Is The Nation so anxious to sell Bernie Sanders to its readers that it publishes John Nichols’s interview with him in its July 20/27 issue [“Bernie Sanders Speaks”] without a single question about foreign policy—not one? No wonder, because Sanders’s foreign-policy positions are much further to the right than his supporters would like voters to know. He is a militarist. He supported the US war on Kosovo and the US invasion of Afghanistan. He voted for funding for the Iraq War. He has been a hawkish advocate for Israel, never questioning the $3 billion per year that the United States gives the country, and he supported Israel’s recent bombing of Gaza, which was condemned by human-rights organizations.
This is the record of a progressive? Maybe Sanders is one on domestic policy, but certainly not on foreign policy. Nor is he running for president of Palau, which may not need a foreign policy, but of the United States, where foreign policy is critical. Sanders falls far short as a progressive candidate. The Nation knows this and should not cover it up.
Great interview with a great candidate talking about important issues. I hope Bernie is the catalyst for a progressive renaissance, and I hope that starts with nominating and electing him! (Although it would be good to do another interview where his ideas on the military and foreign policy are explored further.)
I thought Eric Foner’s article on the background of the white-supremacy movement (if one can call it that) in South Carolina was excellent [“Warped History,” July 20/27].
I must take exception, however, with his assertion that there are no monuments to the victims of slavery in the state. Come to Charleston and tour our historic sites, all created by the labor of enslaved Africans. Tour the Old Slave Mart Museum, where thousands were bought and sold; it is probably the most unknown historic site in Charleston, as well as one of the most moving.
Tour our plantations, all of them built by enslaved Africans. Take a Gullah Tour. Go visit “Mother Emanuel” Church. (Although it isn’t the original building, the church itself was founded by enslaved Africans.) That is their monument. I also think it’s only right, if you’re going to talk about white supremacy, to talk about African-American resistance. Not quite as overt as the other, but it was there.