., is adopted by the authors I have often quoted, such
as Agahd, A. Lansburgh, L. Eschwege, and among the French writers Victor Berard,
author of a superficial book entitled <EM>England and Imperialism </EM>which
appeared in 1900. All these authors, who make no claim to be Marxists, contrast
imperialism with free competition and democracy, condemn the Baghdad railway
scheme, which is leading to conflicts and war, utter "pious wishes" for peace,
etc. This applies also to the compiler of international stock and share issue
statistics, A. Neymarck, who, after calculating the thousands of millions of
francs representing "international" securities, exclaimed in 1912: "Is it
possible to believe that peace may be disturbed ... that, in the face of these
enormous figures, anyone would risk starting a war?"<A href="thismessage:/3"
name=a3><SPAN class=NOTE>[3]</SPAN></A></P></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR> </DIV></BODY></HTML>