> that I was included in the 'we' that discusses here. If anyone
> identifies themselves with the dilemmas of the US and its presidency
Noone on this list identifies with official US policy or its Regency. The US doesn't have a President; the election was stolen, pure and simple.
> imperialist / capitalist. It could not be otherwise. And these two
> monstrosities arise from the same source, capitalist imperialism and
> its specific history. How do you explain this to your Democrat
> friends?
You don't. The partisans of the US one-party state are as blinkered and corrupt as the Brezhnev-era nomenklatura; talking with them is a waste of time. Instead, you try to convince the people whose interests diverge from the one-party state, i.e. ordinary US citizens. It comes down to concrete history: *how* were the Taliban created? Who was in charge of this? How did the CIA's Frankenstein turn on its master? Etc.
-- Dennis