The Real Kerry?

[Desertrat]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/19/opinion/19BROO.html?th

This is a David Brooks column, discussing a peaceful protest method in Cuba, whereby those opposed to Castro's regime are trying to push for civil rights along the lines of our system.

Kerry calls it "counterproductive".

I'll add more in an edit.

'Rat

Partial text:

Earlier this month, Andres Oppenheimer of The Miami Herald asked John Kerry what he thought of something called the Varela Project. Kerry said it was "counterproductive." It's necessary to try other approaches, he added.

The Varela Project happens to be one of the most inspiring democracy movements in the world today. It is being led by a Cuban dissident named Oswaldo Payá, who has spent his life trying to topple Castro's regime. Payá realized early on that the dictatorship would never be overthrown by a direct Bay of Pigs-style military assault, but it could be undermined by a peaceful grass-roots movement of Christian democrats, modeling themselves on Martin Luther King Jr.

Then in the mid-1990's, he and other dissidents exploited a loophole in the Cuban Constitution that allows ordinary citizens to propose legislation if they can gather 10,000 signatures on a petition. They began a petition drive to call for a national plebiscite on five basic human rights: free speech, free elections, freedom to worship, freedom to start businesses, and the freeing of political prisoners.

This drive, the Varela Project, quickly amassed the 10,000 signatures, and more. Jimmy Carter lauded the project on Cuban television. The European Union gave Payá its Sakharov Prize for human rights.

Then came Castro's crackdown. Though it didn't dare touch Payá, the regime arrested 75 other dissidents and sentenced each of them to up to 28 years in jail. This week Payá issued a desperate call for international attention and solidarity because the hunt for dissidents continues.

John Kerry's view? As he told Oppenheimer, the Varela Project "has gotten a lot of people in trouble . . . and it brought down the hammer in a way that I think wound up being counterproductive."

Imagine if you are a Cuban political prisoner rotting in a jail, and you learn that the leader of the oldest democratic party in the world thinks you're being counterproductive. Kerry's comment is a harpoon directed at the morale of Cuba's dissidents.

Imagine sitting in Castro's secret police headquarters and reading that statement. The lesson you draw is that crackdowns work. Throw some dissidents in jail, and the man who might be president of the United States will blame the democrats for being provocative.

Imagine if in the 1980's Ronald Reagan had called Andrei Sakharov or Natan Sharansky or Lech Walesa or Vaclav Havel "counterproductive" because, after all, what they did spawned crackdowns, too.

If there's anything we've learned over the past 20 years it is the power of moral suasion to buck up dissidents and undermine tyrannical regimes. And yet Kerry seems to have decided that other priorities come first.

Over the past several months, Kerry and his advisers have signaled that they would like to take American foreign policy in a more "realist" direction. That means, as Kerry told the editors of The Washington Post, playing down the idea of promoting democracy and focusing narrowly instead on national security. That means, as Kerry advisers told Joshua Micah Marshall in The Atlantic, pursuing a foreign policy that looks more like the one Brent Scowcroft designed for the first Bush administration.

You can see why Kerry thinks that's a clever shift, after the arduous efforts to promote democracy in Iraq. With realism, you avoid humanitarian interventions.

But if we are going to turn realist, let's be clear about what that means in practice. It means worrying less about the nature of regimes and dealing with whoever happens to be in power. It means alienating people who dream of living in freedom while we luxuriate in ours. It means doing little to confront crimes against humanity; realism gives a president a thousand excuses for inaction. It means betraying people like Oswaldo Payá — again and again and again.

There's a reason Carter, Reagan and George W. Bush all turned, in different ways, against this approach. They understood that democracy advances security, kowtowing to dictators does not.

'Rat comment: Since I remember very well the results of Lech Walesa's efforts and the aftermath of the strike at Gdansk, I gotta believe that this world view of Kerry's is just dead wrong...

[skunk]

'Rat comment: Since I remember very well the results of Lech Walesa's efforts and the aftermath of the strike at Gdansk, I gotta believe that this world view of Kerry's is just dead wrong...
I have to agree.

[mactastic]

Oh goodie. Now we have a choice between two candidates whose world views are dead wrong. Super. :rolleyes:

[skunk]

Oh goodie. Now we have a choice between two candidates whose world views are dead wrong. Super. :rolleyes:
This is news? :rolleyes:

[Sayhey]

If I believed David Brooks' sweeping assessment based on one out of context statement then I might be worried as well.

[skunk]

If I believed David Brooks' sweeping assessment based on one out of context statement then I might be worried as well.
I must admit to almost complete ignorance of Kerry's position on anything. Is it just me, or has he actually committed himself to anything?

[Sayhey]

I must admit to almost complete ignorance of Kerry's position on anything. Is it just me, or has he actually committed himself to anything?

It not your fault, skunk. We tend to cover only the "horse race" and personalities in our political reporting. If you want a starting point in learning about Kerry's stands on various issues start here: John Kerry for President (http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/).

There are many issues that I can find fault with Kerry and some on which I whole heartedly agree. I do think you will find important differences with Bush.

[Desertrat]

I seems like at all levels, one is more likely to vote AGAINST a candidate rather than FOR his opponent. I try not to be a one-issue constitutent, but there are times when I feel like a many-issue anti-constituent of both candidates in a race.

'Rat

"The lesser of two weevils still messes up the cornmeal."

[skunk]

If you want a starting point in learning about Kerry's stands on various issues start here: John Kerry for President (http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/).
Looks promising. We'll have to see how it translates. After all, Shrub didn't exactly promise to be a warmongering lunatic...

[zimv20]

After all, Shrub didn't exactly promise to be a warmongering lunatic...
yet many predicted it. one of his major indicators was the zeal i perceived w/ which he signed executions in texas.

applying the same reading between the lines w/ kerry, i see someone who is willing to change his convictions. and i like that.

[Chip NoVaMac]

yet many predicted it. one of his major indicators was the zeal i perceived w/ which he signed executions in texas.

applying the same reading between the lines w/ kerry, i see someone who is willing to change his convictions. and i like that.

Me too zimv20. If some had their way we still would have slaves, women would not have the right to vote, and only property owners would have the right to vote.

I would have much more respect for Bush if he admitted the mistakes in Iraq by his administration. Fire a few scapegoats, and the public would soon forget. And he might just win the second term handily. Well, on second thought is probably better he sticks with his lies.

[Neserk]

I would have much more respect for Bush if he admitted the mistakes in Iraq by his administration. Fire a few scapegoats, and the public would soon forget. And he might just win the second term handily. Well, on second thought is probably better he sticks with his lies.


Pretty much my sentiments. The more he lies the deeper he digs his own grave. I literally was sick to my stomach when I found out he, ummm, won... I knew in some sixth-sense-womanly-way that it was going to be a rough 4 years. I can't wait for it to be over.

[Chip NoVaMac]

Pretty much my sentiments. The more he lies the deeper he digs his own grave. I literally was sick to my stomach when I found out he, ummm, won... I knew in some sixth-sense-womanly-way that it was going to be a rough 4 years. I can't wait for it to be over.

I wasn't happy with the outcome of the 2000 elections either. But I was brought up to at least give the winner a fighting chance. Sure not everything will be my liking, but let the guy at least prove himself. Well for me Bush has proven himself that I don't want for another 4 years.

[Neserk]

I wasn't happy with the outcome of the 2000 elections either. But I was brought up to at least give the winner a fighting chance. Sure not everything will be my liking, but let the guy at least prove himself. Well for me Bush has proven himself that I don't want for another 4 years.


If things had stayed the same I wouldn't complain so much about him. But he just royally screwed everything up. I don't care if the person in office is a Republican or a Democrat. I just care about what they *do.* I had a bad feeling about this one.

[Voltron]

John Kerry is running far behind George W. Bush among those who regularly attend religious services. Kerry's pick of a radical socialist from the faithless Howard Dean campaign suggests he has written off the votes of religious Catholics, Protestants and Jews. Read the CNSNews.com report and meet the Quaker-educated "church lady" (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200406\POL20040615b.html) who will coordinate his, what?, atheist socialists.

Insightmag (http://www.insightmag.com/news/2004/06/11/Politics/John-Kerry.Picks.Radical.Socialist.For.Religious.Outreach-687778.shtml)
http://sharevana.com/forums/images/generalsmileys/new_silly.gif

[Neserk]

So? Bush's church attendance certainly hasn't help him keep most of the 10 commandments. I don't see what difference it makes.

[Voltron]

So? Bush's church attendance certainly hasn't help him keep most of the 10 commandments. I don't see what difference it makes.
the key for me isn't the guys religion but "sociolist"
We have room for everybody on this planet, room for communist countries as well as sociolist countries. Doesn't mean I want our country to be turned into one. I think it is good to have variety throughout the world but don't get rid of Capitalism there is room for that too. Personally I think it would be better if people could pick the country that closest matched their theology and then move there. It would be better than changing every country to a single standard so that the world is under one entirely ****ed up government.

[Neserk]

the key for me isn't the guys religion but "sociolist"
We have room for everybody on this planet, room for communist countries as well as sociolist countries. Doesn't mean I want our country to be turned into one. I think it is good to have variety throughout the world but don't get rid of Capitalism there is room for that too. Personally I think it would be better if people could pick the country that closest matched their theology and then move there. It would be better than changing every country to a single standard so that the world is under one entirely ****ed up government.


Wow... that isn't very Conservative of you ;)

[Voltron]

Wow... that isn't very Conservative of you ;)
I'm not a conservative.http://msn.mess.be/data/media/182/oranje-emoticon01mess_be.gifhttp://msn.mess.be/data/thumbnails/39/blee.png

[skunk]

Personally I think it would be better if people could pick the country that closest matched their theology and then move there.
"If you don't love it, leave it"? Now THAT's an original line. :rolleyes:

Where does Locke say that?

[Desertrat]

Aw, Voltron, that moving away, that'd take half the fun out of life. Who'd want to spend all day Sunday just preaching to the choir?

However, skunk, if some folks followed the "If you don't like it, leave it." school of thought and did indeed leave, the average IQ of both donor and recipient countries might improve. :D

'Rat

[IJ Reilly]

"If you don't love it, leave it"? Now THAT's an original line. :rolleyes:

Where does Locke say that?

It's classic, old-fashioned American jingoism, last heard regularly during the Vietnam War, as "My County, Love it or Leave it!" Bottom line, it's about suppressing free speech and attacking political pluralism. As you say, not an original thought, but its reappearance now is telling.

[skunk]

It's classic, old-fashioned American jingoism, last heard regularly during the Vietnam War, as "My County, Love it or Leave it!"
That WAS my reference, by Jingo! :rolleyes:

It's a curious interpretation of democracy to say that everyone who doesn't agree should leave: why would you need elections?

[IJ Reilly]

That WAS my reference, by Jingo! :rolleyes:

It's a curious interpretation of democracy to say that everyone who doesn't agree should leave: why would you need elections?

I see, but you did paraphrase... I quoted verbatim from the slogan pasted onto bumpers all across America during the last '60s.

No need for elections -- that would be the point, wouldn't it?

[skunk]

No need for elections -- that would be the point, wouldn't it?
I guess so. But who would youy blame when things went wrong? :rolleyes:

[zimv20]

I guess so. But who would youy blame when things went wrong? :rolleyes:
why, the democrats, of course!

[3rdpath]

I guess so. But who would youy blame when things went wrong? :rolleyes:

well now that the blame game has been elevated to an art form...

the best excuse is to say that the problems are actually proof that everything is going well.

and when all else fails...blame france. ;)

[Neserk]

I guess so. But who would youy blame when things went wrong? :rolleyes:

Interesting discussion... and I guess you'd blame the <insert favorite group to hate> here! After all, if you can't blame the past political party you'll have to blame another country!

[Chip NoVaMac]

I'm not a conservative.http://msn.mess.be/data/media/182/oranje-emoticon01mess_be.gifhttp://msn.mess.be/data/thumbnails/39/blee.png :confused: :confused: :confused:

[skunk]

I'm not a conservative.
And the Pope's not a Catholic. I know. It's OK.

[Voltron]

We have room for everybody on this planet, room for communist countries as well as sociolist countries. Doesn't mean I want our country to be turned into one. I think it is good to have variety throughout the world but don't get rid of Capitalism there is room for that too. Personally I think it would be better if people could pick the country that closest matched their theology and then move there. It would be better than changing every country to a single standard so that the world is under one entirely ****ed up government.
People seem to be misrepresentating my post.

[mactastic]

So is there room for a communist country 80 miles from Florida then Sly? Or do you support policies to turn it capitalist?

[Neserk]

People seem to be misrepresentating my post.

Since you didn't explain yourself I have to infer that you mean people are missing the point that you are all for different kinds of governments. I think that is very liberal of you :p

[Voltron]

Since you didn't explain yourself I have to infer that you mean people are missing the point that you are all for different kinds of governments. I think that is very liberal of you :p
I think people moving to a country that matches their philosophy perferable to trying to create a one world government that everyone must modify their own beliefs in order to fit in. In otherwords I'm against those who are trying to turn America into a sociolist state. If you want a sociolist state move to one.

[Neserk]

I think people moving to a country that matches their philosophy perferable to trying to create a one world government that everyone must modify their own beliefs in order to fit in. In otherwords I'm against those who are trying to turn America into a sociolist state. If you want a sociolist state move to one.


If only it were that easy, but I definately see your point.

I've been told "if you don't like it, leave" but that isn't what you are saying, you are saying if you are socialist, you always have the option of moving to country X that is also socialist. Yes?

[miloblithe]

I think people moving to a country that matches their philosophy perferable to trying to create a one world government that everyone must modify their own beliefs in order to fit in. In otherwords I'm against those who are trying to turn America into a sociolist state. If you want a sociolist state move to one.

And to facilitate this plan, would we institute one world language so that people could move to country X that embodies their views but speaks a different tongue? Would we buy people plane tickets for said move, or are we really referring only to those who can afford such a move? Would we insist that political beliefs outweigh family and cultural ties? Are we going to institute one world culture so that those seeking health care don't have to give up watching football and start watching footbol?

People are deeply tied to the places that they are from, and their struggles to improve that place do not in any way mean that they would prefer to live somewhere else just because that place manifests some aspect of their belief system.

[Neserk]

People are deeply tied to the places that they are from, and their struggles to improve that place do not in any way mean that they would prefer to live somewhere else just because that place manifests some aspect of their belief system.

Once again, missing his point. While I seldom agree with Voltron on *anything* it isn't so much as being against trying to improve but rather trying to make the whole world capitalist. He is suggesting that we not to do that, I think ;)

[zimv20]

i'm not sure why sly is suggesting it's the social democrats who move -- we already live in a social democracy. sly should take his own advice and leave the US for a purely capitalist state. maybe he'll spend the rest of his life trying to find one.

[IJ Reilly]

i'm not sure why sly is suggesting it's the social democrats who move -- we already live in a social democracy. sly should take his own advice and leave the US for a purely capitalist state. maybe he'll spend the rest of his life trying to find one.

Now there's a good point. I've always figured the crypto-libertarians should get together and buy themselves an island somewhere, and show us how real capitalism done. I'm sure they could become an economic superpower inside of six months.

[Desertrat]

IJ, while not a perfect example, Hong Kong has done pretty well as an example of purer capitalism in action.

:), 'Rat

[mactastic]

Doesn't Hong Kong have a long history as a haven for pirates among other unsavory types? Sounds like libertarians to me! :D :eek: :p

[zimv20]

IJ, while not a perfect example, Hong Kong has done pretty well as an example of purer capitalism in action.

the triad controls many industries (including the HK movie industry) and, at least before the handover, the HK dollar was pegged to the US dollar.

i guess we should figure out the relationship between "pure" and "organized crime", at least.

[Desertrat]

No, mac. Pirate hangouts have historically been down around Indonesia and Malaysia.

Hong Kong has long been a major world trading center. It has always been a Free Port, with no import/export taxes. The Hong Kong dollar traded at 7:1 with the US dollar until the Mainland takeover.

The tax structure was such that for a citizen from Hong Kong vs. one from the U.S., for any equal level of investment during one's working career, the HK citizen would wind up with ten times as much net worth.

Helluva neat place to visit, too.

I haven't done a Google search, but I'd bet that "Hong Kong Mary's" would appear. A world class department store, begun by a little old lady who got her start painting ships. Real ships, that is, like freighters and aircraft carriers. A tiny, wizened little creature when I met her, some 54 years ago.

:), Rat

[zimv20]

Helluva neat place to visit, too.

agreed. i've been there twice and loved it. was told my pronunciation of cantonese was very good :-)

[Desertrat]

:) I first was there in 1950, passing through on a passenger-freighter. We offloaded mahogany from the Philippines, and took on frozen tuna for delivery to Japan. Then, I got an R&R trip out of Korea in late 1954, for a week. I wound up almost an inch shorter, walking and walking and walking along, browsing the little shops in Kowloon.

Another time, I was supposed to do my R&R in Tokyo, but I slickied a deal to get back to Hong Kong. Almost got caught on that one; a typhoon messed up air travel to Okinawa and I had to hop a ride with a Cathay Air Transport freight flight into Korea. Took a bit of fast talking to stay "clean". :D

Hoooeee! Some fun times!

:),'Rat

[zimv20]

Since this is a thread on JFK "the lesser"
I'll bet they would like to keep quiet the fact that the Vietnamese are paying tribute to him:

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/2/10/222651.shtml

In his 1985 memoir about the war, Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap wrote that if it weren't for organizations like Kerry's Vietnam Veterans Against the War, Hanoi would have surrendered to the U.S. - according to Fox News Channel war historian Oliver North.

[...]

"People are going to remember Gen. Giap saying if it weren't for these guys [Kerry's group], we would have lost," North told radio host Sean Hannity

rotflmao

i think the general is giving away a little too much credit. i'd say it was his own Tet offensive that broke the back of the american military. if you can dig up the general's quote that specifically mentions kerry by name, i'll have another look. until then, my right-wing media spin (oliver north, indeed) stink-o-meter is going off.

[Sayhey]

You may have to watch a short advertisement in order to read the article, but the Joe Conason piece at salon.com (http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2004/06/18/hunting/) is very interesting.

Whatever doubts I might have felt about the current relevance of "The Hunting of the President" -- the new documentary based on the book of the same name by Gene Lyons and me -- were abruptly dispelled last Tuesday evening, after the movie's premiere screening in Little Rock, Ark.

As I was leaving the auditorium, an older gentleman approached to shake my hand and offer his generous compliments.

"I'm a Vietnam veteran," he said. "I served with John Kerry. I'm supporting him for president, I've campaigned for him -- and I want to tell you, they're trying to do the same thing to him that they did to Bill Clinton." He explained that in recent weeks, a private investigator has contacted many of the vets who served on the Navy's swift boats with Kerry. According to him, the investigator asks insinuating and sometimes outlandish questions about the former lieutenant's wounds, decorations and military operations. Exactly who hired the Kerry-bashing detective is not yet clear, but his queries echo accusations promoted by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a Republican-backed band of Kerry-bashing veterans.

[Desertrat]

zim, the '68 Tet offensive was a horrible military loss for the VC. More importantly, however, it was a PR victory for them. After the Tet debacle, the war on South Vietnam was mostly done by the NVA.

'Rat

[zimv20]

zim, the '68 Tet offensive was a horrible military loss for the VC.
indeed. but from what i hear, the US didn't know that until too late. making it a stroke of genius in my book.

[Chip NoVaMac]

indeed. but from what i hear, the US didn't know that until too late. making it a stroke of genius in my book.

Some what like the loss of American life that was discussed before we decided to drop the A-bomb on Japan.