[R-G] Rick Wilhelm on John Kerry

[lapwing at att.net]

Macdonald wrote:

> Both interventions were launched in order to maintain the besty set up for
> the Empire. The intervention under Clinton was not carried out for democracy.

I can't speak to motives in that I don't have an X-ray of Clinton's thoughts. However, the practical net effect of intervening in Haiti in the 1990s was to put back in place the president the Haitian people had elected, Aristide.

I won't quarrel with the notion that this did not, by and of itself, alter civil society of Haiti in any fundamental way. Yet, arguably, it was a move in favor of democracy and the folks running the Clinton White House, which included Clinton himself, certainly knew that would be the effect. It was a first in Western Hemisphere history: marines put back in power someone populist and elected.

In contrast, the folks running Bush White House, which does not include Bush, without doubt want the old guard of corrupt oligarchs and military men in Port-au-Prince, just as they want them in Caracas. Their moves leave no doubt that they knew where their actions would lead. The effect is opposite to that of the Clinton move.

Sure, we can agree that neither intervention is revolutionary in transforming Haitian society into an economic and social democracy. But they're not identical.

I would argue that Kerry would follow the Clinton approach.

Again, I see nothing but despair and deepening suffering with Bush. I do not see a magical transformation of the world into a socialist paradise by the election of Kerry, but I do think the trend towards utter disaster for millions might be stopped or blunted.

I'm past the point of seeing "revolutionary conditions" in every setback. Let's build on some wins, however meager.

Lapwing
> 
> 
> Lapwing wrote:
> 
> > I would expect that the interference with elected officials in Venezuela
> > (and Haiti) would end. Clinton and Bush are two opposite side of the
> > coin there. Clinton intervened to restore an elected leader, Bush to
> > depose two. So, yes, there can be a difference.
> 
> 
> AS far as Venezuela, remember that the Contras may have been primarily
> identified with Reagan, but they were launched by Carter's admin.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Macdonald Stainsby
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green
> In the contradiction lies the hope
> 		--Brecht.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rad-Green mailing list
> Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu
> To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green