Eclipsed from the headlines by the ongoing carnage, there is an active
civil resistance in Iraq that opposes the occupation, the torture regime
it protects, and the jihadi and Ba'athist 'resistance' alike.
Submitted by The New Centrist (not verified) on Tue, 02/19/2008 - 12:02.
At one time, our politics would have been very close but I'm much less prone to placing the primary emphasis for the world's problems on capitalism these days. In many cases—certainly not all—the market can provide better solutions than government. Back in my rad-leftist days this sort of thinking would have got me branded as a counter-revolutionary petit-bourgie scum.
I empathize with feeling lonely on a political level. In your case I suspect you see the political tendency you identify with abandoning its principles and behaving in a reactionary manner (or something along those lines). I went through a period of this and eventually “left the left."
If you haven't checked out Bob's blog, you should. He's further to the left than myself and you’ll find much to agree with (or at least find interesting). The Contentious Centrist’s politics are closer to my own. Follow the link above to view both blogs.
I thought you would be able to discern my foreign policy perspective (hawkish) by the posts at my site and the Euston Manifesto button at the top of the page http://eustonmanifesto.org/. As to the specifics of Iraq, there is certainly much to critique (to put it mildly) but I do not support bringing the troops home tomorrow.
I took the fascist test. My fascist scale is: 2.8 . Almost "within normal limits" but still in the "liberal airhead" range.
One critique I have regarding these general political tests--even ones that add the authoritarian-libertarian axis--is they do not capture the complexity of people's politics. For example, an individual may be considered "conservative" on foreign policy issues and "liberal" on domestic issues. Plus, when you actually start to examine positions on specific issues things get more muddled. I've known many working-class individuals who are very "liberal" when it comes to wages, health care, and pensions but very "conservative" when it comes to the environment or matters of concern to the lgbt community.
Why this is the case is an interesting question to ponder. IMHO most Americans have similar ambiguities in their political identities. I suspect that part of it is we don't have a long history of political parties tied to specific political ideologies like democratic socialism, communism, etc. in the United States. The parties espousing these sorts of ideas were all relatively short-lived, especially compared to those of Europe. This continuous institutional history goes a long way in explaining differences in worldview between American and European workers.
One last comment, an interesting perception is your "own politics haven't changed, but everyone else's have." Is this really the case? Haven't similar things been going on for a long time on the radical left, even libertarian circles? I am referring to supporting individuals and regimes that run counter to everything that the lib-left supposedly stands for in the name of some vague anti-capitalism, anti-imperialism or anti-Americanism? I contend in case after case--going back to Russia, Spain, Cuba--the radical left supported the forces of totalitarianism. http://newcentrist.wordpress.com/2007/07/21/does-anti-imperialism-trump-anti-authoritarianism/
»
Reply
For more breaking news and world events, seeThe first open media site where anyone can report from anywhere
Advertisements:
The inconvenient facts and unanswered questions surrounding the attacks are legion, but the endemic sloppiness of the self-styled "researchers" is delegitimizing the entire project of critiquing the "official version." The ostentatiously named "Truth movement" is not clearing the air, but muddying the water.
WW4 Report pamphlets
WAR AT THE CROSSROADS
An Historical Guide Through the Balkan Labyrinth
The Balkan region is intensely multicultural - a point of crossroads and clash for some of the world's major religions, cultural spheres, and economic systems. While there have been vicious wars in Balkan history, these have taken place in the context of manipulation by imperial powers and the self-serving local leaders who cater to them.
opensource technology and the people of Sundays Energy
Idiot Left, &c
At one time, our politics would have been very close but I'm much less prone to placing the primary emphasis for the world's problems on capitalism these days. In many cases—certainly not all—the market can provide better solutions than government. Back in my rad-leftist days this sort of thinking would have got me branded as a counter-revolutionary petit-bourgie scum.
I empathize with feeling lonely on a political level. In your case I suspect you see the political tendency you identify with abandoning its principles and behaving in a reactionary manner (or something along those lines). I went through a period of this and eventually “left the left."
Idiot-left is good. Loony left or leftover left (Ron Radosh's term) works fine for me. Bob from Brockley and The Contentious Centrist prefer "Rococo Left": http://brockley.blogspot.com/2007/08/lexicon-for-our-times.html
If you haven't checked out Bob's blog, you should. He's further to the left than myself and you’ll find much to agree with (or at least find interesting). The Contentious Centrist’s politics are closer to my own. Follow the link above to view both blogs.
I thought you would be able to discern my foreign policy perspective (hawkish) by the posts at my site and the Euston Manifesto button at the top of the page http://eustonmanifesto.org/. As to the specifics of Iraq, there is certainly much to critique (to put it mildly) but I do not support bringing the troops home tomorrow.
I took the fascist test. My fascist scale is: 2.8 . Almost "within normal limits" but still in the "liberal airhead" range.
One critique I have regarding these general political tests--even ones that add the authoritarian-libertarian axis--is they do not capture the complexity of people's politics. For example, an individual may be considered "conservative" on foreign policy issues and "liberal" on domestic issues. Plus, when you actually start to examine positions on specific issues things get more muddled. I've known many working-class individuals who are very "liberal" when it comes to wages, health care, and pensions but very "conservative" when it comes to the environment or matters of concern to the lgbt community.
Why this is the case is an interesting question to ponder. IMHO most Americans have similar ambiguities in their political identities. I suspect that part of it is we don't have a long history of political parties tied to specific political ideologies like democratic socialism, communism, etc. in the United States. The parties espousing these sorts of ideas were all relatively short-lived, especially compared to those of Europe. This continuous institutional history goes a long way in explaining differences in worldview between American and European workers.
One last comment, an interesting perception is your "own politics haven't changed, but everyone else's have." Is this really the case? Haven't similar things been going on for a long time on the radical left, even libertarian circles? I am referring to supporting individuals and regimes that run counter to everything that the lib-left supposedly stands for in the name of some vague anti-capitalism, anti-imperialism or anti-Americanism? I contend in case after case--going back to Russia, Spain, Cuba--the radical left supported the forces of totalitarianism. http://newcentrist.wordpress.com/2007/07/21/does-anti-imperialism-trump-anti-authoritarianism/