Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

here are two key Dem policy planks ... if they'll listen ...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 10:10 PM
Original message
here are two key Dem policy planks ... if they'll listen ...
it's time we stopped thinking about terms like "empire" as things "lefties" say ... most of you are familiar with PNAC and have read some of their documents ... PNAC believes the US can use its military might to "puppetize" (my word not theirs) foreign governments and make them "friendly" to the US ... they are NOT doing it for noble reasons like "spreading democracy" ... they are doing it to control foreign markets ...

and we're all very familiar with all the republican hype about the sanctity of the "free market" ... what they mean by "free market" is to shut down government's oversight function and let mega-corporations run amuck ... free markets often do an effective job setting the price level but they are totally incompetent when it comes to setting policy ... as global warming grew nearer and nearer and US dependence on foreign sources of oil entangled our country in the Middle East, what did the "free market" do? it sold us SUV's !!!!! go figure ... the "free market" mentality has to be destroyed by the Democratic Party ... make the republicans own it and shove it down their throats ...

so, there you have it ... two, of many, very solid platform planks ... let's get our representatives to take the bold steps and start taking these real issues into battle ... the American people are desperate for these kinds of changes ... if we tell them the truth, they will reward us in spades ...

the following is one of the best articles I've read all year ... i hope you read it ...


The failure of the occupation of Iraq, coupled with the Bush Administration's unleashing of Israel, makes one thing clear: conservative foreign policy has failed. Conservatism hasn't strengthened America's position in the world, produced the Pax Americana that conservatives expected. It's done the exact opposite; weakened the United States across the board. As a result, we're witnessing the death of the conservative dream of American empire.

Conservative foreign policy rests upon two beliefs: The first is that military might is sufficient to ensure supremacy of American interests. The second belief is that when it is unencumbered by government interference, the marketplace will solve the world's problems whatever they are: WMDs, poverty, or global warming.

Conservatives rely solely upon the military to solve America's foreign policy disputes. Their stance is based upon a logical contradiction: conservatism insists on drastic reduction of the Federal government and simultaneously demands that the Department of Defense grow larger. The US military budget is roughly equal to the amount that the rest of the world spends on defense, yet for conservatives this is never enough. Each year brings demands for increased expenditures on foolish projects, the anti-missile defense system being only one. <skip>

In the domestic arena the shortcomings of conservatism's childlike beliefs are obvious: the market won't take care of problems such as building levees to protect citizens from floods or inoculating children from Polio. The market cares only about profit: it has no conception of the common good or public morality.

Conservatives' nave belief that the marketplace will resolve global issues is equally problematic. International organizations deal with three classes of problems: military, economic, and social. It's obvious that neither the market nor American military force can solve all international disputes. DOD hasn't succeeded with the occupations of Afghanistan or Iraq; privatization of the "reconstruction" failed either to provide necessary services or to enable civil society. There are military predicaments that clearly require international cooperation, such as cutting off the flow of nuclear weapons. As for social problems, there is no indication that the market is able to deal with issues such as bird flu and AIDS. A huge international economic issue is what to do about damage resulting from unpredictable weather, such as hurricanes. The global marketplace ignores such events and calls upon governments to be the ultimate insurer. More generally, the market is unwilling to address the problem of global climate change; it would rather pretend that global warming is not happening and continue to treat the environment as an infinite, free resource. Similarly, the global marketplace shows no indication that it will resolve the issue of poverty. <skip>

The critical question is: what do liberals propose as an alternative foreign policy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
terryg11 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 10:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. the free market worked in the suv case
The car companies, especially Ford bet heavily on the large, gas guzzling vehicles to continue to carry them even in the face of a lagging economy and soaring gas prices and the consumers didn't go for it. That move has practically crippled Ford and hurt the other automakers too.

I agree tht for many consrvatives think free market = less oversight and that's nt always a good thing but sometimes it works out
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. no, it absolutely did NOT ...
Edited on Thu Aug-10-06 11:03 PM by welshTerrier2
you're actually making the point i'm making ... way back in 1973 and then again during the Carter years, we saw the shock to our nation that dependence on OPEC oil could cause ... in 1973, everyone's badge of honor was "hey, how many miles per gallon can ya get in that?" ... smaller was in ... more MPG's was good ...

that was the RIGHT national policy ...

and it was right not just because of OPEC but because of global warming and many other societal needs as well ...

so, what did Detroit do? they pushed SUV's ... yeah, they're dying now ... that's a REACTION ... we needed proactive policy ... free markets aren't able to "think" that way ... the result? many bought these huge behemoths that guzzled gas ... a "fake" market was created by Detroit and macho Americana bought into it hook, line and gas pump ... just a total tragedy ...

we have seen the desperation and greed dictate US Middle East policy for more than a generation ... the "free market" did nothing as car sizes, and trucks, got bigger and bigger and bigger ... people died in Gulf War I ... they're dying still today and tomorrow too ... it's all madness ...

and global warming? some believe it's too late and that ALL LIFE on the planet will perish from the destruction we've caused ... global warming wasn't just discovered ... it's been talked about for decades ... Americans bought SUV's ...

and now, gas is expensive ... people will be FORCED to REACT ... we will finally downsize and start driving less ... maybe, although it's hard to see it right now, Americans will actually demand real mass transit ...

and the "free market" ... it says: hey look, as supplies became unstable, i drove up gas prices ... look at the REACTION ... see, it's perfect ... things will get better now ... pathetic ... we should have been PRO-ACTIVE ... we've waited far too long and we are now at very severe risk ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-11-06 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
3. hmmmm .... not much energy for platform building ...
DU always seems far more interested in politics and politicians than in developing policy recommendations ... it's not really clear how that makes any sense but that seems to be the way it is ...

my first day on DU, i tried to get a discussion going on building a platform the party could use ... that thread went nowhere too ...

so, who do like in '08?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
deaniac21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-11-06 09:35 AM
Response to Original message
4. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Sep 20th 2017, 08:52 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC