BELGRADE – Hillary Clinton understands “American exceptionalism” in a particularly warped way, analysts note, adding that, if elected, she would continue to support America’s interventions against those nations which “balk at playing caboose to her locomotive.”
A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for war, Bruce Fein, Associate Deputy Attorney General and General Counsel to the Federal Communications Commission under President Ronald Reagan, notes. “If you believe United States presidential wars with Russia and China (not declared by Congress) are necessary to fulfill a divine mission to bring freedom, justice, dignity, and civilization to the Russian and Chinese peoples, then you should vote for Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton,” Fein remarks with a touch of irony in his article for the Huffington Post.
The lawyer refers to the Democratic presidential nominee’s speech before the American Legion on August 31, 2016, recalling that Clinton declared America an “exceptional” and “indispensable” nation.
“We are an exceptional nation because we are an indispensable nation. In fact, we are the indispensable nation,” she emphasized. According to Clinton, the world would be dragged into chaos if Washington fails to keep a tight rein on it.
“In other words, the United States must conquer the world to avoid chaos wherever we are not; or, even worse, the exercise of power outside our control,” Fein notes, adding that the Democratic nominee has apparently forgotten that the world survived for thousands of years “without falling into chaos” before the United States were founded in 1776.
Daniel Larison of the American Conservative echoes Fein. Commenting on Clinton’s speech to the American Legion Larison drew attention to the fact that the Democratic nominee and her followers understand “American exceptionalism” in a “particularly warped way that justifies interfering all over the globe.” Moreover, Clinton went even so far as to claim that “Defending American exceptionalism should always be above politics.”
That de facto means that the US foreign policy debates “should always be narrowly circumscribed and most of our current policies should always remain beyond challenge or major revision,” Larison underscored, warning that such an approach is “not healthy for the quality of [the US] foreign policy as a whole.”
During his appearance on Peter Lavelle’s CrossTalk show, Russian political analyst Dmitry Babich called attention to the fact that the “American exceptionalism” propagated by Clinton is deeply flawed.
“I think it’s very important that Clinton said that ‘We are exceptional not because we are so military strong and not because we are so economically strong, but because we have values’,” Babich noted. He recalled when the famous philosopher and social scientist Immanuel Wallerstein told him in an interview that when nations declare themselves superior to others under the pretext that they have “democratic values” it resembles nothing so much as a “brand new kind of racism.” “The most modern form of racism — when a certain nation is elevated above the others not because of its skin color or “ancient culture,” but because of its ‘supreme(acist) values’,” Babich elaborated on his Facebook page.
But that’s half the trouble, according to Fein. There is a little if any doubt that Clinton will continue to support American interventionism.
“She supported and continues to support United States wars, i.e., the wholesale legalizations of first-degree murder, in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen Somalia, Libya, and against ISIL [Daesh] and al-Qaeda everywhere on the planet. If she had her way, we would also be at war with Syria,” Fein emphasizes. He draws historic parallels between the Democratic presidential nominee and former US president Lyndon B. Johnson.
According to Fein, both Clinton and Johnson “held the same tribal, simplistic, good guys vs. bad guys view of foreign policy.” However, one should remember that before Johnson left the White House, 569,000 American troops were “fighting a futile war in the jungles of Vietnam,” he stresses. “Be forewarned. Hillary Clinton is the 2016 candidate who will fight wars with Russia, China, and anyone else who balks at playing caboose to her locomotive,” Fein concludes.