4 ms·
>in 1776 the American colonists rebelled against what they saw as the arbitrary and tyrannical British monarchy. although they didn't just do that, the America
by Barrin92 4mo ago
>in 1776 the American colonists rebelled against what they saw as the arbitrary and tyrannical British monarchy.
although they didn't just do that, the American founders also articulated the point that the article seems to present as some new insight. That permanent foreign military involvements and the state it requires will eventually diminish freedom at home, that was why many of them wanted to avoid emulating the British empire.
Given that papers like the Economist used to regularly be staunch defenders of these interventions until they went wrong, and only ever seemed to disavow them for their practical outcomes rather than in principle they might want to do some reflecting on that.
- rayiner 4mo agoI seem to recall the Economist wholeheartedly supporting the Iraq War. Am I wrong?
- andsoitis 4mo agoYes, they ran a leading editorial titled "Why war would be justified", arguing that confronting Saddam Hussein was "the least bad of the limited range of available options". However, they reversed position in 2007, calling the invasion a debacle.
- crote 4mo agoIt would've been more surprising if they hadn't reversed their position, well after it became painfully clear to everyone that the war had been a terrible idea.
- dingaling 4mo agoThe idea of overthrowing a vicious dictator can't really be wrong in any moral sense. In terms of realpolitik or execution it can be.
- andsoitis 4mo ago> the Economist used to regularly be staunch defenders of these interventions until they went wrong, and only ever seemed to disavow them for their practical outcomes rather than in principle they might want to do some reflecting on that Can you link a couple of examples? Presumably those articles should be easy to find on economist.com
- rayiner 4mo agoThe economist was a strong supporter of the Iraq War, and reiterated that in a retrospective 2003 article citing its earlier articles: https://home.uncg.edu/~jwjones/world/readings/economist.html https://home.uncg.edu/~jwjones/world/readings/economist.html “The threat posed by Saddam The Economist certainly said it was. We did so most strongly and clearly in a survey (Present at the creation, June 29th 2002) on America's world role; and in leaders on August 3rd that year (The case for war), February 22nd 2003 (Why war would be justified) and March 15th 2003 (Saddam's last victory).”