U.S. Supreme Court Justices Voting in Favour of the Transgender Military Ban is a Good Thing

Transgenders are officially banned from serving in the U.S. military. This is a good thing for the anti-imperialist cause because the less recruitment the U.S. military has, the better it is for the rest of the world, especially for the victims of imperialism. Having said that, the ban should also be extended to the following: women, black people, brown people, gays, disabled persons, heterosexuals, whites... or rather, everyone.

Of course, not everyone is celebrating this small, tiny victory. Unsurprisingly, liberal 'social justice warrior' groups such as the organizers of the Women's March on Washington took to Twitter to vent about how "devastating" the news was:

Nothing says peak identity politics or peak Brzezinski school of thought like placing more energy and value into the frivolousness of "equal representation". Obviously, that is to be expected from liberals. But, once again, the self-identified "radical" leftists in the West -- or rather, the ultra-left -- find themselves falling into the Brzezinski-ist trap of latching onto this latest postmodernist, bourgeois 'moral outrage'; that is, being distracted by being equally upset at this news rather than taking a principled stance against imperialism and standing in solidarity with nations, such as Syria and Venezuela, who are standing up against the American Empire. In the current climate of identity politics, the lives of the victims of imperialism don't matter so long as "progressives" think that they can have their pink imperialist cake and eat it too.

Now, it should go without saying that celebrating this ban does not mean a support for or a defense of Donald Trump. It is true that some sections of the U.S. ruling class want him out of office, but not for reasons "out of the goodness of their own hearts"; nor is it because he is anti-imperialist -- he most certainly is not, and is far from it. And yes, there are plenty of key political figures who denounced the recent decision to enforce the ban, such as liberal darling Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The only reason they want him out, and don't agree with all of his decisions, is because he is a liability and they want a person who can carry out U.S. capital interests and imperialism properly and more effectively. Stephen Gowans describes it best:

"...Trump is disruptive and mercurial and completely unpredictable, and he certainly must be vexing the U.S. foreign policy establishment because he simply adopts positions ‘on the spot’ which are completely inimical to longstanding U.S. foreign policy positions. What will happen is difficult to predict, but Trump won’t be around forever. When Trump goes, U.S. foreign policy will go back to its regular patterns..."

Either way, the new and long overdue anti-war movement in the imperialist nations needs to have a more sophisticated understanding of U.S. foreign policy. And it certainly needs to stay away from the liberal trappings of "privilege theory" and "oppression theory".

I leave you with the words of Vladimir Lenin, which address the question of what is to be done in the imperialist nations when the imperialists are waging war:

"During a reactionary war a revolutionary class cannot but desire the defeat of its government."