|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 8:54 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I'm not an isolationist. Who is? There are only two times in American history that an isolationist viewpoint has existed in any meaningful sense: the late eighteenth/early nineteenth century, and during the Great Depression. In both cases there were obvious reasons for reticence toward international engagement; none of them apply today, and as far as I can tell there are no isolationists in American politics. (With the possible exception of certain fringe viewpoints on the right. I'm thinking here of the people who have "US out of UN" signs in their yards and tend to mutter darkly about black helicopters, World Government, and the coming of the eschaton.)
Neither do I believe that being nice to our enemies will make them nice to us. Who does? Not even Jane Fonda, I'm guessing. Well, maybe Jane. But who cares what she thinks?
"Being nice" and "obeying the law" are not the same thing. The invasion of Iraq was not a question of niceness but of legitimacy. The same test can be applied to the various "humanitarian interventions" (sickening euphemism) proposed by the Samantha Power left.
This is way too complex and far-reaching a discussion for this thread. I'll merely note that it is the primary issue that has split the Democratic Party from 1968 onward. In a sense, it's not even an "issue" at all; it's a question of outlook. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stillnotking wrote: |
| "Being nice" and "obeying the law" are not the same thing. |
Here comes the antiAmerican-derived and very simplistic dichotomy that reduces the United States to "a country that does not obey the law" like is should, as does, for example, "the rest of the world." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| stillnotking wrote: |
| "Being nice" and "obeying the law" are not the same thing. |
Here comes the antiAmerican-derived and very simplistic dichotomy that reduces the United States to "a country that does not obey the law" like is should, as does, for example, "the rest of the world." |
Gopher, I'm going to put this in the nicest possible way and say that you display an unpleasant and counterproductive proclivity to imagine what your opponents' views and motives are, and then put words in their mouths.
For instance, the "anti-American derived" part. I am not anti-American. I am an American and I love my country. You are confusing a criticism of American policy with a hatred of the nation or its people. I advocate the policies I advocate because I sincerely, deeply, and fully believe that they are the best policies for both America and the rest of the world, in the long run. Absent a framework of established international law by which the actions of nations can be judged on their legitimacy, humanity will destroy itself in the not-too-distant future. Hobbesian traps make this a near-inevitability. Law is the only solution to the Hobbesian trap, whether we are talking about individuals, tribes, clans, or nations.
I am aware that many other countries do not obey the law. None of them obey it all the time. This does not mean the law is not real or should be ignored. If somebody breaks into my house, that does not give me license to break into somebody else's. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Oh yeah? "The United States govt is, far more often than not, a law-abiding govt in world affairs." What is your opinion on that statement? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Oh yeah? "The United States govt is, far more often than not, a law-abiding govt in world affairs." What is your opinion on that statement? |
True. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Live and learn, Stillnotking. I am truly amazed. My apologies, then. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:17 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
The problem at this point is not Clinton and Obama. The problem is the primary process itself, which really hasn't been scrutinized much at all. We just had 6 weeks of nothing. Why?
Just cuz.
People are sick to death of this election already. One problem is that the candidates started campaigning way early? Why? Because they thought it would be over by now.
This is how the primary process is supposed to work. Are we gonna go, as Dean once suggested, to Oregon? Maybe. Maybe we are.
The more important question is: Do we want to?
Is there any substantial reason why voters in Iowa and New Hampshire should play a pivotal choice in candidates while other states are treated as chopped liver?
Nope.
Let them go on. Some states who NEVER get to vote will get a chance at "democracy".
If people are too bored to care, then how bout we share who goes first?
Make it a rotation.
(My stalkers will lambast me for trying to change things through a web board, but I say that what I say here counts more than my vote, unlike Iowans) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Live and learn, Stillnotking. I am truly amazed. My apologies, then. |
No worries.
My occasional intemperance on the subject stems from frustration that a country which was founded on the rule of law, and has been a tremendous exemplar of the rule of law even in the most adverse and existentially threatening circumstances, decides to abandon its ideals and commitments (not wholly, but far more than it should) because a bunch of stateless religious whackos got lucky on 9/11.
A great amount of what is construed by the right as "America hatred", both at home and abroad, is the result of this same frustration. In a sense, criticism of America is a compliment: conservatives who like to point out that liberals would rather condemn America than China are missing this fundamental point. We don't expect any better from China. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
