Re: [Marxism] An open letter to our Cubaholic [was: Cuba policy asaU.S. domestic political issue]

["S. Artesian" <sartesian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

We need a bit more rigor, here, don't you think?

For one thing, it wasn't so long ago that everybody was saying the US empire 
was finished, over, done, dead-- that a new global epoch was dawning-- so if 
everybody is a subject to the US global empire-- what happened to the 
EU-euro-BRIC 4R- South-South  Mercosur-Alba-ASEAN independence from that 
empire?

Secondly, whatever we may consider the merits of the hegemony debate, I 
don't think Germany qualifies as a nation oppressed by US imperialism.

Thirdly, all David and Louis and others are trying to do is make a simple, 
rational, and altogether empirical distinction between domestic policy 
issues like agriculture for example which of course always have 
international repercussions and which are always reviewed with two eyes on 
the world market, and foreign policy issues like relations with another 
nation, like funding Contras, invading Panama, overthrowing an elected 
government, threatening war,  which are always approached with two eyes on 
swaying the voting population.

But I must say, it really tickles me when residents of the largest exporter 
of manufactures complains about not having a say in the prospects of the 
empire.  I'm going to write my congressman about this and see if I can't get 
Luko and absentee ballot.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lüko Willms" <lueko.willms@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <sartesian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2008 5:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] An open letter to our Cubaholic [was: Cuba policy 
asaU.S. domestic political issue] 


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu