Display:
I don't disagree wth anything you wrote except the equation of the primacy of US interests with the primacy of neoliberal interests.  I think it is important to distinguish between the legitimate interests of the people of the United States and the interests of the United States government in its current form.  Our current government has become a wholly owned subsidiary of global Capital, and is acting in ways that are quite detrimental to the interests of the people it purports to represent, not to mention the rest of the world.

Somewhere in cyberspace, the ghost of de Chardin is smiling.
by budr on Fri Sep 28th, 2007 at 11:15:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, me too, in full agreement with you here. This is what I meant referring to the "primacy of US interest" as an assumption, and why I put the word nation in quotes... Capital assumes that the US and the UK are already fully on-board with Capital, and thus the support of US/(UK) primacy in 'western' foreign policy is just a support of its own primacy as a force in the world.

As for "the legitimate interests of the people of the United States", yes I do think those could exist. But if those interests extend to other nations, in particular to how those other nations trade and allow access to their natural resources, 'markets' and labour pool, then, I cannot agree that those interests would be 'legitimate'. I.e. if the people of the United States where to explicitly demand and favour foreign policy to exact control over the middle east for the purpose of filling the tanks of those godforsaken SUVs, then, no, that is not a 'legitimate' interest of the people of the United States. If the people of the United States where to explicitly demand and favour foreign policy to limit the rights of workers and human rights in foreign lands  so that their box-stores might continue to be filled with cheap goods from sweatshop labour, then that too would not be a 'legitimate' interest. etc. etc. etc.

And every day Americans (and Europeans, we are not blameless, oh no. 'Westerners', we can really write here!!) do demand such foreign policy. Perhaps not explicitly, but certainly implicitly, though their continued worship of another shiny piece of convenience crap. As long as ones economic interests are so closely aligned with an exploitative relationship to foreign labour, than any amount of hand-wringing about those poor people of whatever country, and their lack of human rights, and a decent standard of living, and reasonable labour conditions, is just that. So much hand-wringing, and nothing else! Some pity to make ourselves feel good about ourselves. "Yes! We are good people! Wanting good for everyone. No one should be hurt! And cheap goods and services too, please!!"

by someone (s0me1smail(a)gmail(d)com) on Fri Sep 28th, 2007 at 11:39:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Recommended Diaries
Change I can believe in
by redstar - Jul 3
38 comments

Photography Blog No. 42 [UPDATED]
by LEP - Jul 4
45 comments

A game for reasoning on Archimedes.
by PerCLupi - Jul 3
4 comments

Odds & Ends: Russia Politics LQD Edition.
by poemless - Jul 3
14 comments

How You Get Oil
by Crazy Horse - Jul 2
17 comments

What do you think?
by PerCLupi - Jul 3
22 comments

OPEC blames speculation
by Migeru - Jul 2
52 comments

Houston, we have a solution
by Jerome a Paris - Jul 2
4 comments

Debates
Campaigns
Occasional Series
Countdown to $200 oil
by Migeru - Jul 2

Wind power
by Jerome a Paris - Jul 2
1 comment

Train Blogging
by DoDo - Jul 1

TOC: Socratic Economics
by Migeru - Jun 26

Germany
by DoDo - Jun 22

Agriculture
by afew - Jun 19

Anglo Disease
by Migeru - Jun 18

Most Commented threads ever
by Migeru - Jun 13
10 comments