[A-List] Re: [A-List] (Forward from Nestor) A comment to Henry´s notes.

["Henry C.K. Liu" <hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I don't disaree with you.  I was merely stating the American view of its
ideology, not approving it. Personally, I think if the US seeks regime
change in any country that falls short on these value, the uS itself
would be on top of the list.  But the main issue is that even a country
is deficient in US values, it is not sufficient reason for US imposed
regime change.

You need to remember that I am speaking to a general audience, including
 Americans.  My aim is to show Americans that even if their values are
acceptable to them, they are not universal values.

Henry  C.K. Liu

Sabri Oncu wrote:
> Subj.: A comment to Henry´s notes.
>
> Henry Liu:
>
> "The American notion of freedom focuses on freedom of speech,
> freedom of religion, freedom of association and freedom to
> disagree with and oppose government policies through legal means.
> Associated with these political freedoms are institutions of free
> enterprise and free markets. Any nation deemed deficient in any
> of these characteristics is fair game for regime change through
> the application of overwhelming military superpower, unless it
> possesses credible counterattack deterrence."
>
> The problem lies in that defending the <exclusively American and
> West European right to "freedom of speech, freedom of religion,
> freedom of association and freedom to disagree with and oppose
> government policies through legal means" clashes, in the (actual
> or potential) rogue states, with "free enterprise and free
> markets" both _before_ and _after_ the attack.
>
> Before the attack, because these wars seek to tilt the scales
> towards a single group of competitors. After the attack, because
> these wars impose conditions for hegemonic domination by this
> single group of competitors.
>
> Thus, they are monopoly wars not "free enterprise wars".
>
> Even if we stick to the idyosincratic and idiotic (in the
> primeval Greek sense of the word) ideology that guides these
> movements, they are immediately proven false.
>
> The whole new order is based on sheer force, not benign hegemony.
> Bayonets, however, are a very uncomfortable place to sit on, as
> Talleyrand observed some time ago.
>
> Sooner or later, the whole castle made of cards will crumble
> down. And this will be worth seeing, if you cannot have the luck
> to be a participant in the destruction of this order.
>
> The question is not "will it last?" but "how long will it keep
> stable?".