I think the only positive policy set that could oppose US imperialism is one of multilateralism that breaks the mould of "the world"'s consent being Europe, Japan, and South Korea. But I can't imagine that this can be motivated as a rallying cry like something like Medicare for All without already doing the work of making people anti-imperialist, which requires making them marginally international anticapitalist and is still a necessarily negative process. The imperial core is in a very different situation than the imperialized, where you can draw a straight line between US interventionism and the difficulties in their lives. It will always have to be motivated in solidarity and working on behalf of shared humanity, not nationalist politics that improve domestic policy. Imperialism actually leverages their position to improve their lives through importing the spoils and keeping their prices down, it's in contradiction of the usual material interest narrative. In addition, the USD's dominance and austerity politics means that government spending is fairly magical already, so decreasing funding for the military or IC does not actually increase funding for anything domestically.
In short, I don't think there's any way for those in the imperial core to move forward on the topic of interventionism without directly attacking US interventionism and the dominant narratives. I don't think we can shoehorn in a positive rallying cry like we can for domestic policy due to the contradiction in self-interest and the strength of capitalist propaganda in lieu of a direct challenge. Indirect challenges could help, but are risky precisely because of how easy it is to convince liberals of cynical human rights narratives, hell even simple narratives about loss of stature. Germans care not just about the cost of war but their place in NATO. This is what they think about Afghanistan. Not the incredible death and destruction of Afghans. NATO narratives handed down by imperialists.
I think the only positive policy set that could oppose US imperialism is one of multilateralism that breaks the mould of "the world"'s consent being Europe, Japan, and South Korea. But I can't imagine that this can be motivated as a rallying cry like something like Medicare for All without already doing the work of making people anti-imperialist, which requires making them marginally international anticapitalist and is still a necessarily negative process. The imperial core is in a very different situation than the imperialized, where you can draw a straight line between US interventionism and the difficulties in their lives. It will always have to be motivated in solidarity and working on behalf of shared humanity, not nationalist politics that improve domestic policy. Imperialism actually leverages their position to improve their lives through importing the spoils and keeping their prices down, it's in contradiction of the usual material interest narrative. In addition, the USD's dominance and austerity politics means that government spending is fairly magical already, so decreasing funding for the military or IC does not actually increase funding for anything domestically.
In short, I don't think there's any way for those in the imperial core to move forward on the topic of interventionism without directly attacking US interventionism and the dominant narratives. I don't think we can shoehorn in a positive rallying cry like we can for domestic policy due to the contradiction in self-interest and the strength of capitalist propaganda in lieu of a direct challenge. Indirect challenges could help, but are risky precisely because of how easy it is to convince liberals of cynical human rights narratives, hell even simple narratives about loss of stature. Germans care not just about the cost of war but their place in NATO. This is what they think about Afghanistan. Not the incredible death and destruction of Afghans. NATO narratives handed down by imperialists.