tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post5782997517143459633..comments2024-03-27T23:28:20.274-04:00Comments on Face to Face: US incapable of imposing its will since WWII: Asia and Latin Americaagnostichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-15468344179092382862017-04-28T19:31:01.414-04:002017-04-28T19:31:01.414-04:00We're in a state of managed decline. We willi...We're in a state of managed decline. We willingly put ourselves in more precarious situations because we continually roll over for tinpot dictators or leftists who think the future is meant to atone for past sins rather than an optimistic future.Random Dude on the Internetnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-59266583586939273642017-04-28T19:19:43.903-04:002017-04-28T19:19:43.903-04:00By this reckoning much of the rationalist explanat...By this reckoning much of the rationalist explanations for us policy is wrong. As it turns out much of our foreign policy adventures don't have deeper strategies bit are just failuresCurtisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-9194098607780609082017-04-26T15:37:12.984-04:002017-04-26T15:37:12.984-04:00The narrative and debate for some time has been ab...The narrative and debate for some time has been about "support for dictators" or no support.<br /><br />But that does not say how we support them -- are we basically imposing the dictator on the client state, or are they doing their own dictatorial thing and we're only too happy to help them along if there's something in it for us?<br /><br />Merely allying with dictators, and even gaining from that alliance, does not prove that we can impose our will on other nations in order to enjoy the spoils of war.<br /><br />This shift in the narrative and debate reflects our weakening imperial power. Now it's primarily about "our values" and who shares them -- or should we not care if they don't share our values? But it's all about values, rather than amoral concerns about geopolitics and mercantilism.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-14063335350575087612017-04-26T15:28:38.845-04:002017-04-26T15:28:38.845-04:00Suharto did not come to power due to America impos...Suharto did not come to power due to America imposing its will. It was an internal thing, like South America.<br /><br />First it was controlled by the Dutch empire, then briefly occupied by Japan during WWII, after which it gets independence by the Dutch.<br /><br />Sukarno comes to power internally, trying to thread the needle of anti-imperialism and military strength. The Communist side becomes too strong, so the military stages a coup that brings Suharto to power. That was not the US sending or threatening to send troops, or installing a puppet who would otherwise not have come to power.<br /><br />Suharto was amenable to some Western powers, although geopolitically they were neutral and non-aligned rather than an American client. Economically, sure, they encouraged and welcomed foreign investment, but again that was not at the barrel of a gun from an imperial power establishing another plantation.<br /><br />Suharto's downfall was also internally driven.<br /><br />The US has played almost no imperial role in Indonesia.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-75280727531986369932017-04-26T15:14:14.217-04:002017-04-26T15:14:14.217-04:00"Going back to the first United Nations confe..."Going back to the first United Nations conference in 1944, the United States has strived to control the global economy"<br /><br />Globalism is plainly neutral or against the *national* interests of the United States. What does the American nation or its people get from "controlling the global economy"? Note that it's not America that controls the global system, but an international elite and transnational institutions that control the global system.<br /><br />If they happen to use American branding and symbols, big deal. We still get nothing out of it -- embracing globalism has destroyed our economy and weakened our nation-state and former empire.<br /><br />The same is true of the related misconception -- that our former sphere of influence is still there, and just as powerfully controlled by the US, only it's cultural imperialism rather than geopolitical or economic. Everybody eats McDonald's and watches Hollywood movies.<br /><br />But that too has weakened our distinctly American culture, by pandering to a global audience of such diverse nations and peoples. Hollywood movies are no longer recognizably American -- the only difference is how much a given movie is pandering to the Central American vs. the East Asian peoples.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-45834067660217262382017-04-26T13:59:02.454-04:002017-04-26T13:59:02.454-04:00You didn't mention Indonesia under Suharto, wh...You didn't mention Indonesia under Suharto, which I'd put in the success column at least US companies have done well out of its natural resources, for example Grasberg the worlds largest gold mine is owned by Freeport.With the thoughts you'd be thinkinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-1658857602272340512017-04-26T08:46:05.526-04:002017-04-26T08:46:05.526-04:00This couldn't be further from the truth; you d...This couldn't be further from the truth; you don't understand how precisely American imperialism functions. Going back to the first United Nations conference in 1944, the United States has strived to control the global economy by compelling the world to use the USD as the primary reserve currency. This was in contrast to Keynes' proposal of the Bancor, for which most of the world's major powers (especially the BRICS nations) are calling for. <br /><br />The goal of American foreign policy has never been to control every aspect of the world. It has only been to use a carrot and stick approach to compel the ruling class of the world's nations to participate in the USD global economy. <br /><br />Countries that do not wish to participate are attacked. Communism was opposed because it advocated barter for international trade; hence they were the enemy. The purpose of the Vietnam War and the Korean war was not to seize territory, but to prevent the spread of opposition to the USD denominated financial system. <br /><br />You will note that Nixon announced ending the Vietnam War within a year of 1) abandoning the Bretton Woods System and going full on to USD Superimperialism (see Michael Hudson) and 2) restoring diplomatic relations to China, which was primarily about formalizing the current relationship we have of massive foreign exchange imbalances. <br /><br />All conflict since that time has largely been for show. <br /><br />I highly recommend you read Michael Hudson's Super Imperialism book. This is the best way for you to understand how and why American foreign policy functions as it has. I mean no offense, but this blog post indicates you really don't understand how things work. Serge_Tomikohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02073364884400341461noreply@blogger.com