Discussion World Forum  


Go Back   Discussion World Forum > Discussion Forums > Arts & Literature

Arts & Literature Book Reviews, Fiction, Literary Criticism, Poetry, Stage and Visual Arts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old Jul 7th 2015, 06:11 AM
Tom Palven Tom Palven is offline
Cranky Curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,045
Default Swords into Plowshares

Ron Paul's new book:
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/07/...to-plowshares/
__________________
Voltairian individualist on the Lunatic Fringe of the Radical Center
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old Jul 20th 2015, 07:08 AM
Tom Palven Tom Palven is offline
Cranky Curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,045
Default Re: Swords into Plowshares

A new review of Paul's book- "Ron Paul at his best:"

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/07/...l-at-his-best/
__________________
Voltairian individualist on the Lunatic Fringe of the Radical Center
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old Jul 20th 2015, 05:40 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,823
Default Re: Swords into Plowshares

Almost all countries engage in some form of industrial development policy, including subsidies for politically favored industries. In the USA, this is decried as 'socialism' and instead, they do exactly the same thing but it is mostly focused on weapons and the military (and oil companies and big pharma).

The massively bloated Pentagon budget, is enormously popular at all levels of the US political spectrum, with almost 'sacred cow' status. It is a really big industrial development slush-fund for well-connected 'entrepreneurs' and a big subsidy program for a huge host of private companies, including some of the largest corporations in America. In other words, this is the biggest, baddest, gold-plated feeding trough on the whole fucking planet - and that means a huge political interest/faction to defend it forever.

Ron Paul has always been pissing in the wind on this issue. I'd expect that US Congress would happily cut every single spending program it has before it will substantially reduce the Pentagon's budget in any meaningful way. That's just built into the fabric of Washington. The whole idea of US 'isolationism' was a casualty of WW2.
__________________
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old Jul 21st 2015, 03:41 PM
Tom Palven Tom Palven is offline
Cranky Curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,045
Default Re: Swords into Plowshares

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael View Post
Almost all countries engage in some form of industrial development policy, including subsidies for politically favored industries. In the USA, this is decried as 'socialism' and instead, they do exactly the same thing but it is mostly focused on weapons and the military (and oil companies and big pharma).

The massively bloated Pentagon budget, is enormously popular at all levels of the US political spectrum, with almost 'sacred cow' status. It is a really big industrial development slush-fund for well-connected 'entrepreneurs' and a big subsidy program for a huge host of private companies, including some of the largest corporations in America. In other words, this is the biggest, baddest, gold-plated feeding trough on the whole fucking planet - and that means a huge political interest/faction to defend it forever.

Ron Paul has always been pissing in the wind on this issue. I'd expect that US Congress would happily cut every single spending program it has before it will substantially reduce the Pentagon's budget in any meaningful way. That's just built into the fabric of Washington. The whole idea of US 'isolationism' was a casualty of WW2.
I agree with all but your last sentence.

Imho previous US isolationism is a myth.

The ink was barely dry on the US Constitution, ratified in 1792, when the US began acting like a typical European colonial power by invading Canada to take advantage of the fact that England was tied up fighting Napoleon.

Then, the US acquired much of the South, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico either by purchase or invasion. And the US even invaded Russia on the side of the royalty; and that hasn't changed as the US currently props up the royalty in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

http://www.criticalenquiry.org/history/polarbear.shtml
__________________
Voltairian individualist on the Lunatic Fringe of the Radical Center

Last edited by Tom Palven; Jul 21st 2015 at 03:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old Jul 21st 2015, 05:48 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,823
Default Re: Swords into Plowshares

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Palven View Post
I agree with all but your last sentence.

Imho previous US isolationism is a myth.

The ink was barely dry on the US Constitution, ratified in 1792, when the US began acting like a typical European colonial power by invading Canada to take advantage of the fact that England was tied up fighting Napoleon.
US invaded Canada in 1812 because US ally France paid them to do so (and US was morally obligated to help France's war since France was instrumental in assisting the US in their Independence War with Britain). France was desperate to open up a North American front in the war to suck British military power away from Europe - because Napoleon was losing his war in Europe at that time.

In other words, the War of 1812 is about the ONLY war the US engaged in before 20th century that wasn't driven by US imperialism or warmongering.

Btw, US interest in invading/conquering Canada did appear, but wasn't taken seriously by anyone until after the US Civil War. This is the unspoken context behind Canada becoming a nation in 1867.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Palven View Post
Then, the US acquired much of the South, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico either by purchase or invasion. And the US even invaded Russia on the side of the royalty; and that hasn't changed as the US currently props up the royalty in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

http://www.criticalenquiry.org/history/polarbear.shtml
Aquisitions of Alaska and Hawaii didn't violate isolation principles.

I'll agree that the USA has been, since 1776, quite ready and willing to engage in extra-territorial interference with foreign nations, quite contrary to isolationist principles, but that doesn't negate the fact that isolationism has been (up until WW2) a major political doctrine espoused by a considerably large number of US political thinkers and politicians.

Besides, no one has suggested that isolationism was part of the US Constitution or anything. Just that it was a common political ideal of that era - and is apparently long gone now. Since WW2, Ron Paul seems to be quite alone on this issue.
__________________
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old Jul 21st 2015, 08:58 PM
Tom Palven Tom Palven is offline
Cranky Curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,045
Default Re: Swords into Plowshares

Maybe most of those in the US Congress in 1812 were as pure as the wind-driven snow, but check out the last sentence of the first paragraph in this link:
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-h...of-1812-begins
__________________
Voltairian individualist on the Lunatic Fringe of the Radical Center
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old Jul 23rd 2015, 06:34 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,823
Default Re: Swords into Plowshares

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Palven View Post
Maybe most of those in the US Congress in 1812 were as pure as the wind-driven snow, but check out the last sentence of the first paragraph in this link:
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-h...of-1812-begins
The President couldn't exactly announce that America was declaring war on Britain basically because the French government had bribed the American government to do so with cold hard cash. One just doesn't say such things.

As for that 'hawkish' interest, there has always been a small, delusional and highly vocal minority in Congress that always wants to invade someone. As I noted above, the American idea of invading Canada wasn't considered politically significant until the post Civil War period.

US never even tried during the War of 1812. They launched a few military operations into Canada, but nothing close to an invasion/conquest.
__________________
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old Apr 25th 2016, 02:29 AM
Tom Palven Tom Palven is offline
Cranky Curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,045
Default Re: Swords into Plowshares

"Nothing undermines American belief in military force."

https://theintercept.com/2016/04/23/...r-middle-east/
__________________
Voltairian individualist on the Lunatic Fringe of the Radical Center
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2008 - 2017, DiscussionWorldForum.com