Justin et Antiwar triomphent

Justin et Antiwar triomphent

Le triomphe de Ron Paul à la convention annuelle de la CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) est considéré comme une victoire majeure pour le mouvement anti-guerre aux USA, particulièrement sur le site Antiwar.com, mené par le libertarien et isolationniste Justin Raimundo. Deux textes saluent ce triomphe, celui de Justin ce 22 février 2010, qui place la victoire de Ron Paul dans la perspective historique du mouvement anti-guerre, c’est-à-dire la perspective anti-interventionniste, anti-wilsonienne, selon un affrontement politique interne fondamental qui n’a cessé aux USA depuis la Première Guerre mondiale.

Le second texte, de Jon Basil Utley, également ce 22 février 2010, est plus concentré sur les sentiments anti-guerres qui sont apparus au cours de cette convention du CPAC. La chose est présentée comme une donnée nouvelle à l’intérieur du mouvement conservateur US, annexé par les interventionnistes depuis les débuts de la Guerre froide.

• Ouverture du texte de Justin:

«The annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), which has been going on for many years, is a bellwether of where the action is on the right side of the political spectrum – and the news from the latest gathering has both the traditional Buckley-style right and the Obama-ite liberal-left in shock. The CPAC presidential polls are a conference tradition, and the winner is often hailed as not only the up-and-coming champion of the Republican "hard" right but also a serious presidential contender. The winner of the previous three CPAC polls, Mitt Romney, was accorded such status early on in part because of his CPAC victories, but this time he was left in the dust by congressman Ron Paul.

»Headlines reported Paul’s win as a "surprise," but early indications of the Paulian domination of CPAC this year included the ubiquitous presence of Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) activists and the rock star reception given to Rep. Paul himself.

»The former – and perhaps future – Republican presidential candidate gave a half-hour peroration that boldly stressed anti-interventionist foreign policy as the key to reining in big government on the home front. Invoking the shade of Robert A. Taft, and wondering aloud how we’re going to pay for our empire, Paul traced the roots of our dilemma back to Woodrow Wilson, the quintessential "progressive" of Glenn Beck’s worst nightmares. Unlike Beck, however, whose anti-progressive polemics only mention World War I in passing, Paul realizes that the whole kit-n-kaboodle of progressivism – the income tax, the Federal Reserve, and the philosophy of government as an instrument of moral uplift –all culminated in US involvement in the Great War.

»As Murray Rothbard pointed out, the war – portrayed by its advocates at The New Republic and among the nation’s intelligentsia as a crusade for moral and spiritual uplift on a global scale – was the apotheosis of the progressive project. The term “Wilsonian,” in foreign policy lingo, refers to the view that democracy and human rights can and should be advanced abroad at gunpoint…»

• Ouverture du texte de Jon Basil Utley:

«Antiwar sentiment was a major issue for the first time at this year’s giant CPAC meeting in Washington. Thousands of young conservatives attended, some 5,000, and for the first time, Ron Paul was voted the favorite presidential candidate with 31% of the vote. His speech about how governments use wars to take over dictatorial power was constantly interrupted with roaring applause, denouncing Republicans nearly as much as Democrats and saying, “It’s still morning in America, it just happens to be kind of a head-pounding, hung-over, vomiting for four hours morning." Beck is not a war promoter and I’ve heard him on FOX TV saying he had pretty much come around to agreeing with libertarians on the wars.

»Republican congressional leader John Boehner had spoken earlier promising that next time Republicans would be different and not cave in to big government.

»Speakers covered the gamut of the conservative movement including old timers and new comers. Speaking has been almost obligatory for hopeful presidential candidates. Sarah Palin was not there. Romney spoke including praise for Bush and Cheney and came in 2nd in the straw poll with 22%. He was followed by Sarah Palin with 7% and Tim Pawlenty with 6%. Gingrich and Huckabee both came in with 4%.

»Most different this time was the strong antiwar contingent of mainly Ron Paul supporters. Even many YAFers (Young Americans for Freedom) seem to have turned to antiwar sentiment, judging from the voting. There were still several pro-war panels including one arguing how Americans needed to limit our freedoms in order to save ourselves from Islamic fanatics and fascism. Another argued for war with Iran. However, there were also important speakers arguing for constitutional limits on the executive, such as Dimitri Simes of the Nixon Center, Pat Nolan of Justice Fellowship, Bruce Fein and others, certainly much more than in Bush times....»

Une incontestable atmosphère d’une grande nouveauté dans l’air, d’un important mouvement en cours aux USA, touchant également la politique expansionniste du système. Pour les deux commentateurs, la possibilité d’un Ron Paul comme candidat du parti républicain en 2012 est désormais très, très sérieuse.

dedefensa.org