From: irvine@en.ecn.purdue.edu (B-rent)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: U.S. Role in the world (was Re: Canada and the U.S.)
Date: 14 Apr 92 19:24:02 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <1992Apr14.130806.10490@cl.cam.ac.uk>, iaf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Innes Ferguson) writes:
> In <1992Apr13.231910.6945@midway.uchicago.edu> 
> mss2@quads.uchicago.edu (Michael S. Schiffer) writes
> >Without defending every US action in the Cold War, I have to say that
> >I still think that US influence has, on balance, been more good than
> >evil.
> 
> But then you're from the West so you've probably been conditioned
> to think this.

Interesting, I am suprised to hear Politically Correct statements
coming from the UK of all places! (Thought here in the USA we had
a monopoly on that sort of thing...)

But, seriously, the US *has* done far more in the name of idealism
than many other previous powers, who didn't give a wet slap for
the condition of subjugated people.  (We didn't take over conquered
territory - we rebuilt them and now they have more vitality than
us -- :( )

> 
> >And as the US recognizes
> >the end of the Cold War, it has been removing its support from
> >the ubiquitous "friendly dictators" in Africa and Latin America.
> >We can argue whether supporting them was ever a good move, but the
> >record suggests that it was never our primary interest to install
> >repressive governments, but what our government considered the
> >necessitites of a global conflict.
> 
> Naive crap. America had strong economic interests in South America
> which it had to defend. Deposing a democratically elected president
> (Allende) will never be justified.

Nice specific example.  I think that many acts of poor judgement were
done in the 'heat' of the cold war.  I also think that the population
as a whole cares more than previous powers - notice all the hand
wringing in the news, etc.  and response, yes *response*, by the\
government (however things have gotten a bit more pragmatic and
cynical with Regean/Bush counteracting a, for the most part, liberal
legislature).

> 
> >I reject any idea that the US and the Soviet Union were moral
> >equivalents during the Cold War, and that the US was interested
> >in nothing but geopolitical advantage.
> 
> If you think the US goes around invading countries, supporting
> dictators, and perpetrating acts of barbarism simply for the
> good of humanity then you really have been conditioned by your
> politicians and media.
>

To think they do it just to do it is equally naive-brainwashed.
Secondly, not all of the governments supported are dictators.
In fact, there has been a great democritizing movement in all
the countries supported by the US.  Or doesn't that fit your
theory?
 
> >though it's true the US has preferred a friendly dictatorship
> >to one which is an enemy.  Is that so unreasonable?
> 
> Yes, if you happen to live in the country ruled by the dictator.
> I'm guessing a lot of people in East Timor might agree with me
> on that one.



> 
> >it's taking us too long to press China on its human rights violations
> 
> Not only that. Your government has given it favoured nation status.
> Which just goes to show that justice, freedom, etc. take second place
> to the US's economic/strategic interests.

What you fail to realize, is that there is a veto-override in Congress
right now.  Unfortunalely your entire theory here rests on one man that
is (hopefully) going to lose the election.  The great bulk of the government
is against MFN with China.  Expect MFN to be revoked soon.

> 
> >But all of those
> >presuppose that we _should_ be doing something to encourage democracy,
> >and that's something I have to agree with.
> 
> And that's the heart of the problem. Most US citizens feel an _obligation_
> to go around the world and sort everybody out as they see fit.

Wait a second?  Didn't you just say that the US should encourage democracy?
Unfortunately, you have failed to do your homework.  For the most part
the US has been an isolationist nation paying very little attention to the 
world as a whole.  In WWI and WWII the US *reluctantly* entered the war
when the situation deteriorated to the point where if something wasn't
done the war would risk destroying civilization!   After WWII when the
communists took Eastern Europe (it was more of less a staged coup) the
US realized that if they were to stop yet another crisis and war, they
*had* to try to nip it in the bud.  Hence the cold war.  Now that it is
generally acknowledged that the cold war is over, the US is casting around
for a new role.  There are poeple here that are interventionists (Bush et al),
isolationists (Gephardt) and others with different adgendas.  The US
as a whole is casting about for a new role.  Remember, every time the
US did not get involved (and, yes, the US wanted peace - good for buisness)
the preverbial kettle boiled over and we had WWI, WWII.  

	Whether the US abandons this role or takes another one there
WILL be some nation with a lot of influence, be it the US, UK,
France, Germany, Japan, or someone else...

> 
> >I never proposed that the US is perfect or that it should rule the
> >world-- but given the existence of its power, it cannot simply
> >withdraw to its border and ignore the world
> 
> Um. Why not? Believe, if you put half as much effort cleaning up your
> own country as _try_ to do in the rest of the world, the US might again
> become the great nation it used to be.

Read above.  

> 
> >But I'll still
> >maintain that the US comes out, in the end, as a positive factor
> >in world history.
> 
> For you.
>

Heck, what if Fascist Germany were the superpower.  What about Imperial
Germany?  Imperiual Japan? the USSR?    

I think the US gave up isolationism because it conflicted with th
its interests.  The US, while not perfectly idealistic, probably
is far more humanistic compared with other powers of similar 
stature.  It is easy for some to moan about how some things could be
better.  They could be a *lot* worse without the US over the last 50 years.	
 
> Innes


-- 
Brent Irvine						irvine@ecn.purdue.edu 
 
Xref: sparky soc.culture.usa:3020 soc.culture.canada:3519 soc.culture.japan:3553