----- Original Message ----- From: "Carrol Cox" <cbcox at ilstu.edu> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 8:35 PM Subject: No! Re: farewell to the Westphalian system?
>
>
> Ian Murray wrote:
> >
> > [ de-re-territorialization anyone? ]
> >
> > If we are going to intervene, there will have to be rules
> > Fetishising sovereignty is a dictators' charter, but Martini
> > interventionism would be worse
> >
>
> Did you extract this passage, or was it extracted in the original?
======================
I don't tamper with the articles I post.
>
> Nothing good will _ever_ come from any action of the U.S. government
> outside its own borders. There is neither empirical nor theoretical
> evidence for any hope to the contrary. (I'm _not_ saying anything about
> its internal actions.)
==================
Is that a prediction or a metahistorical apriori for you?
>
> This has important tactical and strategic implications. Those who
> recognize the validity of this proposition must find ways to introduce a
> change of attitude through large sections of the current anti-war
> movement. The majority of those now involved in that movement think they
> are struggling against _Bush's_ War, not the U.S. War. When the let-up
> comes (for whatever reason) we must be left with a large core who are
> prepared to continue working between crises to build for the next one.
> And to start the next one at a higher level.
====================
Why? Your statement above tells them that any attempt to change US foreign policy via internal collective action is an exercise in futility.
Ian