Progressive Ponderings: International “Leftists”
"Progressive Ponderings"05/31/2007
Joe Mayer
May 30, 2007
Just as the last "Pondering" described how "leftist" domestic policy is actually mainstream but doesn't fit the agenda of the powerful, so too our foreign policy is designed to corrode and sabotage any "leftist" – mainstream – foreign governments and initiatives. Mainstream policy thwarts corporate freedom to exploit and is hostile to imperial designs.
United States elite and its conforming government's statements and actions regarding Venezuela are typical. Hugo Chavez has been elected three times by overwhelming majorities with normally 75 percent of registered voters participating. The international community, without reservation, recognizes that Venezuela has free and fair elections with ballots providing a "paper trail" contrary to some recently disputed U.S. elections. Still, the United States instigated a coup against Chavez and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stated recently, "I believe there is an assault on democracy in Venezuela and I believe that there are significant human rights issues." No supporting evidence was offered. Chavez, democratically elected and popular, is almost always termed "leftist" in the U.S. media which swallows a skewed hierarchical definition of democracy.
Prior to the illegal, immoral invasion of Iraq, the Bush administration organized the "coalition of the willing" through threats and bribes, but a few countries refused to be bullied. France and Germany took the most abuse from the right wingers and their mass-media echoes. Why? France and Germany, among others, took a "leftist" position in following their citizens' desires who overwhelmingly opposed the war. Acting for the will of the people rather than the Bush dictates is insolence in the eyes of U.S. imperialists.
For a long period of time, and especially since World War II, independent "nationalism" (at home we call it patriotism) by countries vulnerable to our power was cause for U.S. outrage and aggression. Many had legitimate democratic governments, all termed "leftist" by the United States. Independent "nationalism" was never overtly announced as the justification of U.S. aggression. As with Iraq, the official "sins of independent nationalists" were contrived to appeal to the American sense of fear or righteousness. "Promoting Democracy" is often the appeal – Iran, Iraq, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Brazil, Chile, etc.
"Structural adjustment" mandates of the World Bank and IMF along with "free trade" agreements often target "leftist" positions especially in Third World countries. Programs, democratically sought and popularly supported, which benefit the poor and indigenous are targeted for extinction. They interfere with multinational corporate appetites.
People-powered (leftist) movements usually drive a nation toward democracy with a greater sense of social justice and equality. The poor, the exploited, the masses of humanity around the world are beginning to rise up, no longer willing to accept perpetual poverty.
As this is happening, citizens of the United States apathetically accept greater inequality and less democracy and freedom. The latest U.S military budget (not the supplemental Iraq budget), supported by Democrats and Republicans alike, authorizes and supports continued global dominance advocated by the neocons who brought us the Iraq disaster.
We have to choose – democracy where the people decide (leftist) or empire where money decides. The "decider" told us where he is. Let the real deciders speak! jmayer