3 ms·

I'm not sure how much you can learn from history when you take claims of "democratic US empire enforcing prosperity and freedom on tyrannical despotic regimes"

I'm not sure how much you can learn from history when you take claims of "democratic US empire enforcing prosperity and freedom on tyrannical despotic regimes" on face value. The justifications to project power changed greatly over time and vary between the set of political ideologies in charge at any given time, but US and western foreign policy was always rooted in unspoken, consistent motivations. That's why the transition between pre- and post- cold war foreign policy was so seamless. The covert action, coups, interventions, military support, economic warfare didn't change at all. Afganistan 1 was about the "red scare", 2 was about "international terrorism". Iraq, Syria and Libya was about "tyrannical despotic regimes". etc.

netbioserror 3y ago
Those are nominal justifications. They reflect persuasive arguments (aka propaganda), not true beliefs and actions. The true beliefs and actions of the military and state bureaucracy for many decades has had an imperial focus that is crystal clear through the prism of action and belief. I could cite the revealed preferences of many prominent figures in the military and state policy world: Rice, Power, Rumsfeld, Kissinger, Bolton, Nuland, etc. And those are just the people at the top; the hierarchy is stocked with true believers.
- lyu07282 3y ago
  > the hierarchy is stocked with true believers Yes, the belief in the empire, it was always about (neo)colonialism/imperialism, I think even neoliberalism and LIO is just justification rather than a true belief of the people that drive foreign policy of western nations. > They reflect persuasive arguments (aka propaganda), not true beliefs and actions. People have been so infantilized by this propaganda, its really frustrating to talk with most people about it.
  - netbioserror 3y ago
    I don't think you understand. Some of these people genuinely believe that US imperialism will spread progress and prosperity. Yes, some are Machiavellian and understand the geopolitical game, and are simply playing for keeps (resources, dominance, US hegemony, self-enrichment, etc). Others actually believe in the forceful spread of the Enlightenment project worldwide to accelerate the upward curve of history. Never underestimate how stupid an aristocracy can become. Some portion will always be true believers. The idea that it is all Machiavellians is a probabilistic impossibility, and revealed preferences (interviews, slips of the mic, secret conversations, whistleblowers, etc.) have shone sunlight on them in the past. There are genuine ideologues in the US military and state department. Calling them "conservative" or "neoliberal" is a useless simplification that does not adequately describe how deranged their beliefs are.

netbioserror 3y ago

Those are nominal justifications. They reflect persuasive arguments (aka propaganda), not true beliefs and actions. The true beliefs and actions of the military and state bureaucracy for many decades has had an imperial focus that is crystal clear through the prism of action and belief. I could cite the revealed preferences of many prominent figures in the military and state policy world: Rice, Power, Rumsfeld, Kissinger, Bolton, Nuland, etc. And those are just the people at the top; the hierarchy is stocked with true believers.

lyu07282 3y ago
> the hierarchy is stocked with true believers Yes, the belief in the empire, it was always about (neo)colonialism/imperialism, I think even neoliberalism and LIO is just justification rather than a true belief of the people that drive foreign policy of western nations. > They reflect persuasive arguments (aka propaganda), not true beliefs and actions. People have been so infantilized by this propaganda, its really frustrating to talk with most people about it.
- netbioserror 3y ago
  I don't think you understand. Some of these people genuinely believe that US imperialism will spread progress and prosperity. Yes, some are Machiavellian and understand the geopolitical game, and are simply playing for keeps (resources, dominance, US hegemony, self-enrichment, etc). Others actually believe in the forceful spread of the Enlightenment project worldwide to accelerate the upward curve of history. Never underestimate how stupid an aristocracy can become. Some portion will always be true believers. The idea that it is all Machiavellians is a probabilistic impossibility, and revealed preferences (interviews, slips of the mic, secret conversations, whistleblowers, etc.) have shone sunlight on them in the past. There are genuine ideologues in the US military and state department. Calling them "conservative" or "neoliberal" is a useless simplification that does not adequately describe how deranged their beliefs are.