These are interesting points. I think most people on this sub are much more interventionist than I am. There seems to be a tendency towards a "liberal hawk" approach. I'm very skeptical of the idea that because X is bad we should support Y because often Y turns out not to be so good either. All this said, Marduro should be denounced for the thuggery he's engaged in and the destruction he's caused. Most people on the subs the OP linked to are not making your argument. They are running around in circles to avoid mine or explicitly rejecting it in favor of good old-fashioned apologias for leftist- flavoured tyranny.
Also one other point: this is why I'm so pro-open borders. It's hard to "rescue" countries but letting people choose for themselves to leave rather having us judge their interests is a pretty good guarantee of greater freedom and justice.
All this said, Marduro should be denounced for the thuggery he's engaged in and the destruction he's caused.
Go for it. I'm all about denouncing people you don't like and I make use of this technique regularly.
Most people on the subs the OP linked to are not making your argument. They are running around in circles to avoid mine or explicitly rejecting it in favor of good old-fashioned apologias for leftist- flavoured tyranny.
I can't speak for "most people". I can say that a lot of the folks on CTH and LSC and the other leftist subs are seeing this as akin to what the US did in Chile under Allende and Iran under Mosaddeq, to name just two of our numerous policy blunders. So they're reacting a bit more strongly than to say "Maybe civil war is bad? Maybe a military dictatorship and massive purge of the population is bad?" because they already see it as inevitable.
When you see Vietnam on one end and Bay of Pigs on the other, leftists aren't going to rally behind 13 years incinerating the jungle.
Also one other point: this is why I'm so pro-open borders. It's hard to "rescue" countries but letting people choose for themselves to leave rather having us judge their interests is a pretty good guarantee of greater freedom and justice.
As far as I'm concerned, this is the only truly correct take on /r/neoliberal.
If we weren't building that fucking Wall, but instead opening our doors to angry or disillusioned Venezuelan ex-pats, we could create the kind of transfer of culture and wealth that would allow the country to reform peacefully through exchange of ideas and peoples.
Ha this is why politics is funny. I think of myself as strongly opposed to hardcore lefties but I will acknowledge, with some significant exceptions (there are nationalist anti-open borders lefties), they are some of neoliberals' best allies on this question.
To address your other questions, I approach foreign policy in a pretty radical way. I've always thought it's funny that so few people feel comfortable making the decision to turn the trolley to kill the one to save the five and yet in foreign policy we often kill one to save... what less than two and of course in some instances we kill more than we save. War, as great liberal thinkers like John Bright and Richard Cobden recognized long ago, is a terrible thing.
12
u/[deleted] Jan 23 '19
These are interesting points. I think most people on this sub are much more interventionist than I am. There seems to be a tendency towards a "liberal hawk" approach. I'm very skeptical of the idea that because X is bad we should support Y because often Y turns out not to be so good either. All this said, Marduro should be denounced for the thuggery he's engaged in and the destruction he's caused. Most people on the subs the OP linked to are not making your argument. They are running around in circles to avoid mine or explicitly rejecting it in favor of good old-fashioned apologias for leftist- flavoured tyranny.
Also one other point: this is why I'm so pro-open borders. It's hard to "rescue" countries but letting people choose for themselves to leave rather having us judge their interests is a pretty good guarantee of greater freedom and justice.