New answers tagged

2

One of the few things Obama and Trump had in common was that they were not interested in starting new foreign military adventures. I think there is not much point in protesting war if those in power are not actively seeking it.


17

I think this is another issue that could do with a Special Providence analysis. According to Mead there are 4 competing schools of US Foreign Policy, basically divided via what their international goals are (trade, security, ideals, or US independence), which ultimately means they have different standards for when they want things ignored, when they want ...


13

You may not remember it, but the Iraq war was new horrors each month for years, and the government was in favor of keeping it going. It was very protestable and very newsworthy. Whereas today there's no war and everyone in power is against war. There's not much to protest or cover. At first in the Iraq war, buildings with civilians got bombed. Later road-...


17

Obama got elected. Long story short, you'll notice that the anti-war Left got really quiet right around the time that Obama got elected. With a Democrat in power, it was no longer in the interests of the Democratic Party to fund or organize rallies protesting the President, and as a result, the anti-war protests rapidly died away. Unfortunately, I don't have ...


42

The "anti-war" rubric is mainly a conservative conflation of a lot of different Centrist, Leftist, and (non-authoritarian) Rightist positions. I mean, it is often blithely applied to wide ranging movements like: Pacifism, which opposes mass violence for moral and/or religious reasons Anti-draft movements, which oppose forcing young people to risk ...


Top 50 recent answers are included