Monday, January 28, 2013

On Mali intervention, a French Communist sounding more pro-liberty on foreign policy than some libertarians

by Eric Dondero

The world turned upside down indeed. What can we make of this statement by French Communist Party leader, Francois Hollande ally and parliamentarian François Asensi, (via overseas leftist blog Counterfire):
Non-intervention would have been the worst cowardice. An international military action was necessary to prevent the installation of a terrorist state. The Jihadists in northern Mali and their Al Qaeda accomplices have only one goal: to impose bloodthirsty despotic medieval regimes worldwide. Their fundamentalism constitutes a new form of fascism.
So, one leftist faction is fiercely opposed to Islamism.

Meanwhile here in the U.S. non-intervention libertarian Ron Paul was blasting the Mali intervention by French forces on Cavuto (at And predictably the left-libertarian site, published by Justin Raimondo and Eric Garris is headlining this anti-interventionist story this morning: "12 Civilians Slain in French Attack in Mali."

Left-libertarians siding with Islamists who have outlawed smoking, booze, un-veiled women walking down streets in Tibuktu and Gao, unmarried couples flirting in public, celebrity magazines, TV soap operas and even banned playing football and watching football matches on the television. On the other side of the spectrum, a bonafide communist is siding with the pro-liberty side (pro-sex, pro-booze, pro-smoking, pro-recreational sports) over fascism and Islamic law?

A strange world indeed.


mitsukurina said...

The left in France is very anti-Islamist. Many of its deputies voted in favour, for instance, of the burkha ban.

Eric Dondero said...

Well, maybe then they're not really "left"? Or at least, they've got a libertarian streak when it comes to fighting Islamism, unlike the appeasor left here in the US.

Joe Rousé said...

Is Lew Rockwell really a Libertarian?

Eric Dondero said...

He's sort of a libertarian. He's a paleo-libertarian.