[Peace-discuss] [Peace] US presidential elections, the Left, and IP

[John W.]

On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 4:28 PM C G Estabrook <cgestabrook at gmail.com> wrote:

John, you’ve mistaken the attributions. Not I but Craig Murray is the
> author of the remark to which you object.
>

Ah, I see.  Thanks.



> By 'set of opinions’ here, he seems to mean something like the
> conventional Left, of which I’ve long been a critic (even before the rise
> of identity politics).
>

Yes, you sort of have.



> As a Chomskyan anarchist and a Catholic Marxist (those positions are not
> incompatible), I’ve long argued for a number of opinions to which I know
> you take exception.
>

Not too many, actually.  Just the narrowness or rigidity of them, sometimes.



> But what is the “single issue” by which you think I’m ”driven”? Perhaps we
> should discuss that candidly. —CGE
>

I'm not quite sure what Voltaire has to do with it.  :-)  But in a word,
anti-war.




> > On Jun 29, 2019, at 4:09 PM, John W. <jbw292002 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Carl says:  "I do not subscribe to a set of opinions but attempt to
> consider every question afresh."
> >
> > Actually, Carl, you DO subscribe to a set of opinions which is almost
> always as predictable as the sunrise.  You're very ideologically driven,
> and for the most part a single-issue thinker and voter.   To be fair, most
> of us are pretty set in our ways by the time we reach middle age, and we
> hold dear two or three dominant paradigms with which we "consider every
> question afresh" and then arrive at the exact same, highly predictable
> conclusions.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 11:54 AM Brussel, Morton K via Peace <
> peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting analysis, which I can mostly agree with: The the ultimate
> answer to this view is that which will occur in the next decade or so. This
> will concern what evolves from American foreign policy, and what will
> happen on the climate change front.
> >
> > It is noteworthy that trying to portrayTrump as “antiwar" is
> inconsistent with his "growing of" our military and national security
> arsenals while surroundiing himself with characters such as Bolton, Pompeo
> and Abrams. His championing of fossil fuels will likely prevent the
> measures essential to slowing down the global warming we now experience.
> >
> > Anf then there are his domestic measures, which I can only charaterize
> as ignornant and pernicious for this country and more widely. Environment,
> civil rights, education, corporate control, etc., etc., etc.
> >
> > —mkb
> >
> >
> > > On Jun 29, 2019, at 8:51 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss <
> peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > I voted for the Green party candidate in the last presidential
> election & expect to do the same in the next, given that Gabbard is not
> nominated. But I think the British ex-diplomat Craig Murray is correct:
> > >
> > > 'Every now and then, I feel myself compelled to write something I know
> that the majority of my readers will not agree with. That is because I do
> not go along with left wing groupthink any more than I go along with the
> line of the Establishment. I do not subscribe to a set of opinions but
> attempt to consider every question afresh.
> > >
> > > 'Wikileaks is much criticised for having published the leaked Hillary
> and Podesta emails, thus having “caused” Trump. At its extreme, this
> involves the entire evidence-free “Russiagate” paranoia. I find myself
> criticised for my association with Julian Assange on these same grounds.
> > >
> > > 'The major answer to this is that it would have been morally wrong to
> conceal the evidence of Hillary’s wrongdoing, her associations with the
> Saudis and the Bankers, and particularly the rigging of the primary
> elections against Bernie Sanders by Hillary and the DNC. If I was accused
> of association with concealing all that, I would not be able to defend
> Wikileaks. Another part of the answer is that I am not sure any of this
> much affected the actual votes cast.
> > >
> > > 'But the most important bit of the answer is that I am not sorry that
> Clinton lost and Trump won. I say that with apologies to all my American
> friends who are suffering from Trump’s harsh domestic policies and his
> version of the “hostile climate for immigrants” which we have long suffered
> in the UK. I do not underestimate the harm done by Trump’s penchant for
> trade wars, or his blindly pro-Israel policies and gestures, nor the
> continuation of the Saudi anti-Shia alliance.
> > >
> > > 'But the vital fact for the rest of the world is that Trump remains
> the only US President since Jimmy Carter not to have launched a major war.
> In this, he is true to what he said consistently during his election
> campaign. I do not think you have to look any further than that for the
> explanation of why he pulled out of the attack on Iran following the
> destruction of the US drone. The mechanics of the decision-taking are not
> its cause, contrary to all the speculation.
> > >
> > > 'I should take the time to congratulate Iran on shooting down the
> drone. The Americans have killed tens of thousands of people, all over the
> Middle East and Central Asia, using such drones. That they should holler so
> much when somebody knocks one down is ludicrous.
> > >
> > > 'I am absolutely convinced that, were Hillary President, the Middle
> East would now be devastated by the biggest of all the recent wars, and
> America would have invaded both Syria and Iran by now.
> > >
> > > 'Hillary was an enthusiast for the destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan
> and she was personally involved in starting the obliteration of the
> advanced Libyan state on the flimsiest of pretexts. The potential
> devastation she would have inflicted and the millions who would now be
> dead, maimed or orphaned outweighs in my view all the harm perpetrated by
> Trump. So my conclusion is this: I would far rather not have President
> Trump nor President Clinton, but forced into a straight binary choice I
> will take Trump. He has a better character; for all his faults he is the
> only one of the two who is not a psychopathic killer.’
> > >
> > > 'How the Trump administration plays out, given the warmongering
> advisors from the political Establishment with whom Trump has surrounded
> himself, is a fascinating question. John Bolton is as near evil as any
> human being can be. Which brings me back to the faux left and their views.
> > >
> > > 'In 2013, I spoke in a ceremony at the Oxford Union to give the Sam
> Adams Award for Integrity, of which previous winners include Julian
> Assange, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, John Kyriakou, Thomas Drake and
> myself. Hundreds of students from the “left” at Oxford University were
> engaged
> > > in a rowdy picket against the Sam Adams award aimed to stop the event
> because of the ridiculous allegations in Sweden against Assange.
> > >
> > > 'Now get this. Exactly the day before, the Oxford Union had hosted an
> evening with John Bolton. Not a single member of the “left”, who tried to
> prevent Ray McGovern and I from speaking, had demonstrated against the
> egregious war criminal, responsible for the death of millions. There could
> not be a more stark example of the spectacular success of the
> > > Establishment in using the false trail of identify politics to split
> and divert the left, particularly among young people.’
> > >
> > > —CGE
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20190629/02d25916/attachment-0001.html>