From: mss2@quads.uchicago.edu (Michael S. Schiffer)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: U.S. Role in the world (was Re: Canada and the U.S.)
Date: 14 Apr 92 16:50:36 GMT
Reply-To: mss2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

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


>>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.

But my understanding of the East Timor invasion is that we chose _not_
to protest or intervene to stop it, not that we actively participated
in it.  I agree this is wrong, but it's also what you're advocating as
a broad US policy.

>>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.

True.  (Though unlike the UK, we _haven't_ handed it a few million more
people.)  And the US, the UK and Canada, among others, all had MFN
relations with the former governments of Poland, Czechslovakia, and
Romania.  Not to mention Pinochet's Chile, Yugoslavia, and South Africa
(though I presume the last was suspended during the sanctions).  While I
disagree with my government's stance on China's trade status, granting
MFN status (which simply means that any trade concessions given to
another nation must also be given to the MFN) does not imply approval
of its government-- unless you're of the opinion that the UK and Canada
approved of Ceaucescu, Pinochet, and Tito.  Hell, the UK had MFN with
Argentina at the time of the Falklands war, yet we presume that the
two countries did not approve of one another.

>>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.

Good point.  What call did we have to go mucking about in Europe when
our economy was in a shambles and we were being attacked in Hawaii?
Who were we to say that Hitler's government was a bad thing?  After
all, if our system worked so well we wouldn't be in a depression,
would we?  We should simply have addressed our own problems and
left Europe to its own.

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

>For you.

And for you.  I don't think you would be posting from a .uk address
if the US had remained isolationist and neutralist this century.

Mike
-- 
Michael S. Schiffer, LHN, FCS	"Never let your sense of morality prevent
mss2@midway.uchicago.edu	 you from doing what's right!"
mike.schiffer@um.cc.umich.edu	 --Mayor Salvor Hardin of Terminus
mss2@usite-next.uchicago.edu     Isaac Asimov, _Foundation_