3 ms·
A "bipartisan coalition cut from the same cloth" does not sound very "bi", nor very "partisan" to me, beyond the absolute barest colloquial use of the term to d
by dmreedy 3y ago
A "bipartisan coalition cut from the same cloth" does not sound very "bi", nor very "partisan" to me, beyond the absolute barest colloquial use of the term to describe the fact that there are two choices of the flag you can raise in order to functionally participate.
What you are describing to me sounds a lot more like a single powerbase with a few disagreements of narcissism amongst its participants, with a dramatic hegemonic control over the broader citizenship.
The self interests of this neoliberal consensus include empire-building, and have since the cold war that spawned and shaped it. A program to spread that hegemony broader and broader to preserve the flow of resources into the imperial center.
I'm trying not to assign morality here per se; just give I think a better model with, I think, more explanatory power.
- rayiner 3y agoI disagree with your characterization because I don't think it's accurate. I come from a country where the government has "hegemonic control over the broader citizenship." That's not what's happening in America. It's much more akin to different infighting sects of the same evangelical religion. I also disagree that your model has "more explanatory power." We spent $6 trillion going to war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we certainly didn't get $6 trillion in oil. We opened up trade with China, gave them our technology, and put them on a path to leapfrogging ahead of us. Your theory is that America is an empire trying to direct "the flow of resources into the imperial center"--but if that's the case then our imperial leaders are extremely incompetent. What happened in Iraq and China makes much more sense under my model. It was an attempt at converting those countries into our religion of liberal democracy, human rights, and capitalism.