Yes, some of yesterdayвЂ™s activists were blind to coercion within these movements, and others joined elite cadres bombing their way to liberation. Whether the cause was democracy at home or liberation abroad, men and women afflicted by oppression had to organize themselves for freedom. During the Vietnam era, liberals and leftists believed not only in social justice but also in mass protest. But if the deeds of the US government need not stop liberals from supporting the war in Afghanistan, why should the wordsвЂ“words, mind you, not deedsвЂ“of leftists deprive the antiwar movement of these very same liberalsвЂ™ support?Д«oth questions register a fundamental shift among liberals, and on the left, since the 1960s: from skepticism of to faith in US power, and from faith in to skepticism of popular movements. Politics, of course, often entails an unhappy choice of associations. Yet many of those who could not abide an alliance with ANSWER endorsed the war in AfghanistanвЂ“even though it was waged by a government that recently invaded three Caribbean countries, funded dirty wars in Latin America and backed the government of Guatemala, the only regime in the Western Hemisphere condemned by a UN-sponsored truth commission for committing acts of genocide. Second, why did certain liberals who opposed the war in Iraq refuse to march against it? The reason they gave was that left-wing groups like ANSWER, which helped organize the antiwar rallies, failed to denounce SaddamвЂ™s regime. First, how is it that few liberals and no leftists in 1968 believed that Lyndon Johnson, arguably the most progressive President in American history, would or could airlift democracy to Vietnam, while many liberals and not a few leftists in 2003 believed that the most reactionary President since William McKinley could and would export democracy to Iraq? Two questions, however, have not been asked, perhaps because they might actually help us move beyond where we are and where weвЂ™ve been. Republicans are challenging the President, activists and bloggers are pressing the Democrats and liberal hawks are reconsidering their support for the war. ItвЂ™s the fourth anniversary of September 11, and Americans are getting restless about the war in Iraq. But still, itвЂ™s got some useful stuff there.

Other issues I over-emphasized or neglected. Some things I got wrong (Beinart, for example, went onto have something of a turnabout on these issues it wasnвЂ™t Oscar Wilde but Jonathan Swift who made that jibe). On the tenth anniversary of the War, I thought I might reprint that essay here. In September 2005, on the fourth anniversary of 9/11, The Nation ran a long piece I did on liberal support for the Iraq War and for US imperialism more generally.Г‚ By way of Paul Berman, Michael Ignatieff, Christopher Hitchens, and Peter BeinartГўв‚¬вЂќas well as Judith Shklar and Richard RortyГўв‚¬вЂќit addressed what I thought and still think are some of the deeper political and intellectual roots of the liberalsвЂ™ support for the Iraq War.

Coffee shop tycoon quarks