4 ms·

you are confusing some words a former president said with actual events and material course of history. the US has been continuously directly or indirectly par

you are confusing some words a former president said with actual events and material course of history. the US has been continuously directly or indirectly participating in wars for over 20 years at this point, while it directs the largest international military alliance in history and orchestrates the exclusion of its opponents from global financial markets. none of this is exclusive to any party; this is the logic of empire

llamaimperative 2y ago
None of this discredits the argument that there exists an isolationist strain in US politics today.
- nyolfen 2y ago
  yes, a strain that has manifested in...withdrawing from one (1) conflict after 20 years. even the example he gives, of threatening to withdraw from nato, is counterbalanced by the fact that nato has in fact expanded since! this is a 'strain in american politics' in the same way that being a billionaire is a strain in my worldview or speaking russian is a strain in mexican culture
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    It also delayed critical military aid from Ukraine, ceding European ground to a violent and despicable autocrat. It is fascinating to see bent-reality arithmetic in real time: “There is no isolationist strain” “Okay yes there is but it’s ‘counterbalanced’ (whatever that means) through vigorous efforts by the opponents of that strain!” That’s called there being an isolationist strain buddy.
    - rufus_foreman 2y ago
      Giving a country military aid, but not as much military aid as that country might have liked, is not isolationism. It just isn't. That's not what "isolationism" means.
      - llamaimperative 2y ago
        Good god. No one is saying “the US is isolationist.”
        nyolfen 2y ago
        no one is saying “There is no isolationist strain” either, just that it's inconsequential and meaningless > ‘counterbalanced’ (whatever that means) ah, you are engaging in bad faith. adios!
        llamaimperative 2y ago
        > I don't see much of an isolationist strain in the US today at all Huh And I've just explained exactly how it's consequential and not meaningless. It succeeded in delaying aid to Ukraine. There you go: a consequence!
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]

llamaimperative 2y ago

None of this discredits the argument that there exists an isolationist strain in US politics today.

nyolfen 2y ago
yes, a strain that has manifested in...withdrawing from one (1) conflict after 20 years. even the example he gives, of threatening to withdraw from nato, is counterbalanced by the fact that nato has in fact expanded since! this is a 'strain in american politics' in the same way that being a billionaire is a strain in my worldview or speaking russian is a strain in mexican culture
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  It also delayed critical military aid from Ukraine, ceding European ground to a violent and despicable autocrat. It is fascinating to see bent-reality arithmetic in real time: “There is no isolationist strain” “Okay yes there is but it’s ‘counterbalanced’ (whatever that means) through vigorous efforts by the opponents of that strain!” That’s called there being an isolationist strain buddy.
  - rufus_foreman 2y ago
    Giving a country military aid, but not as much military aid as that country might have liked, is not isolationism. It just isn't. That's not what "isolationism" means.
    - llamaimperative 2y ago
      Good god. No one is saying “the US is isolationist.”
      - nyolfen 2y ago
        no one is saying “There is no isolationist strain” either, just that it's inconsequential and meaningless > ‘counterbalanced’ (whatever that means) ah, you are engaging in bad faith. adios!
        llamaimperative 2y ago
        > I don't see much of an isolationist strain in the US today at all Huh And I've just explained exactly how it's consequential and not meaningless. It succeeded in delaying aid to Ukraine. There you go: a consequence!
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]