>You have presented no evidence that Kerry's imperialism will be less
>aggressive than Bush's -- you merely offer your wishful thinking.
Hmm, well I just happened to be reading Robert Fatton's book on Haiti and interviewing the author. Fatton - who reads like a Marxist, and certainly quotes lots of them (from Karl himself through Gramsci and Ellen Wood) - say that Carter's "human rights" campaign forced Duvalier into liberalization measures that were reversed when Ron took office. Aristide was overthrown during Bush I and Clinton oversaw his restoration. And now he's been overthrown again, under Bush II. As Fatton put in on my show last night (I'll be posting the audio pretty soon), the LAC people in the Bush admin - Reich and Noriega - are very right wing and hate Aristide. There are many things wrong with Aristide and his rule. He was restored under severe constraint, with an IMF program and dependency on the U.S. But there's no doubt that his ouster was a turn for the worse, and the Bush admin played no small part in the outcome. So there's a concrete example of how the D brand of imperialism is marginally better than the R brand. It's still imperialism, but over the last 20-25 years, Haitians have been more oppressed under Republican administrations.
Doug