[PEN-L:5271] Re: Business leaders against U.S. militarism

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>>> "Seth Sandronsky" <ssandron@xxxxxxxxxxx> 04/14/99 11:17AM >>>
Charles,

This seems to be the "we do US imperialism better" (i.e., more cost
effective) view of the ruling class, no?

Seth

((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

Chas.:

Seth,
I just came across this, so I can't "definitively" answer your question; and I am glad that you have begun a critique of it. However, my first impression upon reading it is that any proposal that so trenchantly attacks military spending cannot be in the interest of imperialism, which depends upon military might to support its economic neo-colonialism. Countries would laugh at the IMF if it weren't for the U.S. military might backing it up. Without U.S. militarism backing up the transnationals, MAI, NAFTA, "Free" Trade, etc., around the world working classes would be "freed-up " some to carryout their inherent inclination to struggle against capitalist relations of production in their local areas. What would happen in Korea today if 30,000 U.S. troops backed by nuclear weapons weren't there ?

In terms of our recent discussions, on its face this group seems to be more of a sector of the bourgeoisie ( though they may be petit bourgeoisie on today's scale; some millionaires are petit bourgeoisie today) with which the Left would form a united cross-class front, analogous to the alliance against fascism and Nazism in WWII.

Lets critique it though.

Charles