John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN CHECKPOINT ASIA

 

“Bolivia’s White Supremacist Coup Regime Determined to Quench Resistance in Blood

“The fury of Bolivians cheated of their elected government has to be subdued with terror”

 

While I am in sympathy with much of this article, I very much object to the following:

“The one time there is an actual white supremacist takeover the liberals predictably line up behind it”

First, the word “liberal” is misused so often today, it is becoming meaningless, and this quote represents just another misuse.

No liberal can possibly support the coup. Liberals don’t ignore democratic principles, they are defined by them.

The fact is that there are almost no liberals in the United States and in many places under its dominance. But isn’t that what you expect to find at the heart of an empire? Its people all nurtured on twenty-four-hour-a-day political cant and corporate press propaganda?

America is a place, after all, where a football player can’t even make a brief, respectful gesture of protest against police violence without literally being booed and heckled, even insulted by high officials.

Empire- and Pentagon-loyalists like Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden and most of the Democratic contenders are not liberals, no matter what views they may hold about social programs.

In fact, America’s political party system leaves almost no room for careers in opposition to empire and the crushing weight of the military and security services.

By definition, empire and the military represent the antithesis of democratic and human values. They represent telling others what to do and using force if they don’t.

Second, we have had other “white supremacist” takeovers. Very much so.

As in Ukraine. That coup could not have happened without the work of Right-wing extremists like the Azov Battalion.

America’s covert support of such outfits in 2014 was publicly displayed by photos of America’s appointed Proconsul to the Coup Government, Joe Biden, smiling broadly, while vigorously shaking hands with the commander of that dreadful outfit.

You could argue that all American-induced coups and interventions abroad are of that nature, even if some of the actors used inside the target country are not white. You do have to use the material at hand for a coup, don’t you?

The guys running the show from Washington could very much be viewed as sympathetic to many of the world’s “white supremacists.” Just look at photos of the faces gathered around the Cabinet table or sitting in attendance at the Oval Office.

And the long-term record supports that impression. Until the actions of others in the world made it no longer sustainable, Washington vigorously defended and cooperated with the former white Nationalist government of South Africa, just as today it vigorously supports the brutality of Israel’s apartheid government.

Washington has had a hand in many coups and interventions against genuinely democratic governments over the years, but they were democracies with either “non-white” majorities or major “non-white” components of support, as in Egypt or Iran or Libya or Guatemala or Panama or Chile or Haiti.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ITEM IN MOON OF ALABAMA

 

“There are freshmen from Michigan and Maryland in Congress who recently made some news with comments about the Zionist lobby. Some anti-imperialists and progressives lauded them for their efforts and defended them against attacks. But these are wolfs in sheep clothing.

“Rep. Ilhan Omar: ‘The people of Syria revolted against Assad’s repressive dictatorship 8 years ago today, demanding a more just and free government. Peace loving people around the world stand in solidarity with them in this struggle!’

“Rashida Tlaib: ‘The anniversary of the uprising against the oppression in Syria was yesterday. We must recognize the struggle of those who organized and stood up against injustice. It is my hope that we can see a Syria that is truly free one day.’”

 

I like Ilhan Omar for speaking out on Palestine, just as I like Tulsi Gabbard’s efforts to understand the ugly war in Syria. I admire them both for public courage.

But, please, this is America we are talking about.

To expect anyone in American politics to come along with completely fresh and informed and honest views is just dreaming.

Just as with Bernie Sanders’ so-called socialism or, indeed, anything at all about Sanders.

He’s a distinguished-looking bag of hot air.

He showed everyone what he was made of in his confrontation with the woman who plainly stole the nomination from him, Hillary Clinton.

He’s never been a strong voice against global empire, against the secret terror of the CIA, against the vast intrusions of the NSA, or against the monstrous waste and mass killing of the Pentagon.

And then we have that thoroughbred phony, Elizabeth Warren, making precious little noises all the time about progressive matters while voting for hateful defense and security budgets and never opposing all those wars and offering us in speeches smatterings of the establishment’s poison about Iran.

I’ve said it many times. There are no liberals, genuine liberals, in the United States, at least not in any positions of authority or influence. Not one in the national government. Not one in charge of a major news source. None guiding the nation’s great institutions and foundations and education establishments.

America is about empire and the wars required to sustain it, and that is pretty much it. The rest is elaborate window dressing, theater, playacting. Empires do not get built and maintained and expanded by nice guys, and the resources constantly pouring into empire leave no room for great human or humane efforts.

Another thing I’ve said many times is that you can have either an empire or a decent country, but you cannot have both. America made its choice, long ago.

The entire atmosphere of the place, the education system, the press, the churches, the politics – all immersed and saturated in war and the drive for empire with little room for other values. It can be seen and heard and felt in a thousand details.

What could be more blatantly unfair and anti-democratic than what we see being done to Venezuela today? Yet, where are the American voices against their government’s open use of threats and terror? The politicians? The editors? The great university heads? The church leaders?

Some might claim an excuse over events in Syria because many facts about responsibility for that set of atrocities remained well hidden for a long time. Many facts remain hidden still, despite our learning a good deal here and there.

But here, in the case of Venezuela, we see daily the blunt face of fascism telling people who they should vote for, who should swear himself in as President, who should control the country’s assets, and destroying the national power grid, an act of terror which undoubtedly killed and injured many and destroyed what was in the fridges of literally millions of the most ordinary people.

Why isn’t anyone shouting at the top of their lungs?

All this done by men who say they respect democracy and human rights and expect to be respected in the world as leaders.

You know, Hitler gave one of the great speeches about peace, not long before he started a new war. It was reported by that great journalist and chronicler of Nazi Germany, William Shirer.

And, under the Nazis, Germany had some window dressings of progressivity, various socialistic measures, if you will. It even sometimes held plebiscites.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY SAMUEL MOYN IN THE GUARDIAN

 

 “The problem with Democrats is substance, not style

“Following Trump’s election, US liberals have blamed their failure on rhetoric. But politics is about much more than baiting voters”

 

The author starts with inaccurate assumptions.

Democrats and liberals are not the same thing at all.

Of course, some Democrats are liberals, but this is not a liberal party overall.

It is a war and empire party for sure.

The last Democratic President, Obama, still often is referred to as liberal, and I challenge anyone to support the characterization.

He was bombing people somewhere for every day of his eight years.

He was responsible for the chaos made out of Libya, a country whose leader, like him or not, kept his country at peace and was generous with the needs of his people.

He was also responsible for the start of the horror in Syria, which still continues, having killed about half a million.

He created millions of desperate refugees in Europe from his bombing in the Middle East.

He was responsible for the ominous “pivot” towards China after his march of destruction through the Middle East.

He started the American industrial-scale extrajudicial killing system using drones, something I would never have dreamed of seeing in the US years ago.

It was under his watch that the NSA and its massive domestic spying got really rolling.

He was almost a fanatic about secrecy and leaks and was always ready to punish leakers.

His one big domestic program, Obamacare, was a poorly-done compromise with big private health interests in the US. It never gained any affection from people with its very complicated and costly nature.

He did absolutely nothing for his own people, the poor blacks to whom he appealed in his campaign with “Yes, we can!” delivered in the rhythm of a black preacher.

He was involved in some pretty shady stuff we do not completely understand during the election with spying and other matters.

Please, there are no liberals in American, except some folks who gather in a few quaint shops in Vermont and Oregon and some professors no one listens to.

This is a massive brutal empire, and both parties fully support that central reality, which also leaves little resources or time or concern for the ordinary citizen. Indeed, years ago, both parties stopped talking about citizens and talked about consumers. They stopped talking about the poor and started talking about the middle class. The differences between the two parties are of the profound nature of any duopoly, as Coke versus Pepsi or McDonald’s versus Burger King.