HomeBernie SandersProgressive foreign policy missing from revised Sanders revolution
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Between a bloated military budget, outright govt waste and or fraud by companies on govt contracts, legalized tax evasion by corporate crooks ,their is more than enough money for infrastructure, Bernie care, re-fund social security the money that was stolen from the fund, take better care of our veterans and so on. Its just that the corpratistic control of the govt will not allow this to happen.


Valid points, but I might add that school board members and state senate folks are not likely to dwell into foreign policy, unless their state pension plan has decided to invoke BDS.

I think we will continue to hear from Bernie on this issue, but it will be from his twitter account.

The thing I keep thinking about is that Bernie at least is being heard. 15 months ago, he was the lone senator on C-SPAN. Now people pay more attention to what he says, even if it is just on twitter these days.


Thank you Linda T. for pointing this out. I hadn’t noticed this omission during Bernie’s live stream….not sure why because his positions on foreign military involvement, his “NO MORE WARS” , and specifically his fair stance on Palestine and Israel were some of the most important issues in my view. I also just checked out the issues listed on the web site “ourrevolution” and these were not mentioned. I don’t know what this means other than we, WE the people will need to let them know that these issues MUST be included and discussed. I didn’t see a place on the web site for any comments or input. Does any one here have advise?


Excellent point. Thanks for posting.


Really? This is what this author took away from Bernie’s address: he didn’t address I/P?

There are a TON of things that Bernie didn’t cover in that address. That doesnt mean that Bernie isn’t taking them seriously; it just means that they aren’t his current highest priorities.

And the past year+, I/P issues weren’t his highest priority. He’s enough out of the main stream on I/P that aipac wouldn’t let him stream his speech to their conference, but he is certainly not a leader on I/P issues, BDS etc.. Expecting Bernie to be shows that the author does not understand Bernie.


He’s enough out of the main stream on I/P that aipac wouldn’t let him stream his speech to their conference,

which, imo, shows immense bravery as a contender for the Presidency.


yes! yes! yes!


Really good to see you back, Linda!

I’m starting to feel like a broken record, though, and here goes.

Bernie stated his willingness to roll back the MIC and said, famously, “No more war!” at one point. He well knows that money should come out of the MIC to fund the programs he wants.

I’m not sure why it didn’t make it into the Our Revolution speech. Perhaps by supporting the kind of candidates that we will support, it is understood that there will be less war. It’s one of the main reasons we all, including Bernie, fought Hill so hard and so long.

Sure, it’s an omission, but I am honestly dumbfounded by the Bernie pile-on that is happening. I am so grateful to him, and I know that after a lifetime of fighting these fights, he still feels the same way, unlike the current and future residents of the White House.

I don’t get it. Especially by Greens, who are benefitting immensely from Bernie’s campaign. I should probably just stay out of this kind of discussion because he seems like the best friend I have in Washington right now and I understand feeling betrayed by someone like Obama, who never meant a word he said, but I struggle to see it in this case, by a man who literally gave his life to the fight and

was the only one in the debates to stand up for Palestine at all, much less say, “No more war!”

I’m going to continue to support progressive candidates and causes (going out to caucus for a SoS in my state that might save one of our coastal forests in a little bit here, and give Bernie and Our Revolution some space and time to recover from the campaign and settle in and hope like hell that Hill gives him a powerful position–he sure deserves one.

Oh, and this is from Politico staff–always really liked Bernie, right? /s

belle de jour

Linda, one of the things I hoped for most in a genuine revolution was finally, finally eliminating some of the false distinctions made when people separate and label policy as either ‘domestic’ or ‘foreign.’

As for your example alone: with the amount of money and lives we forfeit (not to mention how much of our political dialogue and policies are influenced) by our ties & interference in middle eastern policies and dynamics, it is most certainly an issue we ourselves have made ‘domestic.’

On a human-earthly scale, I hardly think rising tides and global warming weather disasters are going to be restricting themselves, adhering to individual country borders and regional shores.

These distinctions between domestic and foreign (vs. foreign interventionism and adventurism) are rapidly fading into denial and irrelevance, on so many levels; they are inextricably linked, and it would be truly revolutionary to hear politicians consistently weave them into their thinking and their messages and their behavior and their planning and their accountability.


While I don’t know why Bernie didn’t bring up foreign policy issues in his latest, truncated, speech, the impact he made while running, with his particular views on American foreign policy, is still being felt.

I had literally just finished this piece by John Pilger before logging into The Progressive Wing this morning:

Provoking nuclear war by media

The CIA has demanded Trump is not elected. Pentagon generals have demanded he is not elected. The pro-war New York Times – taking a breather from its relentless low-rent Putin smears – demands that he is not elected. Something is up. These tribunes of “perpetual war” are terrified that the multi-billion-dollar business of war by which the United States maintains its dominance will be undermined if Trump does a deal with Putin, then with China’s Xi Jinping. Their panic at the possibility of the world’s great power talking peace – however unlikely – would be the blackest farce were the issues not so dire.

“Trump would have loved Stalin!” bellowed Vice-President Joe Biden at a rally for Hillary Clinton. With Clinton nodding, he shouted, “We never bow. We never bend. We never kneel. We never yield. We own the finish line. That’s who we are. We are America!”

In Britain, Jeremy Corbyn has also excited hysteria from the war-makers in the Labour Party and from a media devoted to trashing him. Lord West, a former admiral and Labour minister, put it well. Corbyn was taking an “outrageous” anti-war position “because it gets the unthinking masses to vote for him”.

How I got to Pilger’s piece was a tweet from Rania Khalek:

Which led me to look up John Pilger on Twitter, which led me to this, with the link to the article above:

Corbyn is facing similar attacks as Bernie faced too, of course:

It would be very difficult for Bernie, or for anyone, to campaign for less intervention, for less war, for a smaller MIC, with Hillary Clinton as ‘Commander in Chief’. I don’t see how anyone could dispute that.

Btw, the entire Pilger piece is superb. When you hear the name Milosevic, what comes to mind? Yah, maybe you too, along with yours truly, swallowed too much of the propaganda? When you read Pilger’s piece, you’ll see what I mean.

In the US, the anti-Russia campaign has been elevated to virtual reality. The New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, an economist with a Nobel Prize, has called Donald Trump the “Siberian Candidate” because Trump is Putin’s man, he says. Trump had dared to suggest, in a rare lucid moment, that war with Russia might be a bad idea. In fact, he has gone further and removed American arms shipments to Ukraine from the Republican platform. “Wouldn’t it be great if we got along with Russia,” he said.

This is why America’s warmongering liberal establishment hates him. Trump’s racism and ranting demagoguery have nothing to do with it. Bill and Hillary Clinton’s record of racism and extremism can out-trump Trump’s any day. (This week is the 20th anniversary of the Clinton welfare “reform” that launched a war on African-Americans). As for Obama: while American police gun down his fellow African-Americans the great hope in the White House has done nothing to protect them, nothing to relieve their impoverishment, while running four rapacious wars and an assassination campaign without precedent.

Keep those eyes open my friends!
Thank you Linda,


Wow! I second what Linda says. Illuminating….
And, yes, the look on Bill Kristol’s face when Pilger tells him the U.S. has intervened in other countries 72 times since WW II (72 times! Holy s**t) says a lot, doesn’t it.


@lindathieman, has James Zogby had anything to say about it yet?