[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
International News Title: Marco Rubio's Foreign Policy: Reckless, Reactionary Big-Gov Love Republican presidential aspirant and U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio gave a major foreign-policy speech recently, and the best that can be said is that he did not claim to favor small government and free markets. What he wants in a foreign policy couldnt possibly be reconciled with any desire to limit government power. Rubio is for big government no matter what he might say on the campaign trail. He acknowledged this when he said, correctly, "Foreign policy is domestic policy." Rubio set out a doctrine with three pillars, none of which which should comfort anyone who understands, as the great libertarian writer Albert Jay Nock noted, that political power displaces social power. The three pillars are: "American Strength," "protection of the American economy," and "moral clarity regarding Americas core values." All three display a hubris typical of a big-government advocate, including those of the conservative variety. Regarding strength, Rubio wants you to believe that Americas ability and eagerness to project global power prevents war, while "weakness" promotes it: "the world is safest when America is at its strongest." Where has he been this century? Does he not know that U.S. power knocked out Shiite Irans chief regional adversary (Saddam Husseins Sunni-dominated regime in Iraq), in turn giving rise to a more-virulent form of al-Qaeda (ISIS), which controls large parts of Iraq and Syria while extending its influence to Africa and elsewhere? Contrary to Rubio, violent disorder has been the direct outcome of George W. Bushs post-9/11 invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and Barack Obamas 2011 declaration of open season on Bashar al-Assad in Syria and bombing of Libya. [Al-Qaedas 9/11 attacks of course followed decades of U.S. intervention on behalf of, among others, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Israel.] Its not that the U.S. government should have sided with Saddam, Assad, and Libyas Muammar Gaddafi, all secular rulers. Rather, the point is that the exercise of American power is most likely to muck things up. If government cant manage health care (as Rubio believes), how can it manage regime changes in foreign societies? Why dont conservatives ever ask themselves this? Rubio thinks Obama, whos hardly a dove, hasnt war-mongered enough. The Republican wants even more confrontationwith Russia, China, Cuba, and North Korea. What he calls strength is just recklessness. Rubios speech demonstrates his unfitness for office (assuming anyone is fit for office). He says he wants to spread freedom and other values, but he must realize that what American drones, bombers, and special ops spread are death and social upheaval. Again, where has Rubio been? "America did not intend to become the worlds indispensable power," Rubio said, adding, "America is the first power in history motivated by a desire to expand freedom rather than its own territory." Here he adds historical demagoguery to political recklessness. From the start, many American rulers, who embraced empire, intended to make America the continental, hemispheric, and even world hegemon. War was an option, and no onenot the Indians, Spanish, English, French, or Russianswould thwart destiny. Rubios glorification of American "strength" is reactionary. His second pillar, protection of the American economy, also shows his attraction to government power. Although he invokes "free trade," Rubio embraces "trades role as a tool of statecraft that can bolster our relationships with partners and create millions of jobs." So much for the free market. Again, Rubio is a reactionary. Most American presidents believed that trade was not a matter for free enterprise but a government program designed for political objectives, including the benefit of special interests. [The military-industrial complex must be licking its chops.] Rubio says he will promote, as his third pillar, moral clarity regarding Americas core values. Are those the same core values promoted by Americas embrace of dictators and monarchs in the Middle East (and elsewhere) and Israels decades-long oppression of the Palestinians, which Rubio supports? Note well that Rubios values do not include privacy. He wants to protect the NSAs PATRIOT Act bulk-data-collection program. Rubio seeks to "restore Americas status as a nation that shapes global events rather than one that is shaped by them." We cant afford another ruler with such hubris. This piece originally appeared at Richman's "Free Association" blog.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread |
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|