Attack of the cruise missile liberals
Margaret Kimberley | 05.04.2011 21:40 | Analysis | Anti-militarism | Social Struggles | Sheffield | World
Americans are warlike – as long as they think they can be victorious. These nominal Democrats and Republicans “differ only on who they want to see doing the dominating.” Today, a Black Democrat is the head killer in charge, allowing the likes of Ed Schultz, Bill Maher and Juan Cole to endorse the criminal assault on Libya. When the chips are down, fraudulent anti-war liberals show their true racist, Manifest Destiny-loving colors. “The true anti-war movement must reawaken itself and hit the streets in the hundreds of thousands.”
Editorial comment:
Americans are warlike – as long as they think they can be victorious. These nominal Democrats and Republicans “differ only on who they want to see doing the dominating.” Today, a Black Democrat is the head killer in charge, allowing the likes of Ed Schultz, Bill Maher and Juan Cole to endorse the criminal assault on Libya. When the chips are down, fraudulent anti-war liberals show their true racist, Manifest Destiny-loving colors. “The true anti-war movement must reawaken itself and hit the streets in the hundreds of thousands.”
______________________________
Liberals love war
by Margaret Kimberley, Black Agenda Report, 30 March 2011
“The desire for America to dominate the rest of the world is prevalent among most of its citizens, regardless of party affiliation.”
Peace loving Americans are few and far between. The vast majority of our citizens see nothing wrong with their government killing masses of people as long as the rationale sounds high minded and noble.
The love of bloodshed is generally connected with the right wing in this country, but nothing could be further from the truth. The desire for America to dominate the rest of the world is prevalent among most of its citizens, regardless of party affiliation. Those citizens differ only on who they want to see doing the dominating. Republicans are ecstatic when a Republican president drops bombs, sends drones on killing missions or occupies other nations. Democrats are equally enthusiastic when one of their own does the same.
Democratic party reaction to President Obama’s military intervention in Libya is but the latest example of the American propensity to exult over government sponsored violence. Obama, like George W. Bush before him, claims that his intervention, no-fly zone, peace mission (take your pick) is being conducted only for the most humanitarian of purposes. The dead bodies belie the claims of dogooderism but those words have a distinct power for people in this country and will always be used as a pretext for someone dying somewhere on the planet.
“The belief in white American superiority effects and infects every policy discussion in this nation.”
The legacy of Manifest Destiny and the belief in white American superiority effects and infects every policy discussion in this nation. The equation of goodness and rightness with white America holds sway very strongly and sadly not just for white people either. The willingness to see white behavior as normative means that foreign policy decisions get a pass precisely at the moment when resistance and skepticism are needed.
No, Barack Obama isn’t white, but he may as well be. He is president precisely because he assured voters that he would not change the complexion of their belief systems. If he didn’t fulfill the deeply ingrained belief that might makes right as long as America, a country thought of as white, is in charge of world affairs, he would never have become the president.
The United States attack on Libya has brought out the worst in this phenomenon. Liberals are gleeful that conservative icon Newt Gingrich backtracked on supporting intervention until the Democratic president actually intervened, but Gingrich is no different than they are.
We now have MSNBC television host Ed Schultz proclaiming “Support for Obama’s Invasion of Libya.” Never mind that Obama has taken great pains to claim that the bombing will be of limited duration and that ground troops will not have a presence there. Schultz seems to be ahead of the president on this one, but his show of support is telling in revealing the true support for American motivations in its interventions abroad. Likewise Juan Cole in an “Open Letter to the Left on Libya” dismisses criticism of the intervention thusly. “I would like to urge the Left to learn to chew gum and walk at the same time,” and adds, “We should avoid making ‘foreign intervention’ an absolute taboo . . .”
“Barack Obama isn’t white, but he may as well be.”
Foreign interventions conducted by the United States should be taboo. Our system is not designed to be in any way humanitarian. Its motives are to say the least suspect and no matter how evil its enemies are made out to be, the evidence of past history should make us suspicious of the arguments in favor of war.
The liberal hawks, like Obama, have no concern for Libyan civilians who are enduring bombing, and exposure to depleted uranium shells which create cancers and birth defects for years to come. This is not conjecture, but has been seen in Iraq and ought to be a reason for anyone who claims to be on the “left” to oppose the actions which bring it to pass.
The true anti-war activist, not just anti-Republican activist, has to raise its voice. The true anti-war movement must reawaken itself and hit the streets in the hundreds of thousands, just as they did in 2003 before the invasion of Iraq. That moment can be recreated, and in a deeper, more honest way, now that a Democrat is the head killer in charge.
* Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR, and is widely reprinted elsewhere. She maintains a frequently updated blog as well as at http://freedomrider.blogspot.com.
Margaret Kimberley
e-mail:
Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgandaReport.com
Homepage:
http://www.blackagendareport.com/content/freedom-rider-attack-cruise-missile-liberals
Comments
Hide 5 hidden comments or hide all comments
racist content - remove
05.04.2011 22:14
Well, if that isn't racist then I don't know what is. Basically it is saying that Obama is warlike and therefore he might as well be white because all white people are war-like
I realise this is a "black agenda report" whatever that is, but it is posted on Indymedia and is quite offensive to white people like myself. The author is obviously prejudiced towards white people and therefore is a racist.
So, get this racist shit off indymedia.
White person
White people are mentioned 8 times in this article
05.04.2011 22:17
anon
What, black people speak??
05.04.2011 22:29
How dear this black person think she can make comments about US foreign policy? IS she white? No. She should be grateful that she is not getting whipped by white people on a plantation.
Add who cares if she speaks for many non-whites around the world! Why listen to them, they're inferior to us whites.
Hail white person and anon.! White supremacy for ever!
white anon
not racism, just reality
06.04.2011 10:14
racism, this is not. merely describing what is the reality should not be jumped on as racist. the reality is that the myth of race has been used to perpetuate the hegemony of a small number of rich white men around the world.
acab
its racist and you know it
06.04.2011 16:43
>> no, what its saying is that obama was voted for by 99% of the black population in amerikkka, and has a aduty to represent their intrests, but he is unable to do so and in fact serves the intrests of big business. He may as well have been white and dropped the pretense of representing the black population of amerikkka.
This basically means, that you think black politicians should look after black people and white politicians will look after white people. Well perhaps these black voters should of looked at his policies rather than the colour of his skin. If they voted for him purely because of his skin colour then they are idiots.
>> racism, this is not. merely describing what is the reality should not be jumped on as racist. the reality is that the myth of race has been used to perpetuate the hegemony of a small number of rich white men around the world.
It is racist. “Barack Obama isn’t white, but he may as well be.”
Saying that a man should be a different skin colour because of his actions....
That his actions indicate he must be white rather than black
how more racist do you want!!?!??!
Its would be like saying "A white car thief isn't black, but he may as well be.".... implying that all thieves are black - which is clearly racist
Judge people on their actions - not their skin colour.
White person
Hide 5 hidden comments or hide all comments