Skip to main content

View Diary: PNAC Co-Founder Endorses Dems in '08 (221 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm not disagreeing with DH on the scale (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Wary

    I accept that the military-industrial complex is probably no different than General Motors (big cog in that engine) in aligning America's interests with its own. But I don't see this as proof that there is no smaller subset of organizations and individuals working more behind the scenes to protect those interests.

    In fact, I suppose I'm not really arguing that it's a "cabal" either, but that there is a mutuality of interest which helps shape their collective behaviour. And this mutuality of interest emanates from worldviews held in common.

    Fine. But how does that in any way support the argument that the DLC and PNAC could not also have such a mutuality of interest? If anything, it suggests that they do, but that it's not the product of a conspiracy.

    I don't know, does that difference mean much? Does it contradict your assertion that that mutuality of interest is understood and being exploited by Kagan and others?

    You know, it's late. I just may be full of shit here.

    -8.38, -4.97 "...there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.

    by thingamabob on Sun May 28, 2006 at 10:16:15 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Not full of shit (6+ / 0-)

      read Kagan's editorial.  He would rather the Dems win so that we will rally around a centrist candidate that will not make fundamental changes than have a Republican win that will drive the left to consolidate around an anti-consensus ideology.

      In other words, nothing is currently so critical, like losing Iraq to chaos, that it outweighs maintaining the consensus.  It's the bipartisan consensus for huge military budgets that trumps everything in Kagan's view.  

      And that is telling.  Very telling.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site