[Marxism] RE: Who is David Cobb? (actually re: Walter Lippmann'scomments)
marvgandall at rogers.com
Sat Jul 17 14:49:36 MDT 2004
Fred Feldman wrote:
> Okay, Walter got irritated. I have a different take than he does, but
> nonetheless he is on to something basic about what is going on.
> Are there differences between Kerry and Bush. I can think of three
> basic ones.
> The second difference I have clearly noted is over Cuba.
Not only Cuba. The North Koreans and Iranians would also probably breathe a
little easier under a Kerry rather than a Bush administration, which
(in)famously targeted both as belonging to the "axis of evil", and against
whom military intervention was contemplated if the invasion of the third and
weakest "axis" member, Iraq, succeeded.
I think it is true that foreign ministries around the world see the
Democrats as the more pragmatic party in pursuit of US interests, generally
favouring the use of economic carrots and sticks rather than military
intervention to maintain American hegemony. The Bush administration's
foreign policy, at least at the outset, caused global alarm because it was
seen as blindly driven by ideology, with its ill-considered invasion of Iraq
regarded as an reckless exercise in right adventurism by both the bipartisan
foreign policy establishment in the United States and by China, Russia, and
the US's allies abroad.
Like all adventurists, the Bush administration has since paid a heavy price
for its miscalculation, and has, suitably chastened, brought its policy
towards North Korea, Iran, Europe (and Iraq) back into line with that of the
Democrats and the UN. Still, because the Bush administration is based on the
most reactionary sectors of American capitalism, it is not seen as subject
to the same "moderating" influences which would be imposed on the foreign
policy of a Democratic administration by its liberal base and European
allies. I suspect this is why the governments and peoples of the world
generally prefer to deal with the Democrats in the same way trade unionists
would rather face liberal rather than reactionary employers. Whether this
reasoning is sound - history has shown liberal Democrats and liberal
employers as ready as Republicans and reactionaries to resort to force in
defence of their interests - or whether it is sound more often than not is
More information about the Marxism