|
Kerry Even Worse for World than Bush? |
In this file (http://women4peace.org/kerry.html), we offer links and commentary in support of an analysis that from an anti-imperialist viewpoint, the world may be even worse off with "Democrat" John Kerry replacing George W. Bush as President of the United States of America. This is not to argue for any support of George Bush and the Republican Party, but to suggest that the support of the Democratic Party's candidate by progressive people will serve the interest of the American empire.
See: "The US Must be Isolated and Constrained", By GABRIEL KOLKO, CounterPunch, March 12 / 14, 2004.
From Moveon.org (who seem to have since removed this quote from their site):
|
|
To send a credible message of stewardship and transition to self-rule, we need a truly international coalition, including key Arab nations like Egypt and Saudi Arabia. As Thomas Friedman put it, 'If it is America alone against the Iraqi street, we lose. If it is the world against the Iraqi street, we have a chance' [emphasis ours]. |
So we can see that MoveOn, as the most progressive arm of the Democratic Party, wants the United States of America to win against the Iraqi people. Moveon's quote confirms the position of the CounterPunch article that the "Democrats" want to win by allying more national governments in support of the US imperialist policies for control of the world.
Next reference: "Will the Opposition Lead?" By PAUL BERMAN, New York Times, April 15, 2004. Excerpt:
|
|
A Democrat contingent could straighten out the situation in Iraq and achieve what President Bush seems unable to. |
A friend writes:
|
|
I'm a little suspicious of this type of reasoning, to be honest. There are many reasons, e.g. future nominations to the Supreme Court, to try to defeat George [W.] Bush. Foreign policy is a major component, but not the only one. |
Maybe so, but it is the USA Empire's foreign policy that affects the tremendous billions of people in the Third World. Even if the "Democrats" carried out better domestic policies (which is not true ever since conservatives such as Bill Clinton took over -- recall that Clinton implemented "Welfare Reform"), it still holds true that to decide issues only on their effect on the people in the USA (and even then, excluding most of the poor working class in the USA), is a non-tenable position from an anti-imperialist point of view, one that puts the interest of USA citizens above the rest of the people of the world.
Well-intentioned citizens of Third World countries may vote based on domestic policies, since these countries do not dominate and exploit the rest of the world. But in the USA, the superpower empire of the world, votes and actions based on domestic policies alone, in the final analysis, will serve the interest of the Empire.
|
Women for Peace and Justice in Iran
|
We stand for Peace and Justice for all. We hold that:
|
SR/wjw 2004-04-15
