"Once Upon A Time, In a Galaxy Far,
Far Away" the left wing of the political spectrum were the vanguard of opposing the globalist warfare matrix. The
anti-war movement changed the world in the 1960's and stopped the bloody carnage in Viet Nam. Judging by today's standards,
that world is forgotten and the replacement culture has an attitude that preserving the empire is necessary no matter how
trumped up the rationale is to maintain perpetual conflict. Choose the newest enemy; Jihad Islam, Russian nationalism, Chinese
supremacy or North Korean belligerence and any dedicated internationalist can spin an argument why fighting the next war is
Now we all know
just how half-crazed the foreign policy of mentally deranged "Bomber" McCain and his NeoCon warmonger comrades
has been over the decades, but what is the excuse from the Looney Left for abandoning their moral argument that underpinned
opposition to the establishment's persistent drive to maintain a permanent war environment?
Remember the Democratic left is the party that purged the righteous and enlightened
foreign policy opposition from the likes of Dennis Kucinich, Cynthia McKinney and Eric Massa; forcing each from office. Throwing
them under the bus is much different from having them sitting in the back of the coach.
While regrettable these expulsions from Congress are consistent with the radical
purity litmus tests required to remain within the club of ecumenical warfare. The informative site with accompanied link resources,
Neoliberalism as Trotskyism for the rich makes an important point.
"Like Trotskyism, neoliberalism consider wars to impose a liberal-democratic society on weaker countries (which
in modern times are countries without nuclear weapons) which cannot give a fight to Western armies are inherently just ("regime
change" mentality). So both ideologies are ready to bring revolution to new countries on the tips of (USA in case of
resistance to imperialism was seen as a desired objective for liberal wing exponents of the anti-war factions. Sadly, that
is no longer the case. The persistent and expansive dominance within the deep state of the most notable NeoCon proponents
has worked their way into the entire professional establishment. As the NeoLibs become indistinguishable with the fake conservatives,
the liberal cause is relegated to the trash bin.
Doug Bandow writes in Forbes, Americans Should Reject Bipartisan Warmongering: Base Foreign Policy On Reluctance To Go To War and acknowledges the failure the post 911 era.
"After 9/11, President George W. Bush abandoned his campaign pledge of a “humble”
foreign policy and instead unleashed America’s military throughout the Middle East, with disastrous results.
Fifteen years and another
administration later, the U.S. is more entangled in violent conflicts throughout the world than ever before and there’s
no end in sight. The American people understandably have rejected a foreign policy driven by regime change and nation building."
Well, this last conclusion is debatable. Has the
public truly scorned the interventionist involvement policy? The grassroots Trump supporters were certainly onboard, but the
cold hard fact is that the will of the people has little to do with the design and implementation of foreign policy. Just
as President Trump, has been held captive to the careerists from Foggy Bottom.
This brings up the discussion, why is it acceptable in the controlled and manufactured culture
for liberals to jump on the train of the arms munitions machine and always get a pass on their bellicose advocacy?
The short answer, they can get
away with it in a culture that blames right wing conservatives for all wars. However, this is not based upon the real historic
record. According to Willie Osterweil in the essay, Democrats Are the Real Party of War presents a compelling argument.
"Indeed, all of the major U.S. wars in the 20th century—World War I, II, Korea and Vietnam—were
entered by Democratic administrations. Harry Truman, a Democrat, is still the only world leader to use a nuclear bomb on a
population. And with the exception of World War II, where almost all anti-war sentiment collapsed after Pearl Harbor, these
wars were entered over the objections of the left wing of the Democratic Party. But while the presence of that left wing has
guaranteed that anti-war liberals rally to the Democratic side, it not yet stopped a Democratic administration from going
important to face this fact squarely: in the 20th century, it was the Democratic party that was the more aggressive pursuer
of foreign wars. You can make whatever claim you like about historical contingency, necessity, or immediate context. None
of them should convince anyone that the Democrats, as a party, are opposed to war. They’re not even more opposed to
war than Republicans. They are a party of warmongers.
Many of those young anti-war Obama voters learned a hard lesson: when you put your faith,
energy or activism into electing Democrats, no matter what domestic policy you support, you’re also putting your weight
behind militarism, a crackdown on civil liberties, and foreign wars of aggression. Perhaps the most surprising thing about
Obama’s wars, ultimately, is how, despite it all, many continue to hope for change from the Democratic Party."
Folks, there are no successors to Eugene Joseph McCarthy a Man of Courage. The Democratic Party is every bit of a fraud as the Republican NeoCons. As for the ideological inept supporters of progressive
nihilism, they are irrelevant and act as dreadful fools of the Pelosi contingent wing of the sham two party systems.
The fake news offered up by the corporatist media
is so slanted to maintain the protection racket for their heroes and heroines on the left that the condemnation of that other
famous McCarthy, "Tail Gunner Joe", applies to anyone on the right; especially if they propose an American First, non-interventionism populist viewpoint.
Back to, Once Upon A Time, the populism on the left
and that of the right shared most of the same basic distrust of the political and economic elites. Not that way anymore. Even
the liberal site Vox asks, Why Democrats have no foreign policy ideas.
foreign policy debate tends to be mostly conducted between the center and the right. The issue is typically how much force
America should use rather than whether it should use it at all, or how to tweak a free-trade agreement rather than whether
it should be accepted at all. Debates over pressing policy issues — from fighting ISIS to the crisis in Venezuela to
handling Chinese provocations in the South China Sea — lack a left-wing voice of any prominence.
Dan Drezner, a professor at Tufts University’s Fletcher School admits:
we believe in government. And yet, the logic of a security state tends in directions that are antithetical to things we believe
as progressives,” Hurlburt says. “As a security progressive, you’re constantly riding that contradiction,
and you’ll never get away from it.”
His conclusions are void of the definite criticism that the Liberal Wing Nuts actually are in basic agreement with
the prevailing war imposition objectives of the permanent foreign policy consortium.
So when the self-proclaimed indignation of the pseudo holier than thou
libtards rationalize that their complicity in murder comes with the territory, just remember that infamous admission from
war criminal, Madeleine Albright in her 60 Minutes interview.
speaking of US sanctions against Iraq: “We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more
children than died in Hiroshima. And – and you know, is the price worth it?”
Madeleine Albright: “I think this
is a very hard choice, but the price – we think the price is worth it.”
Who can or has the will to bring justice to
the establishment elites for waging war for their globalist masters? Liberals are virtually immune to the silence of condemning
progressives. This "PC" distortion of reality seldom penetrates the bubble of cover-up. When the echo chamber for
leftist exemption from responsibility forgoes accountability, the entire society is drained of an opportunity for social justice.
need to see their faces in the mirror as an enabler for everlasting war. They are the bookends along with the Bush proponents
that destroyed any moral imperative for world leadership. The jury is still out on the Trump administration. However, the
emphatic shift to the shadow government operatives is most disturbing.
If the left really wants to be the champion of the common man, where is the push
back against a foreign policy that has changed little under Bush, Clinton, Bush Junior, Obama and now Trump?
Bombing the incompliant into
submission is not a valid foreign doctrine. The bipartisan gang of warmongers is at blame when the guns explode in a salvo
of death. As long as the phony war on terror goes on the net result is that the lasting causality is the body politik of our
own nation. Reestablish the anti-war movement as an active vehicle for true national defense by bringing back the troops to
our own shore.
- September 26, 2017