The Populist Insurgency and Foreign Policy: Why Are Non-Interventionists Marginalized? by Leon T. Hadar
Obama Retreats by Maury2K
Maury sums it up pretty well:
While Democrats sit on their hands and Republicans play their waiting game, the Tea Party Movement has built up a head of steam. They denounce the status quo, talk “revolution,” demand the dismantling of the Federal Reserve and other radical sounding solutions.
The Tea Party folks display energy, enthusiasm and will power to reach their goal. However, their movement is starting to come unglued because of their own ideological short-comings. For example, they continually bash Obama’s alleged “socialism” when, in fact, he is as dedicated as Bush to corporate rule.
The Tea Party Movement ignores the myriad wars though they are wrecking the economy. Partly, this is out of a sense of faux-patriotism. But what is patriotic about sacrificing our brave men & women for something other than defense of the country?
We could go on but you know the drill.
We need street politics whereas I fear the Tea Party will end up as electoral cannon fodder for a bankrupt GOP.
Any supposed “radical” movement in North American that does not have a firm rejection of the Empire as one of its foremost principles is out of the game before it even starts. To those readers who are interested in working with these movements, my advice would be that you can probably be most effective by serving as a voice that can educate some of these people (at least the more reasonable and intelligent ones) as to the true nature of the Empire. My suggestion would be to avoid referring them to leftist, “anti-American” writers like Chomksy and Zinn and instead attempt to turn them on to neo-isolationists and the antiwar Right like Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, Andrew Bacevich, Claes Ryn, Lew Rockwell, Eric Margolis, Justin Raimondo, and others. I have found from experience that the arguments made by Michael Scheuer are among the most effective when dealing run of the mill center-right types.
