Author: John V. Walsh

Either the censors of the New York Times, also known as the "editors," were taking a long weekend, or the Times felt that it had to issue a warning to the ruling elite last Sunday. They are in danger of losing their Empire, both domestic and foreign. All this is heralded by the defeat of the deeply malign Eric Cantor by the libertarian-leaning, GOP populist, Professor David Brat.

The Times began thus: "The day after Eric Cantor became the first congressional leader in modern times to lose his seat in a primary, one of the biggest aftershocks occurred not on Capitol Hill or in the sprawling Richmond suburbs…. but on the New York Stock Exchange."

The first to fall was one of the titans of the military industrial complex, Boeing. Said the Times, "The share price of Boeing tumbled, wiping out all the gains it had made this year, a drop analysts attributed to the startling defeat (of the Israel Firster, Cantor)."

But it went beyond that. Continued the Times, Brat , is an "economics professor who campaigned on throwing corrupt Wall Street bankers in jail (and) railed against crony capitalism…" Further, "Mr. Cantor’s loss is much more than just symbolism. He has been one of Wall Street’s most reliable benefactors in Congress. And Mr. Brat used that fact to deride the majority leader as someone who had rigged the financial system. In one recent speech, he accused lawmakers like Mr. Cantor of favoring ‘special tax credits to billionaires instead of taking care of us, the normal folks.’"

Them’s fightin’ words, and they clearly disturbed the big financial bourgeoisie. The NYT report quoted one of the biggest of them, who might fear that Professor Brat would like to toss him into the clink: "Lloyd C. Blankfein, Goldman’s chief executive, called the loss of Mr. Cantor ‘stunning’ and praised him as a sensible legislator in an interview on CNBC." Blankfein should console himself that Professor Brat is speaking only of jail not tumbrils. One might wonder at this point why progressives like Tom Hayden and Katrina Vanden Heuval are not rushing to embrace Professor Brat. After all, on all these points he is closer to what they parade as their beliefs than is Obama whom they have supported with some vigor. Could their reticence be due to the lack of a "D" trailing after his name? If not running on empty, they are certainly running on herd instinct.

Continue reading “David Brat’s Victory Over Eric Cantor, The NYT Sounds An Alarm”

Ralph Nader wrote a very perceptive essay in the wake of the edifying defeat of the despicable arch-imperialist, Israel Firster and reliable servant of Wall St. Banksters, Eric Cantor, at the capable hands of the libertarian leaning Professor David Brat. It was titled "Can Progressives Learn From Eric Cantor’s Defeat"? Can they? Yes. Will they? It is highly doubtful. It is difficult to learn if you think you have nothing more to learn.

But here we are interested only in the lessons of Cantor’s electoral humiliation at the hands of Brat for the progressive antiwar, anti-Empire movement. (For the significance of the Brat victory beyond the matter of war, see this.) What do we mean by Progressive? "Progressive" for the most part is little more than a change of name for what was once called "liberal." One looks in vain for a self-described liberal these days only because they have rebranded themselves.

Here are two relevant quotes from Nader’s essay:

“(The Brat victory) has several takeaways for progressives besides envy and shame over why they do not directly take on the corporate Democrats.”

“Unfortunately the driving energy of progressives, including the dissipating Occupy Wall Street effort, is not showing up in the electoral arena. The political energy, the policy disputes and the competitive contests are among the Republicans, not the Democrats…”

Continue reading “The Progressive Antiwar Movement: RIP?”

If you are an Antiwar.com reader like me, you are no doubt fed up with the lies, both of commission and omission, that pour out of the NYT, NPR and lesser mainstream media outlets, when it comes to Ukraine.

And if you are like me, you are worried over the political health of your many friends, who are swallowing the journalistic poison put out by the Mainstream Media. So here is a quick antidote with suggestions for a longer term cure.

The antidote is a 39 minute interview with Stephen Cohen, emeritus Professor at Princeton and NYU, a scholar on Russia, whose word is good as gold. It can be found here. More often than not, getting people to open up to new ideas is a matter of the source rather than the arguments. Who says something often outweighs what is said. And Cohen is an unimpeachable source, coming from the halls of the Ivy League and the author of many books and articles including Soviet Fates and Lost Alternatives: From Stalinism to the New Cold WarandThe Victims Return: Survivors of the Gulag after Stalin.

This interview is part of a continuing series with Cohen on the unfolding crisis in Ukraine on the John Batchelor Show. They can all be found here. I chose the one above, even though it is not the most recent, because it is a great summary leading up to the recent elections in Ukraine. Read it first. The most recent at the time of this writing is here.

At this point one may also recommend for continuing health a daily dose of RT.com ("Russia Today"), which gives coverage of the unfolding crisis in one or two brief stories or videos a day. We can challenge friends and ourselves to read these accounts from the "other side," to compare them to the mainstream media which inundates us daily and to decide for ourselves which rings truer. (The ever pompous John Kerry is horrified and outraged, his basal state it would seem, by the specter of Americans reading RT and, worse, deciding for ourselves what is true!)

Once the ice is broken with your friends by the Cohen interview, they will be prepared for the next step. You can now convince them to ascend to the journalistic heights of Antiwar.com where daily, accurate coverage and penetrating analysis by Justin Raimondo and many others will greet them. The final step is for you and them to donate to Antiwar.com so that these Olympian heights can endure. We owe no less to humanity with our nation now threatening to plunge the entire world into war in its unnecessary confrontation with Russia, China and Iran.

John V. Walsh can be reached at John.Endwar@gmail.com

Today the NYT runs a front page article headlined “(Susan) Rice Offers A More Modest Strategy for the Middle East.” It should be headlined “Battle of the Titans: Israel Firsters versus China Haters.”

It tells of a policy review of the U.S. Empire’s bloody strategy in the Middle East. But it goes well beyond that. As Noam Chomsky tells us, the real story is usually buried away deep in a “news” article. Sure enough here the key paragraph is the penultimate, which goes thus:
“More than anything, the policy review was driven by Mr. Obama’s desire to turn his gaze elsewhere, notably Asia. Already, the government shutdown forced the president to cancel a trip to Southeast Asia — a decision that particularly irked Ms. Rice, who was planning to accompany Mr. Obama and plunge into a part of the world with which she did not have much experience.” For “notably Asia” in the first sentence substitute “notably China.”

The new policy is driven by a desire to confront and “contain” China. Right now the key to this U.S. strategy is to get Japan rearmed and poised to challenge China, as outlined here. and here This is very dangerous since it threatens us with World War III. And it is unlikely to succeed. Since Mao’s revolution in 1949, the U.S. and the Western neocolonial powers have tried to bring China back under Western domination. They failed when China was far weaker and there is no reason to believe that they can succeed now.

The second key paragraph also lies on the second web page of the article and quotes a “critic” of the new policy: ““You can have your agenda, but you can’t control what happens,” saidTamara Cofman Wittes, the director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution. “The argument that we can’t make a decisive difference, so we’re not going to try, is wrongheaded.”” The Saban Center is a hotbed of pro-Israel sentiment, a key part of the Israeli Lobby.

The struggle shaping up is between those who want to continue the depredations of the US in the Middle East, among them the Israel firsters, and those who want to turn toward smashing China. Unwittingly perhaps, Israel and its Lobby may now be China’s best allies.

“Mr. President, in the case of military operations in Libya you stated that authorization from Congress was not required because our military was not engaged in “hostilities.” In addition, an April 1, 2011, memorandum to you from your Office of Legal Counsel concluded:…”President Obama could rely on his constitutional power to safeguard the national interest by directing the anticipated military operations in Libya—which were limited in their nature, scope, and duration—without prior congressional authorization.’”
“We view the precedent this opinion sets, where “national interest” is enough to engage in hostilities without congressional authorization, as unconstitutional.”
Text from letter of Rep. Scott Rigell (R, VA) to Pres. Obama
Signed by 140 Reps, including 21 Democrats

The letter of Scott Rigell (1) to Barak Obama has exploded on the scene with its opening words:
“We strongly urge you to consult and receive authorization from Congress before ordering the use of U.S. military force in Syria. Your responsibility to do so is prescribed in the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution of 1973.
“While the Founders wisely gave the Office of the President the authority to act in emergencies, they foresaw the need to ensure public debate – and the active engagement of Congress – prior to committing U.S. military assets. Engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United States exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution.”
With these perhaps historic words the Congress has begun to claw back its Constitutional right to decide issues of war and peace. Significantly the letter comes from a Republican lawmaker, and it is clearly a tribute to the leadership of the libertarians in the Republican Party, most notably Ron Paul, Justin Amash and Rand Paul.

But the situation is grave enough, possibly leading on to a World War, that 21 Democrats have challenged the President and their Party bosses to sign the statement. They are moving beyond partisanship as Ron Paul did in challenging George W. Bush on the war on Iraq.

Continue reading “Impeachment: Congress Fires Opening Shot Across Obama’s Bow.”

The sharpest minds and most dedicated activists in the progressive mold will gather under a single roof for the annual Left Forum this coming weekend (June 7-9) at Pace University in NYC. But even amongst this select assemblage, one panel will stand out. For it features a stout band of Libertarians and Leftists determined to trespass beyond the bounds set by gatekeepers on both sides. Their hope is to continue discussion of an antiwar movement “with American characteristics.” If you can be in NYC or its environs on Saturday morning, June 8, be sure to clear your schedule so that you can get to Pace University at 10 am when the discussion begins.

All the details are here: http://www.leftforum.org/content/us-war-policy-how-it-destroys-environment-kills-local-economies-drains-natural-and-human-res

The discussion will be in the proud tradition of the Anti-imperialist League which opposed the war in the Philippines over 100 years ago and which counted among its members Mark Twain, a man deeply sympathetic with revolutionary change, and Andrew Carnegie, the richest man in America at the time.

The discussion will take account of the end of the Cold War and the emergence of the Ron Paul libertarian movement which has been steely in opposing Empire and war. It will take into account the enthusiasm of youth for the Ron Paul endeavor. And it will be a step to prevent Right and Left from being divided, then conquered, by the imperial elite in Washington and on Wall Street.
Join us.
And again all the info is at:
http://www.leftforum.org/content/us-war-policy-how-it-destroys-environment-kills-local-economies-drains-natural-and-human-res