[lbo-talk] Just [sic] Foreign Policy

Carl G. Estabrook galliher at illinois.edu
Sat Oct 25 19:27:39 PDT 2014


If the group were in fact interested in a *just* US foreign policy, it would call for a end to Obama's bombing and drone attacks - and for the withdrawal of US troops, 'special forces,' and mercs from the Mideast.

But I don't expect that. --CGE

On Oct 24, 2014, at 7:23 PM, Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:


> I focused, in my last rereadingof this, on the title of the organization
> Naiman speaks for:
>
> *****
>> Robert Naiman
>> Policy Director
>> Just Foreign Policy ****
>
> The premise of that title, *** Just Foreign Policy ****
> is as deeply incoherent as would be, for example, A Nazi Institute for the
> Preservation of Jewish Culture*
>
> U.S. foreign policy, by definition, is deeply antagonistic to the interests
> of the world's peoples. How can _any_ policy adopted by the U.S. government
> be "just"? Absurd.
>
> This, I think, explains the comments of Carl and Michael Yates on Naimon's
> red-baiting style: he is attempting to defend the indefensible.
>
> Carrol



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list