To avert global catastrophe, we need a post-MAGA vision for a transformed US role in today’s interconnected world—a vision based on the common human interests of the global majority.
Thanks to Max and to New Liberator for the article. Lots to think about here, but mainly appreciate the emphasis on international work and program as part of the development of the 3rd Reconstruction program. As Max put it, any left with nothing to offer between today and revolution won't get far. I especially agree with the rejection of New Deal Nostalgia in the international sphere as well as any longing for the good old days of economic
neo-liberalism or even the 1945-1970 period before neo-liberalism was consolidated.
On the one hand, those who fret about the lack of an anti-war movement may have missed the No Kings protests Saturday, which was broad and decidedly anti-Iran war. Indivisible and the more middle class forces of the united front against MAGA supported that theme immediately (different than their hands off approach to the genocide in Gaza, from what I have seen.)
On the other hand listening to someone as smart as Heather Cox Richardson wax poetic about the Monroe Doctrine and Teddy Roosevelt and ignore the endless murderous wars of that period is startling. Similarly Rachel Maddow seems to think the Iran War was a product of Saudi Arabia's rivalry with Iran, and consistently de-emphasized Israel's role. Somehow to the liberals every example of the failures of the period prove the truth of the general approach of the Pax Americana. This calls for the left-progressive bloc, and especially the socialists within it, to develop and propagate the kind of independent analysis and practice that Max calls for.
It is hard to determine at times whether MAGA's blunders are driven by stupidity or their visceral need for performative cruelty. Does Hegseth really think wars are won with push-ups? The only through line is power and profit, with the former serving the latter.
What is clear is that Trump has handed the anti-war initiative back to the left, to the consternation of some of his MAGA cohort who actually have some consistent (and consistently abhorrent) principles. The anti-war movement is ours to build, and we need to do it right.
Good piece, Max, but I would have placed Bandung and the UN as it is today over Gorby, although citing him is worthwhile. The UN can be used now against those who claim there is no rules-based order. There is one, the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration, and the five principles. Yes, it needs reforms, such as the Big Five can only use their veto when they are not directly concerned. Otherwise, they abstain from voting or vote Yes. And many more. But we reform it while using it. We need more discussion of this. Whenever I raise it, too many eyes glaze over.
Good discussion. Thanks Max. One thought that came to me was that maybe we should call it international or global policy rather
M ythan "foreign" policy. We live in a global world and the nation states of today are a product of capitalism and colonialism.
Right on that we need a new vision of multiracial, economic and political democracy. One aim should be to give substance to the Declaration of Human Rights. And the policies should prioritize ecological reconstruction, nuclear disarmament and then general disarmament. Investment in healthcare. And\nEducation for all global policy local as we was international.
Thanks to Max and to New Liberator for the article. Lots to think about here, but mainly appreciate the emphasis on international work and program as part of the development of the 3rd Reconstruction program. As Max put it, any left with nothing to offer between today and revolution won't get far. I especially agree with the rejection of New Deal Nostalgia in the international sphere as well as any longing for the good old days of economic
neo-liberalism or even the 1945-1970 period before neo-liberalism was consolidated.
On the one hand, those who fret about the lack of an anti-war movement may have missed the No Kings protests Saturday, which was broad and decidedly anti-Iran war. Indivisible and the more middle class forces of the united front against MAGA supported that theme immediately (different than their hands off approach to the genocide in Gaza, from what I have seen.)
On the other hand listening to someone as smart as Heather Cox Richardson wax poetic about the Monroe Doctrine and Teddy Roosevelt and ignore the endless murderous wars of that period is startling. Similarly Rachel Maddow seems to think the Iran War was a product of Saudi Arabia's rivalry with Iran, and consistently de-emphasized Israel's role. Somehow to the liberals every example of the failures of the period prove the truth of the general approach of the Pax Americana. This calls for the left-progressive bloc, and especially the socialists within it, to develop and propagate the kind of independent analysis and practice that Max calls for.
It is hard to determine at times whether MAGA's blunders are driven by stupidity or their visceral need for performative cruelty. Does Hegseth really think wars are won with push-ups? The only through line is power and profit, with the former serving the latter.
What is clear is that Trump has handed the anti-war initiative back to the left, to the consternation of some of his MAGA cohort who actually have some consistent (and consistently abhorrent) principles. The anti-war movement is ours to build, and we need to do it right.
Good piece, Max, but I would have placed Bandung and the UN as it is today over Gorby, although citing him is worthwhile. The UN can be used now against those who claim there is no rules-based order. There is one, the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration, and the five principles. Yes, it needs reforms, such as the Big Five can only use their veto when they are not directly concerned. Otherwise, they abstain from voting or vote Yes. And many more. But we reform it while using it. We need more discussion of this. Whenever I raise it, too many eyes glaze over.
Good discussion. Thanks Max. One thought that came to me was that maybe we should call it international or global policy rather
M ythan "foreign" policy. We live in a global world and the nation states of today are a product of capitalism and colonialism.
Right on that we need a new vision of multiracial, economic and political democracy. One aim should be to give substance to the Declaration of Human Rights. And the policies should prioritize ecological reconstruction, nuclear disarmament and then general disarmament. Investment in healthcare. And\nEducation for all global policy local as we was international.