Comments by "Gavin Mc" (@gavinmc5285) on "The Speech That Broke With The Establishment" video.
-
15
-
5
-
@Mast3r0fTheUniverse way i heard it is that he was advocating a janus-faced position for the USA: one face looking internally at domestic matters and one face looking outwardly to the international Cold War arena. and he was warning against isolationism because the responsibilities for the USA, both home and abroad, were too great and too finely balanced to risk abrogating. Which would be a duality yet not inconsistent.
Whereas MAGA v.1 has been isolationist in theory yet Pacific facing in practice. It has been domestically bias in favor of the 'poor' and has promoted a 'we can do it ourselves' mindset particularly with respect to manufacturing and production. and all those are MAGA positives, things that the MAGA movement have done well. the fact that BBB (Build Back Better) imitated that is flattery to the MAGA cause. good job.
and Nixon was pre-Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, pre the War on Drugs, pre-Star [S.D.I.] Wars. yet he was seeing oil and gold exchange, was seeing the early fruits of the electronics boom, and himself, Kissinger and the post 9-11 crew also had their eyes trained on the Middle East and Asia.
At the risk of digressing into the tangent of a rabbithole, if there is one lesson that can be drawn from the two American excursions into Iraq (91 & 03) it is that the PMC (the private military contractor) had a renewed vigor that could absorb way more problems than the State could (for better and worse). the UK didn't learn that lesson upfront - unfortunately.
The reason i'm introducing the PMC to this is that the PMC was born in part from the legacy and (homebound failures - a domestic inability to satisfactorily accommodate veterans effectively) experiences of South-East Asia, Vietnam being at the top of the list. Vietnam, as we know, was as much about the PRC (call it dominos or whatever) as it was about anything else, including the Soviet Union.
MAGA and the militia system are not nothing. And during the first decade of the 21st century it was observed that a very American coup had taken place at the heart of the USA. The rise of the corporation and corporate power relative to the state and the call on the state's monopoly of violence from PMCs is not unique to the USA. Yet the USA has always and consistently pioneered a belief in market economics - sometimes for the best, sometimes less so.
In the sacrifices that MAGA are (clearly) prepared to make on behalf of the USA, Nixon's denial of narrow isolationism could serve as a guide for wannabe warriors that have not ticked the boxes of necessity and proportionality. It's all very well buying into the dreams of made men or folk that have never known anything other than opulence but - so far as the higher echelons of power go - it's not their blood they're offering up, it's those they can afford to let or make fight. So that their bloodshed can be saved.
Yes, Communism was a threat to freedom. Yes, Communism is a threat to freedom. However Nixon (regardless of partisan details) shows that the dignity of statesmanship and the appeal to higher principles of state and the foundations of sovereign order are (especially at a global macro ethic of statecraft) way more preferable than the mademan crime philosophies and strongarm leanings that currently seem to emanate from the MAGA wing. Of course, i could be wrong.
4
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1