[Peace-discuss] Beltway liberals who support U.S. imperialism: it’s time to check your “American Privilege”

[Robert Naiman]

https://www.facebook.com/robert.naiman/posts/10158602425482656

Beltway liberals who support U.S. imperialism: it’s time to check your
“American Privilege”

As part of our campaign to revive bipartisan American anti-imperialism,
we’re going to adopt some of the language and tactics associated with
“identity politics” movements and deploy them against the Beltway liberals
who support U.S. imperialism.

Of course, Beltway liberals who support U.S. imperialism are not the _root_
cause of U.S. imperialism. But they are crucial _enablers_ of U.S.
imperialism. They enable U.S. imperialism by helping to peddle claims that
U.S. government interference in other people’s countries is somehow
motivated by concern for democracy and human rights. These “humanitarian
war” justifications are generally trotted out before U.S. wars to confuse
and disrupt potential opponents. The “humanitarian war” claims are then
discarded when they are no longer useful to U.S. imperialism.

Recall: the “national security” justification given to the U.S. public
prior to the October 2002 Congressional vote to invade Iraq – supported by
Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, and Dick Gephardt - was that the
Iraqi government was developing “weapons of mass destruction” they would
use to attack America. But this was not the only justification given. Also,
we were told, we were going to bring democracy and freedom to Iraq and the
new Iraq would be a shining example of democracy and human rights which
would transform the Middle East. Remember?

The world now knows that the U.S. government claim that Iraq was building
weapons of mass destruction to attack America was not true. After the U.S.
military invaded and occupied Iraq, the U.S. military looked for the
alleged Iraqi “WMD.” They didn’t find them. They didn’t find them, because
they weren’t there to find.

The contradiction between the national security justification given for the
war beforehand and what turned out to be true afterwards was attributed to
“bad intelligence.” But this was a lie. The truth is that the Bush
Administration lied to the American people, and that Joe Biden and Hillary
Clinton participated in the lie.

We know this because Dick Durbin, who voted against the war, subsequently
gave a speech on the Senate floor saying that he knew at the time of the
vote that the public case the Bush Administration was making for the war
didn’t match U.S. intelligence being given to Members of Congress. Of
course, if Dick Durbin knew this at the time, then Joe Biden and Hillary
Clinton knew it at the time. They weren’t tricked by the Bush
Administration, as they later claimed. They were eager accomplices.

There was never any real accountability for this in terms of anyone being
punished. But at least there was accountability in terms of acknowledging
what the truth was. Everybody now admits that Iraq did not have weapons of
mass destruction and was not threatening America. The U.S. military
checked. The “national security” justification given for the war was not
true.

How about the “humanitarian war” justifications for the war? Is the story
better there?

The story there is worse. Why is it worse? Because nobody who’s anybody
even bothered to check, because nobody who’s anybody in Washington really
cares what the truth about that is. Today nobody who’s anybody in
Washington really cares how democracy and human rights are doing in Iraq,
or in Libya, or Syria, or Yemen, or Afghanistan, or in any other country
that U.S. imperialism has destroyed. The state of human rights in a country
is a five alarm emergency when it’s perceived to be a justification for war
or economic sanctions on civilians. Otherwise nobody who’s anybody in
Washington cares about these things very much, if feigning concern about
these things isn’t useful as an excuse for U.S. intervention.

At the root of “humanitarian war” narratives is an unexamined attachment
among Beltway liberals to the idea that Beltway liberals know better how to
run other people’s countries than the people who live in those countries
do. And this is something that we should try to stamp out: this unexamined
attachment among Beltway liberals to the belief that they know better how
to run other people’s countries than the people in those countries do.

Recall that when Barack Obama was running for President in 2008, he
promised to “end the mindset that got us into war in the first place.” This
is part of the mindset that got us into war in the first place: the
unexamined attachment among Beltway liberals to the belief that they know
better how to run other people’s countries than the people who live in
those countries do. So, let’s end that mindset.

And here’s how we’re going to start. Any time a Beltway liberal indicates
that they believe that they know how to run somebody else’s country better
than people in that country do, we’re going to say the following sentence
to them:

“It’s time to check your American privilege.”

===

Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
(202) 448-2898 x1
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20190905/6bc42c0a/attachment.html>