Of course, everybody says they're for peace. Hitler was for peace. Everybody is for peace. The question is: What kind of peace?

We're supposed to believe that oil had nothing to do with it, that if Iraq were exporting pickles or jelly and the center of world oil production were in the South Pacific that the United States would've liberated them anyway. It has nothing to do with the oil, what a crass idea. Anyone with their head screwed on knows that that can't be true.

For a while, after the Second World War, when there was strong support for labor, this was done subtly.

Why should workers agree to be slaves in a basically authoritarian structure? They should have control over it themselves. Why shouldn't communities have a dominant voice in running the institutions that affect their lives?

As far as Marx's analysis of capitalism, there's a lot of very useful ideas in it, but he's developing an abstract model of 19th century capitalism. It's abstract and it's changed.

Free markets are based on the free circulation of labor. If you don't have free circulation of labor, you don't have free markets.

Universities are less constrained by authority and rigid doctrine in the United States than in most other societies, to my knowledge.