4 ms·

My takeaway is that all previous U.S. administrations had pretense of morality and rules in both international and domestic politics (even when they did dubious

by ivell 9mo ago

My takeaway is that all previous U.S. administrations had pretense of morality and rules in both international and domestic politics (even when they did dubious stuff). The new administration has realized that there is no need for such pretense to stay in power. Previously Venezuelan attack would have been about "democracy" and "freedom" and "peace". Trump has made it clear that it is for oil. Overall it is probably better for the world society in general that pretense is gone and the realpolitics is laid bare. The risks are no longer ambiguous but real and clearly stated and the world can plan mitigation accordingly.

AndrewKemendo 9mo ago
> My takeaway is that all previous U.S. administrations had pretense of morality and rules in both international and domestic politics This is a perspective that continues to boggle my mind. Every record of the United States acting internationally has been either: Explicitly horrific (Invasion of Grenada, Vietnam, Firebombing then nuking Tokyo, Iraq etc…) Attempts to Subvert or ignore international law (IPCC, ICC, UN…) Or benefits some major industrial corporation (NAFTA, WTO etc…) Please point to any type of transcendent “morality or rules” that isn’t just straight up large scale international realpolitik and propaganda around maintaining global capitalism on behalf of American based owners.
- ivell 9mo ago
  Actually I mentioned "pretense" in the sense of US pretending to be the good guy.
  - AndrewKemendo 9mo ago
    What do you mean by pretense? The word pretense to me means “we’re gonna actually try this and let’s see how it goes” The United States has literally never done that and we know that because internal documentations for pretty much anything always have some kind of American benefit Nexus it is not based on any type of foundational belief that transcends the concept of “we’re gonna do whatever the people who are the loudest owners of the political system of the United States want to do” Everything else including: Powell going to the UN with a vile full of rice is just straight up unabashed unequivocal propaganda
    - ivell 9mo ago
      The definition of pretense is (from Google): an attempt to make something that is not the case appear true. E.g. "his anger is masked by a pretence that all is well"
      - AndrewKemendo 9mo ago
        Yes that checks out, perhaps I misread your initial comment to imply that was something beneficial
    - machomaster 9mo ago
      Just read the official names of the American military operations and the pretense aspect will be impossible to miss.
- andrewl 9mo ago
  I would say USAID (United States Agency for International Development) has done good work overseas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Agency_for_International_Development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Agency_for_Inter... Like all large organizations and projects they are not absolutely perfect or ethical, as you can see in the Concerns and criticism section towards the bottom of the Wikipedia page. Still, I think they made some contribution to humanity. I have seen articles saying the withdrawal of funding has definitely hurt communities USAID had been helping. I know the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) do (or did) disease prevention work outside the US. There are other examples like these. I don’t know if the government did more good than bad, but they certainly have done some good that is not just designed to benefit American big capitalists.
loudmax 9mo ago
No. That is excessively cynical. Even GW Bush and the neocons really thought toppling Hussein would benefit Iraqis more than just Americans. That invasion turned out to be a complete disaster that probably benefited Islamist radicals more than anybody else. But it's a mistake to think that the neocons didn't believe their own bullshit. The top leadership really believed they could turn Iraq into a liberal democracy at gunpoint. America has always been at its best when it lives up to its ideals, and at its worst when it discards those ideals. America has often been in the wrong, but on balance, the world has been better off for having a great champion of liberal democracy. With Trump, it's not a question of believing things that are right or wrong. For the post-truth mindset, right and wrong don't matter. Democracy doesn't matter. There is only power. The second Trump presidency is the first time in modern history that America is no longer a great nation.
- ivell 9mo ago
  I can understand that point of view from a U.S. citizen's (and allied West) point of view that you think US is really ideological. But as a non-US person, even when US pretended to be ideological, there is an underlying reality of maintaining hegemony, access to resources, etc. When there was a large scale genocide in Bangladesh by Pakistan, US not only implicitly supported Pakistan, but also attempted to block/attack India (not clear the intentions, but Soviets got involved). There are many such cases. For rest of the world to believe that US has only best intentions, they have to be really naive. In case Saddam, would US have the same enthusiasm for democracy if it was not for oil? US has toppled democratic governments when they were not aligned to its interest. To put it in personal terms, would anyone trust someone with their money to person who only cheats 70% of times, while is honest 30% of times? The conclusion to be had is that those in incidents of honesty aligned with the interests of the person. Not because he or she was actually a good person.
  - elzbardico 9mo ago
    The US got involved with Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, because they were enemies of Vietnam. This says enough.
  - 9mo ago
someguydave 9mo ago
No the irony is that Trump lied about the oil - heavy sour Venezuelan oil is mostly useless to the US because we are awash in our own. He did it to experiment with “regime change light”
SanjayMehta 9mo ago
The US invaded Iraq because Saddam was planning to switch to the Euro for his oil trade. They invaded Libya as Gaddafi was working on a gold backed African dinar/Lira, again for the oil trade. The only reason why the dollar has had any value since 1971 is due to Nixon's brilliant creation of the petro-dollar. It's allowed them to export inflation to the rest of the world. Trump gets it, and the only reason for kidnapping Maduro is again oil. If a country has oil, and no nukes, in due course the US will invade.

by ivell 9mo ago

AndrewKemendo 9mo ago

> My takeaway is that all previous U.S. administrations had pretense of morality and rules in both international and domestic politics This is a perspective that continues to boggle my mind. Every record of the United States acting internationally has been either: Explicitly horrific (Invasion of Grenada, Vietnam, Firebombing then nuking Tokyo, Iraq etc…) Attempts to Subvert or ignore international law (IPCC, ICC, UN…) Or benefits some major industrial corporation (NAFTA, WTO etc…) Please point to any type of transcendent “morality or rules” that isn’t just straight up large scale international realpolitik and propaganda around maintaining global capitalism on behalf of American based owners.

ivell 9mo ago
Actually I mentioned "pretense" in the sense of US pretending to be the good guy.
- AndrewKemendo 9mo ago
  What do you mean by pretense? The word pretense to me means “we’re gonna actually try this and let’s see how it goes” The United States has literally never done that and we know that because internal documentations for pretty much anything always have some kind of American benefit Nexus it is not based on any type of foundational belief that transcends the concept of “we’re gonna do whatever the people who are the loudest owners of the political system of the United States want to do” Everything else including: Powell going to the UN with a vile full of rice is just straight up unabashed unequivocal propaganda
  - ivell 9mo ago
    The definition of pretense is (from Google): an attempt to make something that is not the case appear true. E.g. "his anger is masked by a pretence that all is well"
    - AndrewKemendo 9mo ago
      Yes that checks out, perhaps I misread your initial comment to imply that was something beneficial
  - machomaster 9mo ago
    Just read the official names of the American military operations and the pretense aspect will be impossible to miss.
andrewl 9mo ago
I would say USAID (United States Agency for International Development) has done good work overseas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Agency_for_International_Development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Agency_for_Inter... Like all large organizations and projects they are not absolutely perfect or ethical, as you can see in the Concerns and criticism section towards the bottom of the Wikipedia page. Still, I think they made some contribution to humanity. I have seen articles saying the withdrawal of funding has definitely hurt communities USAID had been helping. I know the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) do (or did) disease prevention work outside the US. There are other examples like these. I don’t know if the government did more good than bad, but they certainly have done some good that is not just designed to benefit American big capitalists.

loudmax 9mo ago

No. That is excessively cynical. Even GW Bush and the neocons really thought toppling Hussein would benefit Iraqis more than just Americans. That invasion turned out to be a complete disaster that probably benefited Islamist radicals more than anybody else. But it's a mistake to think that the neocons didn't believe their own bullshit. The top leadership really believed they could turn Iraq into a liberal democracy at gunpoint. America has always been at its best when it lives up to its ideals, and at its worst when it discards those ideals. America has often been in the wrong, but on balance, the world has been better off for having a great champion of liberal democracy. With Trump, it's not a question of believing things that are right or wrong. For the post-truth mindset, right and wrong don't matter. Democracy doesn't matter. There is only power. The second Trump presidency is the first time in modern history that America is no longer a great nation.

ivell 9mo ago
I can understand that point of view from a U.S. citizen's (and allied West) point of view that you think US is really ideological. But as a non-US person, even when US pretended to be ideological, there is an underlying reality of maintaining hegemony, access to resources, etc. When there was a large scale genocide in Bangladesh by Pakistan, US not only implicitly supported Pakistan, but also attempted to block/attack India (not clear the intentions, but Soviets got involved). There are many such cases. For rest of the world to believe that US has only best intentions, they have to be really naive. In case Saddam, would US have the same enthusiasm for democracy if it was not for oil? US has toppled democratic governments when they were not aligned to its interest. To put it in personal terms, would anyone trust someone with their money to person who only cheats 70% of times, while is honest 30% of times? The conclusion to be had is that those in incidents of honesty aligned with the interests of the person. Not because he or she was actually a good person.
- elzbardico 9mo ago
  The US got involved with Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, because they were enemies of Vietnam. This says enough.
- 9mo ago

someguydave 9mo ago

No the irony is that Trump lied about the oil - heavy sour Venezuelan oil is mostly useless to the US because we are awash in our own. He did it to experiment with “regime change light”

SanjayMehta 9mo ago

The US invaded Iraq because Saddam was planning to switch to the Euro for his oil trade. They invaded Libya as Gaddafi was working on a gold backed African dinar/Lira, again for the oil trade. The only reason why the dollar has had any value since 1971 is due to Nixon's brilliant creation of the petro-dollar. It's allowed them to export inflation to the rest of the world. Trump gets it, and the only reason for kidnapping Maduro is again oil. If a country has oil, and no nukes, in due course the US will invade.