Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Brian T. Kennedy: Facing Up to the China Threat

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • 3 weeks later...

I was wondering if anyone had anything interesting to say about this article. This came up on a web search. I was hoping to find some good discussion, but I see no one has responded. That's unfortunate. I've had Imprimis in my view for a number of years now. I don't trust it. The Imprimis was started by Lew Rockwell, but it has been taken over by neocons since. At the Lew Rockwell website, there is a piece by Thomas DiLorenzo, A Warmonger’s Guide to Militarism and Imperialism:

“The Claremont Institute neocons claim to be “the” experts on the U.S. Constitution, with their educational arm now being Hillsdale College, run by former Claremont Institute president Larry Arnn. They hold an annual “Constitution Day” event in Washington, D.C., with this year’s featured speaker being Senator Cotton, who spoke on the subject of foreign policy and the Constitution. The senator’s speech is published in the recent issue of Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College (a publication started by Lew Rockwell when he worked at Hillsdale, long before the neocon takeover). The speech is a textbook example of how the “Straussians,” who claim to have special knowledge of “the real meaning” of America’s historical documents (which is often dramatically different from the literal and historical meaning) distort history in the service of statism and militarism.”

By the way, the author of the piece is Brian T. Kennedy. He is a fairly influential figure. He is the former president of the Claremont Institute, a neocon policy center. Also, he is associated with the likes of Steven Bannon, whether one considers that a good or bad thing. Even more interesting, he is the chairman of the Committee on the Present Danger(CPD), an old Cold War organization with powerful political ties, of which Wikispooks says:

"The Committee on the Present Danger denotes a series of hawkish US establishment pressure groups. The original committee founded in 1950, was revived three times, in 1976,2004 and most recently in March 2019. Both the first and second incarnations of the Committee sought to use public pressure to influence debates already underway within the Government, concerning the NSC-68 document in 1950, and the Team B exercise in 1976, each of which exaggerated the Soviet threat. The 1976 Committee was the first in which the neoconservatives emerged as a significant force within the hawkish coalition. They would go on to be the dominant strand in the 2004 Committee which attempted to apply a similar logic to the war on terror. The 2019 version is directed against China."

Basically, those like Kennedy have been longing for a new Cold War. If that requires pushing propaganda, Kennedy is probably fine with that. About the CPD, according to the Militarist Monitor, "the group has been largely dormant for many years." But that might be changing. They sought to promote war hawk polices and military imperialism during the War on Terror. Now they see another opportunity with perceived conflict with China that has been a major part of President Trump's message. To understand what kind of organization is the CPD, look at it's leadership as described by the Militarist Monitor: "Reagan-era secretary of state George Shultz and Clinton-era CIA head James Woolsey are CPD’s co-chairs. They are joined by two honorary co-chairs, the hawkish former senators Jon Kyl and Joseph Lieberman." So, it's obviously all tied into the war state.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to OO, Ben.

Lew Rockwell served as an early editor of Imprimis. 

O'Sensei Frost would have a copy of Imprimis, Readers Digest or other reading material with him at the dojo. They impart a sentimental value to me. 

Mr. Kennedy makes his case for a more sinister form of warfare:

Perhaps the greatest threat to the U.S. posed by the CCP is its corruption of America’s business and financial elites, who view the economic benefits of dealing with China as more important than America’s national interests. If there is a single group committed to the globalist project and the delusory China dream, it is Wall Street. Our great investment banks are now selling trillions of dollars in debt and equity in Chinese corporations to American investors and retirees. They are literally betting on the success of China at the expense of the U.S.

Guns are amoral. A building and the machinery it houses are amoral. Most of the people that work the Chinese side of this extension of 'corporate America', just want to provide shelter, food, clothing for their families. 

Those resources would not have been locally available to the CCP, and should not have been per this aspect of Mr. Kennedy's moral assessment of the region.

America's wealth and power are by-products of the character of the men and women that built this nation. 

Is a compatible character at the helm of what is being made possible in China with current policies? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...