Terrorism, Reaction, and Possible Competing Imperialisms,was Re: Robert Wade

Charles Jannuzi jannuzi at edu00.f-edu.fukui-u.ac.jp
Mon Jan 7 03:08:41 PST 2002


Jannuzi:
>
> >Nevertheless, the US has helped >directly and indirectly.
> >The US pays 1/4 of the cost of >the UN, which is running the >transition
to
> democracy.
>
> This sounds like a trickle down effect theory for enlightened foreign
> policy.

Prescod:


>You cut out a list of other ways >that the US is involved in the
>transition over there.

If you have the means to prevent a crime and you stand by and watch it happen, you must be guilty of something. If you cheer and support the criminal, you are even more guilty.

Had the US been in earnest about making the UN work for peacekeeping in that part of the world (instead of emphasizing anti-communism and then cheap labor markets and US business investments), so many wouldn't have perished. The US all out supported the dictator responsible, and it's shift under Clinton was due, in part, to anti-American voices that outed and shamed the US and its hypocritical policies.

Jannuzi:


> ... The US finally paid off its arrears (at least allegedly in theory)
> and this supports peacekeeping everywhere, which somehow necessitates
'good'
> foreign policy from the US--whose foreign policies and vast military
> deployments are mostly unlinked to UN peacekeeping.

Prescod:


>Supporting peacekeeping *is an >instance of good foreign policy*.

So is it anti-American to point out how little the US does of it? Something more informed Canadians have noted and complained about.

Prescod:
>All I wanted to point out is that the >US is often involved in good as
>well as evil. I've also mentioned >that American culture is good as >well
as evil. That either of these >are controversial points indicates >that I am on the wrong list. The >only other place I would expect to >find such a black and white view of >the world is an NRA mailing list.

What black and white view are you talking about and whose? Is it black and white to say the US isn't essentially evil, but US imperialism too often is? No but wait, someone will come on the list and regale us with a laundry list of the virtues of imperialism way back when and say something like, see, if you say and believe things like this, you can win support for your cause you bunch of hopeless, unappealing leftists.

Jannuzi
> John Pilger and some other brave Australian journalists (some who were
> murdered by the Indonesian troops or militias) report something quite
> differently about US and Australian dithering as well as about
irresponsible
> UK arms sales to the Indonesian government.

Prescod: >Dithering. That's a sign of >the deepest, most heinous evil
>imaginable.

If only your understanding was as deep as you'd like your irony to portray. The US and UK governments supported a murderous regime and stood by while it slaughtered thousands. They even sold it arms to help it do so. Pilger documents how the signals the US and UK governments sent to the Indonesian government were more or less a green light to go ahead and exterminate East Timorese. Based on the criteria the US government used under Clinton and Maddie Dimwit , Indonesia (and the government of Sudan, too) certainly deserved US bombing as much as Serbia ever did.

However, I myself don't believe that--I believe an engaged foreign policy that isn't caught up in militarism, mineral rights, arms sales (which are convenient for helping to balance trade with our oil suppliers), dominant US business interests, and American messianism for the world might help prevent a lot of the misery and suffering. Both inside the US and in countries where they don't need right-wing missionaries and propaganda but real aid.

Prescod (earlier):
> >Really. Name three places where >the US has militarily deposed a
> >democracy in favor of a >dictatorship in the last ten years.

Jannuzi:
>
> Why answer questions about history and current events from alternative
> universes?

Prescod:


>I didn't ask about alternative >universes. I was told:


>> When you elect people the US >>gov't likes then you can have a
>>Republic. But if you don't follow >>orders then a dictatorship gets
>>imposed.


>I'm asking for evidence of this >charge. I don't see how it would >require
alternate universes!

Is it a serious question? Obviously the person you are posing the question to was talking about more than ten years of history. For some, one decade is still current events.

US intervention is not now about imposing anti-communist dictatorships, it's about affecting the path of development a political economy might take for the benefit of the US and its top position in the world. What's more important than dictatorship vs. democracy is whether or not a government is pro-American when the US wants it to be--the current governments of Pakistan and Colombia being good examples.

The US government has pushed 'democracy' since Wilson, and it got renewed emphasis since Carter.

That doesn't mean it hasn't intervened and used force in other countries regardless of international law, loss of civilian life and infrastructure. That's why it lost its World Court case against Nicaragua. It didn't then impose a dictatorship on Nicaragua; it just supported acts of terrorism launched from foreign soil and spent lots of money to affect the elections once they were held.

Jannuzi:
>...
> Can Canadians like you ever stop vacillating between an overly simplistic
> anti-Americanism and an equally overly simplistic America worship? Seems
> unlikely. You'd have to KNOW something about the US first. I'm sure, Paul,
> you do lots of business in the US and therefore America is great.

Prescod:


>So the fact that I feel that the US >is a force for both good and evil in
>the world means I "vaccilate." And >the fact that I am a Canadian >makes me
an unworthy >commentator on America. I guess >only Americans have unbiased
>views on it. Or perhaps only >Nicuraguans. Or something.

I thought I was making strong suggestions as to what I felt about the quality of the content of your comments. Qualifications mean nothing to me, the higher they fly, the more interestingly they fall. Since take off you've been skimming puddles.

Prescod:


>Just in case you hadn't noticed, >you are starting to attack me
>personally which suggests that >you are taking the whole >discussion
>personally. Why?

Given the preconceptions you are working with--as evidenced from your homepage, which I sampled so people like Carroll would know to stop wasting his time with you--some might call you a troll on this list. I'm not so territorial. It's not my list. A person's place on the list, for me as reader and participant, is only as good as their last week's worth of posts, especially for the threads I take an interest in. It's a discussion list, not a repository of great thought.

Far be it from me to say where you belong with your comments. I mean, I'm already enough of a masochist to discuss US labor history with Nate Newman, clerical fascism with Chip Berlet, and even my status as a 'malignant fuck' with Brad DeLong, so why not America's 'not so simple good and evilness' with you. Sure the US is both good and evil, as are you, as am I, as is Canada, as is the world, yin and yang, vishnu and shiva, whatever. Take it from there. Paint us black in all your shades of grey.

Charles Jannuzi



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list