Use the drop-down boxes above to navigate through the Website  
Return to Reasoning List
 

Here is a link to this page:
http://www.jah-rastafari.com/forum/message-view.asp?message_group=3051&start_row=1


Al Jazeera speaks to Howard Zinn, the author, American historian, social critic and activist, about how the Iraq war damaged attitudes towards the US and why the US "empire" is close to collapse.

1 - 3
Time Zone: EST (New York, Toronto)
Messenger: Eleazar1234 Sent: 9/9/2008 9:06:36 PM
Reply

Al Jazeera speaks to Howard Zinn, the author, American historian, social critic and activist, about how the Iraq war damaged attitudes towards the US and why the US "empire" is close to collapse.



Q: Where is the United States heading in terms of world power and influence?

HZ: America has been heading - for some time, and is heading right now - toward less and less world power, less and less influence.

In focus

In-depth coverage of the US election
Obviously, since the war in Iraq, the rest of the world has fallen away from the United States, and if American foreign policy continues in the way it has been - that is aggressive and violent and uncaring about the feelings and thoughts of other people - then the influence of the United States is going to decline more and more.

This is an empire which is on the one hand the most powerful empire that ever existed; on the other hand an empire that is crumbling - an empire that has no future ... because the rest of the world is alienated and simply because this empire is top-heavy with military commitments, with bases around the world, with the exhaustion of its own resources at home.

[This is] leading to more and more discontent and home, so I think the American empire will go the way of other empires and I think it is on its way now.

Q: Is there any hope the US will change its approach to the rest of the world?

HZ: If there is any hope, the hope lies in the American people.

Zinn says the US needs a new
popular movement [AFP]
[It] lies in American people becoming resentful enough and indignant enough over what has happened to their country, over the loss of dignity in the world, over the starving of human resources in the United States, the starving of education and health, the takeover of the political mechanism by corporate power and the result this has on the everyday lives of the American people.

[There is also] the higher and higher food prices, the more and more insecurity, the sending of the young people to war.

I think all of this may very well build up into a movement of rebellion.

We have seen movements of rebellion in the past: The labour movement, the civil rights movement, the movement against the war in Vietnam.

I think we may well see, if the United States keeps heading in the same direction, a new popular movement. That is the only hope for the United States.

Q: How did the US get to this point?

HZ: Well, we got to this point because ... I suppose the American people have allowed it to get it to this point because there were enough Americans who were satisfied with their lives, just enough.

Of course, many Americans were not, that is why half of the population doesn't vote, they're alienated.

But there are just enough Americans who have been satisfied, you might say getting some of the "goodies" of the empire, just some of them, just enough people satisfied to support the system, so we got this way because of the ability of the system to maintain itself by satisfying just enough of the population to keep its legitimacy.

And I think that era is coming to an end.

Q: What should the world know about the United States?

HZ: What I find many people in the rest of the world don't know is that there is an opposition in the United States.

Zinn says "corruption" of the US
system enabled Bush to win office [EPA]
Very often, people in the rest of the world think that Bush is popular, they think 'oh, he was elected twice', they don't understand the corruption of the American political system which enabled Bush to win twice.

They don't understand the basic undemocratic nature of the American political system in which all power is concentrated within two parties which are not very far from one another and people cannot easily tell the difference.

So I think we are in a situation where we are going to need some very fundamental changes in American society if the American people are going to be finally satisfied with the kind of society we have.

Q: Do you think the US can recover from its current position?

HZ: Well, I am hoping for a recovery process. I mean, so far we haven't seen it.

You asked about what the people of the rest of the world don't know about the United States, and as I said, they don't know that there is an opposition.

"We have a long history in this country of violent expansion and I think not only do most people in other countries [not] know this, most Americans don't."

Howard Zinn
There always has been an opposition, but the opposition has always been either crushed or quieted, kept in the shadows, marginalised so their voices are not heard.

People in the rest of the world hear the voices of the American leaders.

They do not hear the voices of the people all over this country who do not like the American leaders who want different policies.

I think also, people in the rest of the world should know that what they see in Iraq now is really a continuation of a long, long term of American imperial expansion in the world.

I think ... a lot of people in the world think that this war in Iraq is an aberration, that before this the United States was a benign power.

It has never been a benign power, from the very first, from the American Revolution, from the taking-over of Indian land, from the Mexican war, the Spanish-American war.

It is embarrassing to say, but we have a long history in this country of violent expansion and I think not only do most people in other countries [not] know this, most Americans don't know this.

Q: Is there a way for this to improve?

HZ: Well you know, whatever hope there is lies in that large number of Americans who are decent, who don't want to go to war, who don't want to kill other people.

It is hard to see that hope because these Americans who feel that way have been shut out of the communications system, so their voices are not heard, they are not seen on the television screen, but they exist.

I have gone through, in my life, a number of social movements and I have seen how at the very beginning of these social movements or just before these social movements develop, there didn't seem to be any hope.

I lived in the [US] south for seven years, in the years of the civil rights movements, and it didn't seem that there was any hope, but there was hope under the surface.

And when people organised, and when people began to act, when people began to work together, people began to take risks, people began to oppose the establishment, people began to commit civil disobedience.

Well, then that hope became manifest ... it actually turned into change.

Q: Do you think there is a way out of this and for the future influence of the US on the world to be a positive one?

HZ: Well, you know for the United States to begin to be a positive influence in the world we are going to have to have a new political leadership that is sensitive to the needs of the American people, and those needs do not include war and aggression.

[It must also be] sensitive to the needs of people in other parts of the world, sensitive enough to know that American resources, instead of being devoted to war, should be devoted to helping people who are suffering.

You've got earthquakes and natural disasters all over the world, but the people in the United States have been in the same position as people in other countries.

The natural disasters here [also] brought little positive reaction - look at [Hurricane] Katrina.

The people in this country, the poor people especially and the people of colour especially, have been as much victims of American power as people in other countries.

Q: Can you give us an overall scope of everything we talked about – the power and influence of the United States?

"Ultimately power rests on the moral legitimacy of a system and the United States has been losing moral legitimacy."

Howard Zinn
HZ: The power and influence of the United States has declined rapidly since the war in Iraq because American power, as it has been exercised in the world historically, has been exposed more to the rest of the world in this situation and in other situations.

So the US influence is declining, its power is declining.

However strong a military machine it is, power does not ultimately depend on a military machine. So power is declining.

Ultimately power rests on the moral legitimacy of a system and the United States has been losing moral legitimacy.

My hope is that the American people will rouse themselves and change this situation, for the benefit of themselves and for the benefit of the rest of the world.



Messenger: Eleazar1234 Sent: 9/9/2008 9:07:46 PM
Reply

Babylon your throne gone down gone down Babylon your throne gone down

JAH RASTAFARI
HAILE SELASSIE I
KING OF KINGS
LORD OF LORDS
CONQUERING LION OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH
IGZIABEHER
NEGUSA NEGAST



Messenger: Eleazar1234 Sent: 9/9/2008 9:16:17 PM
Reply



News Middle East
US redeploys troops to Afghanistan
At least 8,000 will be out of Iraq by February 2009 [File: GALLO/GETTY]

George Bush, the US president, has announced 8,000 troops will be pulled out of Iraq over the coming months and 4,500 sent to Afghanistan by January.

"While the enemy in Iraq is still dangerous, we have seized the offensive, and Iraqi forces are becoming increasingly capable of leading and winning the fight," he said in a speech in Washington DC on Tuesday.

"Attacks by the Taliban have increased over the past two years," Bush said at the National Defence University.

Bush said Afghan soldiers were "courageous" but "needed help" and that it was important to rebuild educational, agricultural infrastructures in the country.

He said success in Afghanistan was "critical for America and people of the free world".

Nick Spicer, Al Jazeera's correspondent in Washington, said: "The withdrawal amounts to 5.5% of the troops in Iraq ... it's really not that significant.

"This isn't the big pull-out some people in the establishment were calling for."

Decision 'too late'

Al Jazeera's Jasim Azawi, the presenter of Inside Iraq, said the decision to "make amends" by removing troops from Iraq was "too late".

He said: "The legacy, the name, the connection between Iraq and president Bush, is going to be a negative one.

IN VIDEO


US to redeploy Iraq troops
"This is the biggest disaster the United States has committed in the 21st century and it will be a long time before the credibility of the United States and the name of president Bush is mentioned in a good sentence.

"The negative effect of the legacy of George Bush is not limited to Iraq, it has spread all over the Arab world as well as the Muslim world.

"The next [US] president is going to [have to] work very hard in order to ameliorate the image of the United States."

Any large-scale change in US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan will be left to Bush's successor - either John McCain, the Republican nominee or Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate - after Bush leaves office in January 2009 following the November 4 presidential elections.

Zeina Khodr, Al Jazeera's correspondent in Kabul, said: "US military commanders have been calling for up to 10,000 troops to be sent ... they are facing a resurgent Taliban carrying out bolder attacks.

"The Taliban have not been defeated."

Voters' anger

A reduction of 8,000 soldiers would leave 138,000 US government troops in Iraq and there are currently 33,000 in Afghanistan.

That will still be more than before Bush ordered a "surge" of extra forces in 2007 and also more than in November 2006, when his Republicans lost mid-term congressional elections largely due to voter anger over the war.

Bush's plan follows recommendations from senior US defence officials, including Robert Gates, the defence secretary, Mike Mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and David Petraeus, the top commander in Iraq.

Obama has promised to withdraw US troops from Iraq within 16 months and said he would put more resources into Afghanistan and "anti-terrorism efforts" along the Pakistan border, where US officials say they believe Osama bin Laden, the al-Qaeda leader, is hiding.

McCain has refused any set any timeline for withdrawing troops from Iraq.

He has said he prefers Bush's policy of removing them based on commanders' recommendations and security conditions in the war zone.

'Fragile and irreversible'

Bush's "surge" strategy, which sent an additional 30,000 troops to Iraq, has helped stem violence and pulled Iraq back from the brink of civil war, according to White House officials.

The so-called "surge," which was announced in 2007, was criticised by many Democrats who said the US should be pulling out of the country.

While violence has fallen in Iraq, attacks against US, Nato and Afghan troops in Afghanistan have soared.

Nato commanders there have asked for additional forces for years and say they still need about 12,000 troops.

The US has 33,000 troops in Afghanistan, split between a Nato-led mission and a separate "counter-terrorism" mission run by the Pentagon.



1 - 3

Return to Reasoning List




RastafarI
 
Haile Selassie I