The Pitfalls of Boycotting Apartheid South Africa, Communist Cuba, Theocratic Iran, and Communist China………


 Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter        
A Kenny G Holiday

“In 1988, the Wyoming Senate candidate said economic engagement would end apartheid faster than boycotts. Conservatives used the same argument with Jim Crow—and they still don’t get it. Liz Cheney doesn’t just share her father’s neoconservative politics. As a young woman, she also shared his support for the apartheid regime in South Africa. In a 1988 editorial for her college newspaper, Cheney—now running a losing primary bid against Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY)—condemned anti-apartheid activists at Colorado College. “The real problem with divestment,” wrote Cheney, attacking a prominent strategy of apartheid opponents, “is that it won’t work. Like most moral statements, it accomplishes nothing tangible.”……………..”

The Cheneys have had an unusual mixed almost bi-polar relationship with the Al Saud princes. They loved the princes and their money even as they waged a media war on their religion. Liz Cheney particularly has a website (Keep America Safe) that for years focused on being Islamophobic even as the Cheneys remained close to the Saudis. That silly fear-mongering website, which also encouraged banning mosques, is now reportedly closed.
Of course there was and still is much hypocrisy in the right-wing position regarding apartheid South Africa. While they extolled the benefits of “engagement” in reducing Apartheid (not that they cared about it), they have also extolled the virtues of keeping the blockade against Cuba, and tightening the blockade against Iran. Apparently ‘engagement’ works with China and apartheid South Africa but not with Cuba, Iran and a few other places. Of course many Democrats are at the forefront of keeping the blockade on Cuba and tightening the blockade on Iran rather than “engaging” these countries. It all depends on upcoming elections, the Cuban exile lobby, and the potent Israeli lobby (including the Christian Zionists).