RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment


Hillary Clinton. (photo: Getty Images)
Hillary Clinton. (photo: Getty Images)

Don't Let Hillary Housebreak the New New Left

By Steve Weissman, Reader Supported News

12 October 13


eter Beinart might be one of smarter guys on the block. He is certainly one of the most interesting. And with his recent touting of a new New Left as the coming wave in American politics, he has become a most beguiling Pied Piper.

Still in his twenties when he worked as editor of The New Republic, Beinart cheered on liberal interventionists in their enthusiastic support for George W. Bush's War in Iraq. He came in time to see the war as "a tragic mistake," and went into competition with the Bushies and neocons with his first book, "The Good Fight: Why Liberals – and Only Liberals – Can Win the War on Terror and Make America Great Again." He next promoted a return to "liberal Zionism," berating the American Jewish establishment for its uncritical support of Bibi Netanyahu and the rightward turn in Israeli politics.

No surprise, then, he is now talking up a new generation of voters who do not see "liberal" as a dirty word, believing in the tradition of FDR "that government should intervene in society to solve problems that individuals cannot solve alone." These voters are currently backing improbable politicians like New York's populist mayoral candidate Bill de Blasio, and Beinart is now challenging Hillary Clinton to move to the left and ride the new wave to power. Unspoken but obvious, this might work on domestic policy, but Hillary, a humanitarian hawk abroad, would inevitably run up against the new New Left's deep-seated and altogether healthy anti-interventionist impulses.

All of which makes Beinart a fascinating fellow, but not someone to follow. Like neocons and the National Security Agency (NSA), he hypes terrorism as a much greater threat than it is, killing far fewer people than do Washington's efforts to combat it. Liberal Zionism lost most of its appeal before he was born. And while we very much need government to solve social and economic problems, we should clearly see the limitations of both the New Deal and European Social Democracy. He does not, nor do many progressives.

But Beinart's biggest problem is his unquenchable zeal for a muscular, hyper-activist foreign policy, one with all the multilateral trappings of U.N. resolutions and NATO-led coalitions, but still decidedly neo-colonial and inescapably in the service of Big Oil and the merchants of death. He cannot get over his adolescent urge for Washington to intervene, only to help others, of course, and to fight every totalitarian scourge he sees on the horizon.

"Antitotalitarianism should sit at the heart of the liberal project," he wrote in "The Good Fight." "If today's liberals cannot rouse as much passion for fighting a movement that flings acid at unveiled women as they do for taking back the Senate in 2006, they have strayed far from liberalism's best traditions."

We should all share Beinart's passion to stop acid-throwing Islamists, as Hillary most certainly does. But we should firmly reject, as she most certainly does not, any idea that the United States with all its imperial baggage can be the agency to counter the menace of Islamist jihadis. Would that Washington could! But after a Cold War that Beinart's liberal heroes unflinchingly supported, after a war in Vietnam they promoted, and after wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that he and his liberal interventionists loudly applauded, is it not time that we all take a deep breath and refuse to let our government repeat the same tragic mistake over and over again? Is it not time to stop making truly terrible situations infinitely worse?

Beinart's heroes epitomize the original sin. They include most of the old stalwarts – former vice-president Hubert Humphrey, labor leaders Walter Reuther and Walter Dubinsky, civil rights activist Bayard Rustin, theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, my generation's own Shachtmanite bête noir Tom Kahn, and others who made central to their political faith a robust opposition to Communism abroad and a steadfast refusal to cooperate with Communists at home. This "antitotalitarian liberalism," as Beinart notes, became "the dominant ideology in American public life." It also bought a degree of protection from the right in seeking to expand New Deal reforms, defending what remained of our civil liberties, and pursuing civil rights for American blacks.

But, as Beinart barely begins to grasp, Cold War liberals incurred a huge price that we all have to keep paying. They helped create the CIA, the garrison state, and the permanent war economy with its military-industrial complex. Through groups like the CIA's American Institute for Free Labor Development (AIFLD), which Beinart cites as one of Reuther's great contributions, they helped organize anti-communist coups all over the globe. Under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, they helped spread new, more efficient forms of torture. They fed the rightwing red-baiting they condemned. And, in the cruelest cut of all, they ended up undermining the labor unions and civil rights struggles they sincerely meant to support.

The original New Left understood most of this 50 years ago, which is why many of us refused to take sides in their Cold War and why we went out of our way not to exclude Communists or anyone else from our free speech, civil rights, and anti-war struggles. Beinart still wants to pick a fight over our anti-anti-communism, and has absolutely no clue how much it contributed to whatever success we had.

Today, with the new New Left, we have a chance to do far better, but not if we embrace Beinart's liberal mythology and unending foreign intervention. Nor should we accept Ron Paul's old-fashioned isolationism or any knee-jerk reaction to side uncritically with every Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, and Hussan Rouhani who comes along. With or without Hillary Clinton, but preferably without, the way forward requires less dogmatic international cooperation, as we might finally be seeing in Syria and Iran. We should also learn the real lesson of the Cold War, which Beinart completely misses. Both sides shared the blame for an Orwellian conflict that served selfish and systemic interests, and both sides played their part in bringing us to the very brink of nuclear annihilation.

A veteran of the Berkeley Free Speech Movement and the New Left monthly Ramparts, Steve Weissman lived for many years in London, working as a magazine writer and television producer. He now lives and works in France, where he is researching a new book, "Big Money: How Global Banks, Corporations, and Speculators Rule and How To Break Their Hold."

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+18 # freelyb 2013-10-12 13:37
Indeed. No more Billary for me, please. I'm filled to the brink.
+14 # Margery 2013-10-12 16:52
Hillary is a Monsanto lawyer. She should retire.
+5 # WestWinds 2013-10-12 23:05
Hillary is a Trojan horse and not for the better.
+16 # Activista 2013-10-12 21:53
" Both sides shared the blame for an Orwellian conflict that served selfish and systemic interests, and both sides played their part .."
I escaped communism/total ity to other side - United States. The paradox is that now I experience the symptoms I escaped from. We need a change - American Spring.
+4 # Activista 2013-10-12 23:06
Steve Weissman reports complex issues - in depth and objectivity - his new book "Big Money: How Global Banks, Corporations, and Speculators Rule and How To Break Their Hold." should be classic.
+3 # cwbystache 2013-10-13 09:43
Needn't look any further than the third paragraph to have something stunningly Orwellian hit you in the face: "humanitarian hawk".
+2 # tauzinger 2013-10-12 23:13
You may not like what Peter Beinart has to say, but he has what is missing a lot these days - original thought. Yes, The New Republic (not just Beinart) grudgingly was in favor of the intervention in Iraq, but he was also one of the first, if not THE first, to out the Bush administration for what he titled "Washington's Little Lies", including the Nigeria/Yellow Cake hoax. That's a quality many journalists lack, to be critical in ways that go not only against public opinion, but also their own.

I stopped reading The New Republic after he left, because I felt it had lost its bite, their ability to attack problems from different points of view. Make no mistake, the people writing for TNR are among the finest journalists, but so are some at other magazines.

Intervening in other countries for moral and humanitarian reasons or for protecting our access to oil are two entirely different propositions, and I'm pretty sure that Beinart is arguing for the former and not the latter. Bush won support with his (maybe even genuine) desire to bring democracy to the middle east, that freedom is not the privilege of a few, which failed since the killing continues.

Intervention can take many forms. Malala Yousafzai believes that education is key. A friend of mine bemoaned that "not everything can be solved through peace and dialogue." I argue it's the only way without side effects.
+15 # Even 2013-10-13 01:40
In whose delusional fantasy world would Hillary Clinton ever truly be on the left? Except as a campaign lie just like Obama in 2008.
+7 # hwmcadoo 2013-10-13 03:05
She is a war hawk who thinks war solves all problems. She is closely tied to the wall street/corporat e world, especially now that she is a multimillionair e after a life in politics (funny how that happens on a politicians salary). like her husband she was/is a promoter of NAFTA that has destroyed the middle class.

If you like obama you will love Hillary. The elite like her for their pick for Democrats and a person similar will be selected for the Republicans. both will be backed with tons of money.

Good honest people caring for the middle class will not be financed and have no chance.
+1 # ishmael 2013-10-13 04:21
".... But after a Cold War that Beinart's liberal heroes unflinchingly supported, after a war in Vietnam they promoted, and after wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that he and his liberal interventionist s loudly applauded ...."

Huh?? What a ball of confusion. No liberal worth the name fits that description.
0 # stannadel 2013-10-16 04:02
You are right in principle, but they were the liberal establishment and that's just a fact. Check out Phil Ochs' song "love me, love me, I'm a liberal" for a sense of what passed for liberalism in the mid-1960s
+5 # reiverpacific 2013-10-13 09:56
Beinart's heavy (I almost wrote "Liberal" there) use of the word "Liberal" betrays a kind of anti-populist cowardice, as it is the reactionary, conservative and owner-media, including PBS''s buzz word for anything that isn't far right these days.
The words "Progressive", Proletarian", "Grassroots" and -gasp! Yes- "Socialist" -and chuck in "Solidarity" as well, are what the US somnambulist sheeple need to be re-familiarized with daily, hourly and at every chance, in schools, colleges, and communities nationwide along with subsidized mass-distribute d copies of Howard Zinn's "People's History of the United States" and Maj-Gen' Smedley Butler's "War is just a racket.
Mrs Clinton I'm afraid is far too status-quo establishment for anything but the continuation of the same ol' pandering to the Military-corpor ate dictatorship which really runs things so clumsily and destructively.
I'm actually not sure what the "New Left" might be, as there hasn't been a true left critical mass since Eugene Deb's time and he ran from jail a good part of his last bid for President (he'd never get as far as even running in these times of fast-food politics that profit only the appalling mainstream media).
+4 # MidwesTom 2013-10-13 11:14
Hillary is New World Order. A regular attendee at the Bilderberg Conference. Very Smart, and very ruthless.
+1 # Dennyc 2013-10-14 13:56
The main giveaway, among many others, was when Ms. Clinton laughed heartily at the prospects and realities of bombing Iran. It's the laughter at the deaths of the helpless which reveals the inner soul. Ruthless, cunning and compassionless.
0 # harbormon 2013-10-15 10:33
Unfortunately, Hilary never really represented the true Liberal side of the Democratic Party, anymore than Bill or President Obama did. What all three represent, at their respective times in history, is a comparative sea-change in ideas and personalities, especially when compared to their predecessors. Anybody would look and sound like a liberal, left wing idealist when compared to George Sr. and George Jr.

However, what Hillary does represent is the first legitimate opportunity to have a female president and, rightly or wrongly, every liberal-minded female I have spoken with who shows any interest in party politics or the current Zeitgeist is not only rooting for her, if you don't support her, you come close to being labeled a political misogynist.
0 # Khidr 2013-10-16 14:49
Regarding Libya: Hillary's (as some call her Killery) statatment: "We came We saw and He(Kaddafi) died." says it all, a cold hearted, calculating kiler. The reason she wears glasses, so you can't tell, she has lost her soul.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.