• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Natasha Kerensky

Alt Account
Banned
Jul 18, 2019
262
Praha, CZ
Something that keeps bugging me, especially after 9-11 happened, is that almost all Democrats and liberals almost always have exact same imperialist foreign policy as the Republicans. They say that they are not as terrible as the Republicans, that they are for peace and liberty and freedom. But when it comes to the actual practice, the only difference seems to be that liberals say that they are sad when they drop the bombs on brown and black people in the Middle East, Africa, or South America. Let us review the facts:
  • In 2015, the US has over 800 bases across the globe. From Politico:
  • backpage-11601.jpg
  • The US feels entitled to occupy and invade other sovereign nations. Imagine the outrage if any other country had stationed military bases on US soil. Or if any other country had that amount of bases across the world?
  • The US and its citizens see nothing wrong with drone-striking and thereby killing non-Americans without any consequence
  • The US military spending is up to 643.3 billion dollars in 2019! That's over half of the rest of the world combined!
  • The US military emits more greenhouse gases than most countries, and that is not even factored into the political deals to curb climate change. It has a massive hidden impact on climate
  • The CIA still runs foreign prisons across the world to "extract information" (torture) from "terrorists"
  • The US has a long history of bombing, invading, overthrowing democratically elected leaders, and straight up committing genocide. Somehow this is always forgotten whenever the next Axes Of Evil nation shows up in the media and Americans feel they are entitled to "do something" (also known as sending in arms and money to insurgents to fuel conflict and war). Millions of people have died, societies ruined, and fascists given power thanks to US "intervention".
  • The US has been using economic sanctions and military threats against Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, Syria, Libya, for years and decades and it even admits it is at war with seven countries at once. Any other country that wants to break free from the economic dominance by the US are met with hostility, sanctions, and ultimately destabilization, threats, and war.
  • Lots of Democrats think that war criminals like George Bush Sr. and Jr. are decent folk and not the war criminals they actually are
  • One of the leading "progressive" Democrats, Elizabeth Warren, has voted for increasing the already bloated military budget and has argued to make the US foreign forces "green", co-sponsored the United States–Israel Strategic Partnership Act and said Israel has "a right to defend itself" when bombing Palestinians. There is a long list of the ways she supports US imperialism. Yet many liberals think she is more than an acceptable candidate? Similar criticisms can be leveled against the leftist Bernie Sanders who, although relatively better, still adopts what is known as a form of social democratic imperialism.
Despite all of this, Democrats and liberals almost never take a stand against the above, especially wars and the occupation of other countries. It is as if it is simply a fact of reality that cannot be changed, as if US rule over the world is a god-given right. Democrats and liberals usually get caught in imperialist traps and have to be in favor of the so called "interventions" and the meddling in other countries' affairs. Afghanistan should be invaded to "overthrow the Taliban"? A-okay. Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein? Not a good idea, but sure. Libya and "overthrow Gaddafi"? Fine by me. Syria and "overthrow Assad"? We have to bomb, supply arms to fundamentalists, and send in troops. Escalation with Russia and China? Sure, let's threaten them with more military exercises and not meet at the table to discuss diplomacy.

Where did the anti-war left go? I know there was a sizeable amount back in the 70's against the Vietnam war. There was also a lot of protests against the Iraq war, at least by the citizens themselves back in 2003 I recall. Yet they all kind of disappeared when Obama got to be president despite US occupation and military remaining the same. Are there actually any anti-war movements left in the US?
 

bionic77

Member
Oct 25, 2017
30,888
Violence is a big part of American culture. It saturates our media, sports, daily living and it's part of the national identity (the way we glorify the military).
 

Deleted member 23212

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
11,225
There is still anti-war left, you've kind of mistaken Democrats for anti-war left though. And unfortunately, many people had a feel-good relationship with Obama that kind of lowered opposition to his foreign policy, despite him being commander-in-chief.
 

BDS

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
13,845
There has never been an anti-war left within the Democratic establishment. Liberalism and capitalism will always end in support for war. Anti-military sentiment has always been a minority position among Americans and is a politically toxic third rail no candidate will touch.
 

PlanetSmasher

The Abominable Showman
Member
Oct 25, 2017
115,489
I've been an anti-war Democrat since I was about nine or ten years old. We still exist.
 

Deleted member 22490

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
9,237
The anti-war left were either killed, jailed, driven out of the country or died. democrats have been on a nationalistic kick since Reagan.

When it comes to foreign policy, both sides want to maintain American hegemony
 

Sheev

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
1,809
This is more of an 'American' issue than a 'Left' issue. The democrats as a whole are more akin to Centrists in many other countries, particularly Europe.
 

bionic77

Member
Oct 25, 2017
30,888
There has never been an anti-war left within the Democratic establishment. Liberalism and capitalism will always end in support for war. Anti-military sentiment has always been a minority position among Americans and is a politically toxic third rail no candidate will touch.
I feel like there was more anti war sentiment before the first gulf war. Once people understood how much more powerful our military was and how little casualties would result I feel like a lot more people got on board with wars in far off countries because they don't hurt them personally.

Anecdotal though and not scientific.
 

JCHandsom

Avenger
Nov 3, 2017
4,218
I was thinking of making this very thread myself actually.

I don't think the anti-war left has been a real force in American politics since Vietnam, and even then they lost in terms of how we left the war/conducted ourselves during the "rundown" under Nixon, and I feel you are misremembering how the runup to Afghanistan went down and the support Iraq was getting when it was starting up. There never really was a concerted or sizable anti-war movement during the Bush years, and even if there was it obviously didn't do anything considering we're still technically in both countries.

Consider that there has never been a generation of Americans who haven't lived through a war. We are a culture founded through war, reshaped by it, grown by it, became a superpower through it, defined through and through by war and conflict. The costs have simply not been high enough for the average American citizen (since at least Vietnam) for it to really gain traction.
 

Frankish

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,424
USA
You are too concerned with politicians. The better question is: why is there no anti-war movement in America?

Politicians just go where the votes are. And currently, anti-war is politically toxic. If there is a strong anti-war movement compromised of folks who actually vote and can make a difference in elections, you will begin to see anti-war politicians.

I'm kind of tired of people blaming Democrats for everything. We live in a democracy, oftentimes the problem is us.
 

jml

Member
Mar 9, 2018
4,783
Pro-military propaganda is so powerful in the US. Whenever you suggest defense budget cuts or maybe not invading every single country in the middle east you get labeled as someone who "doesn't respect the troops" which is political poison a lot of the time.
 

Blue Skies

Banned
Mar 27, 2019
9,224
Sometimes there's no stopping the war machine.

Sometimes we actually do need to intervene in places.

But I'm general, you gotta understand how many jobs war creates. It's the most backwards form of socialism in this country, but it's also really good for the communities which benefit from it. And I'm not just talking about Northrop gunnam, Raytheon, etc. Every soldier, sailor, marine, airman, etc. has healthcare and a steady paycheck, and most end up doing great things once they get out.
Also, those tanks and ships all get built in America, leading to JOBS JOBS JOBS.

personally, I think they should just half the budget and put that money towards education and healthcare for all, instead of just for the military members
 

Phrozenflame500

The Fallen
Oct 28, 2017
2,132
US foreign policy, while generally too hawkish for my tastes, is overall a positive force for global stability. The vast majority of nations who have US military bases want them there. I'm happy that even progressive politicians like Sanders and Warren recognize this.
 

Strike

Member
Oct 25, 2017
27,334
McGovern losing and Reagan later shifting our overton window effectively took care of that. Now nobody wants to look weak or hate America/"the troops".
 

thewienke

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,929
They exist but they're not loud until we're about to start a war or are already in a war.

I don't know why that doesn't translate to our actual politicians but many of us surely remember the protests surrounding the Iraq War and the fallout that came with it?

Plus, for better or worse, the one thing Trump is good at is not getting involved in random wars (so far) even though he handles foreign policy like a toddler. I think people are just busy with the zillion other issues that Trump is causing these days.
 

fick

Alt-Account
Banned
Nov 24, 2018
2,261
As much as everyone wants to yell "because murica!", let's take a look:

After WWII you had the US and USSR as the two super powers, and they fought through smaller proxy wars. It's been engrained in US foreign policy for over have a century.
 

Deleted member 41502

User requested account closure
Banned
Mar 28, 2018
1,177
American superiority is ingrained in the culture. It's taught to you very subtely (and sometimes not subtely) from a very young age. They're convinced theyre morally superior. It's not a party issue. The strain in American politics is HOW to spread those morals. Not their existence.
 

y2dvd

Member
Nov 14, 2017
2,481
We've been pro-war long before 9/11.

Would love a lot of pro-war ERA to answer the OP tbh.
 

Richiek

Member
Nov 2, 2017
12,063
The Democratic Party has always been center to center left. It's only been in recent years that it's moved more to the left.
 

Dyle

One Winged Slayer
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
29,903
You can't win an election in the United States if you're explicitly anti-war
 
Oct 30, 2017
8,706
The Democratic party is subjected to the same influences that makes the rest of the country pro-imperialist.

There is certainly a coalition of Democrats that aim to paint the Trump administration as a complete dumpster fire. So even if Trump is doing something to de-escalate war, but does it in his irresponsible/erratic manner, the Democrats don't come off looking good critiquing him.
 

WhoTurgled

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,052
The idea of paying attention at all to foreign policy has completely been removed from the americans publics minds allowing those in power to be completely subservient to the capitalist warmongers that hold all the wealth and power in this country without any backlash
 

Jroc

Banned
Jun 9, 2018
6,145
People only care if a lot of soldiers die. If Afghanistan had 50,000 casualties then there would be people picketing in DC. Likewise if Vietnam stayed low-key most people probably would have been fine with it meandering.

There's also the whole "if we don't then someone else will" mindset.
 

julian

Member
Oct 27, 2017
16,748
A minor thing, but the consolidation of radio station ownership led to a dramatic decrease in political music. Any songs which actively promotes peace (like Imagine) were taken off the air for years after 9/11 from any Clear Channel stations. At the time they owned the vast majority of radio stations.

Eminem came out with an anti-Bush song and people lost their fucking minds. Compare that to music during the Vietnam War.
 

Leandras

One Winged Slayer
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
1,462
For the sake of my sanity I've, as a non-US citizen, stopped discussing this subject with my partner because it always boils down to

"The freedom your country is fortunate enough to celebrate exists because we prevent any other nation from threatening you. You might not like us standing over your shoulder but it keeps the globe in a relative peace that they've not known for centuries."

The elephant in the room whenever we discuss this is the US' uneasy support of the South African Apartheid government against the ANC with Raegan going so far as to call them a terrorist organization.

My mindset will always be that if your freedom and peace is dependant on another nation can it ever be called such?
 

Deleted member 135

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
11,682
There is nothing wrong with foreign bases. They are leased from the hosting nation (ie the hosting nation gets money) and they provide protection and deterrents for the hosting nation.

As well naval bases are particularly important to ensure the seas stay open and free of piracy.

As well, the existence of a sole hyperpower or a pair of superpowers reduces the instances of large scale war. Pax Americana isn't a myth.
 

Sleuth

alt account
Banned
Jul 18, 2019
238
Well it boils down to war against who? The entire globe is fine with killing Muslims. The left wing in the Western world are frequently just as enthusiastic about killing Muslims as the right, frequently. Its just part of our culture at this point.

Even Obama courted Burma and Sang Su Kyii, while they were conducting ethnic cleansing against hundreds of thousands. Almost no one stands up to China for putting a million Uigurs in concentrations camps. Absolutely zero people on the planet care that India is trying to ethnically cleanse Kashmir.

So why does the are democrats and the leftwing so pro war? Well because hatred of Muslims is a global epidemic.
 

BlackGoku03

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,271
Well, if it wasn't for all those bases, I wouldn't be here. Was born and raised overseas because my dad was in the Air Force. I'm definitely more cultured than if I just stayed in one town in the States my whole life.

A lot of the bases in Europe were established after WWII... I would like to think their presence has prevented some bullshit from popping off.
 

GYODX

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,233
We couldn't credibly claim to be anti-war when Obama had largely followed in the tradition of US interventionism/imperialism.
 
Jun 20, 2019
2,638
World War I happened. The anti-war left was dashed to pieces over labor action during the war and it has never recovered. The major parties, the military faction, and corporate anti-labor faction all conspire to elevate militarism in order to keep the left away from power.
 

mutantmagnet

Member
Oct 28, 2017
12,401

  • The US feels entitled to occupy and invade other sovereign nations. Imagine the outrage if any other country had stationed military bases on US soil. Or if any other country had that amount of bases across the world?


This is the worst foreign policy specific problem in this country. Very few people these days don't understand how the United States military was redesigned to enforce world peace and stability.

After WW2 the United States basically told everyone these 2 things that defined foreign policy. We gotta stop the Russians and you have to stop fighting stupid wars so we'll do the wars for you so you can rebulid your economies.

Our forebears made a social contract with the world to be their police and arguably that was the main reason we have an overall decrease in armed conflicts between other nations and the number of armed conflicts that we instigated when added up in aggregate still is significantly lower than what preceded before. Nuclear proliferation and M.A.D. politics muddies this understanding but there will never be only one specific answer to why wars decreased drastically.

This lack of understanding on leftists is bad but it's even worse among the elites and conservatives. The elites of today forgot that social contract of our policing the world is supposed to help enrich all Americans in the same way Japan and Europe had to put up with or consented to our meddling and leadership to enrich their people. Conservatives were justified in looking for answer to punish the elites but choosing someone like Trump was totally the wrong type of decision they could make to "drain the swamp."

Ultimately the military needs readjusting because 1) the United States was much more concerned with the western world so their efforts to promote world peace through their policing action was biased towards reducing conflict for Western countries while leaving a mixed bag of results for non-Western countries (except for Japan for obvious reasons) 2) the United States still used the military to help the western world to profit instead of using it to promote Democracy which lead to some really fucked up outcomes for non-Western nations experimenting with it or transitioning to it through leftist style populist movements. Most Americans will be more in favor of restructuring the military so they can profit off of it equally again but they aren't interested in removing it entirely.

Americans still benefit from the sense of security the military provides but that in of itself isn't enough to keep them happy.