America: The World's Bad Cop
"But every country has corruption"
"...and China has worser violation of human rights!"
What is it that makes America so much, worthier, of criticism, now, then any other country? It is a combination of American ideals, history, their power, and how they have placed themselves on the world's stage.
America has set themselves up, as the world's police. This is problematic in itself, because it's undemocratic, for anyone to impose governance upon those who did not elect them. I believing that order is important in the world, understand however, the necessity of this, as an alternative to absolute chaos, when there are not yet other alternatives. I speak especially from the perspective of a third-generation Hong Konger who left before 1997; while I believe that it wasn't right that Hong Kong don't have a choice over its government, wasn't right that it was previously ruled by a faraway foreign entity motivated by their interests (of course, now that HK is governed by the resentful Main Land government, there is arguably more regression), I do agree that in the latter decades at least, those British Overlords sure did a good job compare to what Mao did to Mainland, and therefore I hadn't want them to get hit by any doors on their way out and I'm not alone in that opinion. Afterall, a majority of people in Hong Kong, descended from people who have chose to flee into the British Colony away from the mess in Mainland. Hong Kong was originally only a small fishing village and then Britain's seaport.
So now that we have established, that America is the world's police, what now? Those that police, those that judge, are not only not above the law (at least they shouldn't), but must be held to a higher standard too. Instability does result from a practice of 'do as a I say and not as I do', no matter how good you are at propaganda, paper can't contain fire and sooner or later, that resentment will hurt you. Though America has set itself up as the democratic model of the world, America itself is not just, is not fair. Everyone nowadays have free speech, can vote, but due to corruption and apathy not everyone does, and with the blackbox voting machines, democracy is not enforced. With no public funding for candidates, only those who are rich can get in. Bill Clinton was lauded as an exemption to the 'rule of the nobles', but while he had started out poor, he was rich by the time he ran for presidency. The American government is irresponsible, they have forgotten or chose to ignore, that the overall freedom of all its citizens matters more than the freedom of the few to oppress the rest (thus, back to yee old monarchy)! They are failing at logic, at judgment, when they link 'absolute free market' with democracy at an era when money has replaced arms as power.
Those that assume power over others that they deem require governing, must also, assume responsibility. Even dictators have a responsibility to ensure some measure of stability or quality of life for the subjects or they risk being overthrown, since the masses outnumber them. The United States, assumed power over countless foreign entities through means of economies, holding in American hands, the power to bankrupt and ruin an entire town through the closing of a factory. This is not democratic, it is not just, and it is tragic when this power is ill use, when all responsibility is pretense, when their corporations advertise their kindness in providing for those they have at their mercy, and then, leave them all hanging when kindness is no longer profitable. The people, everywhere and Those Others within America, are rightly resentful.
If America truly wanted to be the provider of stability, are truly willing to work for respect instead of coercing it at gunpoint and economical tyranny, they must be willing to humble themselves to the needs and wills of the people they seek to help. Even those who are currently not in a position to govern themselves fully deserves to be considered, especially if you want to help their way onto democracy after all, even rulers in times past have to keep wind of public opinion least they cross that final line. To police, to govern, requires a long-term commitment that is much more extensive than simply moving in with the tanks, you must put in place people who know their language, people who will live there, people who can walk among their people. The last British governor of Hong Kong, Governor Chris Patten, was immensely popular and respected even after the 1997 takeover, because he committed himself to learning about the colony, to walking with the people on the street in his spare time instead of vacationing 'back home from the savages', to express that he's pleased that he could raise his daughter in such a city.
Which brings us to, capability, and again, democracy. Nobody should be the world police. Maybe, one day, America or some other country would surprise us all and be good at it, but logically, it is first, impossible. The world is too vast, and even America, with all its resources, could not do it properly, could not possibility know the situations enough and follow it through. The American focus on quantity democracy set-up have resulted in a long string of failures, of ruinations...that are of course aided by the fact that the People In Charge didn't really want democracy a lot of the time to begin with, as they had just wanted either oil, or access to the financial market.
...and what if you could police the world? Why should you have the right to, unless the world elected you? So the British overtaxed their tea to America, but the British still provided stability, protection, connection. That wasn't enough for the Americans, because they wanted, they needed, self-determination, enough that, they fought for it themselves. It was a bloody war, but they were bloody proud if it, they can stand up and say afterwards, that what they have, they fought for themselves, it's their, free of foreign agendas.
Shouldn't the rest of the world have that right too? I do believe in militarily intervention in the case of genocide, I do believe in providing aid, but all who do, must do so carefully, that they do not cause a bigger mess, "first, do no harm", and certainly, before moving to aid others, one must ensure that one's self is healthy, as America is not right now. Fix your damned electoral system, 'clean house'(political/corporate/legal system corruption), your overall infrastructure (remember New Orleans?), do something about your healthcare, your educational system, access, and then you can try governing people that needs a hand.
"...and China has worser violation of human rights!"
What is it that makes America so much, worthier, of criticism, now, then any other country? It is a combination of American ideals, history, their power, and how they have placed themselves on the world's stage.
America has set themselves up, as the world's police. This is problematic in itself, because it's undemocratic, for anyone to impose governance upon those who did not elect them. I believing that order is important in the world, understand however, the necessity of this, as an alternative to absolute chaos, when there are not yet other alternatives. I speak especially from the perspective of a third-generation Hong Konger who left before 1997; while I believe that it wasn't right that Hong Kong don't have a choice over its government, wasn't right that it was previously ruled by a faraway foreign entity motivated by their interests (of course, now that HK is governed by the resentful Main Land government, there is arguably more regression), I do agree that in the latter decades at least, those British Overlords sure did a good job compare to what Mao did to Mainland, and therefore I hadn't want them to get hit by any doors on their way out and I'm not alone in that opinion. Afterall, a majority of people in Hong Kong, descended from people who have chose to flee into the British Colony away from the mess in Mainland. Hong Kong was originally only a small fishing village and then Britain's seaport.
So now that we have established, that America is the world's police, what now? Those that police, those that judge, are not only not above the law (at least they shouldn't), but must be held to a higher standard too. Instability does result from a practice of 'do as a I say and not as I do', no matter how good you are at propaganda, paper can't contain fire and sooner or later, that resentment will hurt you. Though America has set itself up as the democratic model of the world, America itself is not just, is not fair. Everyone nowadays have free speech, can vote, but due to corruption and apathy not everyone does, and with the blackbox voting machines, democracy is not enforced. With no public funding for candidates, only those who are rich can get in. Bill Clinton was lauded as an exemption to the 'rule of the nobles', but while he had started out poor, he was rich by the time he ran for presidency. The American government is irresponsible, they have forgotten or chose to ignore, that the overall freedom of all its citizens matters more than the freedom of the few to oppress the rest (thus, back to yee old monarchy)! They are failing at logic, at judgment, when they link 'absolute free market' with democracy at an era when money has replaced arms as power.
Those that assume power over others that they deem require governing, must also, assume responsibility. Even dictators have a responsibility to ensure some measure of stability or quality of life for the subjects or they risk being overthrown, since the masses outnumber them. The United States, assumed power over countless foreign entities through means of economies, holding in American hands, the power to bankrupt and ruin an entire town through the closing of a factory. This is not democratic, it is not just, and it is tragic when this power is ill use, when all responsibility is pretense, when their corporations advertise their kindness in providing for those they have at their mercy, and then, leave them all hanging when kindness is no longer profitable. The people, everywhere and Those Others within America, are rightly resentful.
If America truly wanted to be the provider of stability, are truly willing to work for respect instead of coercing it at gunpoint and economical tyranny, they must be willing to humble themselves to the needs and wills of the people they seek to help. Even those who are currently not in a position to govern themselves fully deserves to be considered, especially if you want to help their way onto democracy after all, even rulers in times past have to keep wind of public opinion least they cross that final line. To police, to govern, requires a long-term commitment that is much more extensive than simply moving in with the tanks, you must put in place people who know their language, people who will live there, people who can walk among their people. The last British governor of Hong Kong, Governor Chris Patten, was immensely popular and respected even after the 1997 takeover, because he committed himself to learning about the colony, to walking with the people on the street in his spare time instead of vacationing 'back home from the savages', to express that he's pleased that he could raise his daughter in such a city.
Which brings us to, capability, and again, democracy. Nobody should be the world police. Maybe, one day, America or some other country would surprise us all and be good at it, but logically, it is first, impossible. The world is too vast, and even America, with all its resources, could not do it properly, could not possibility know the situations enough and follow it through. The American focus on quantity democracy set-up have resulted in a long string of failures, of ruinations...that are of course aided by the fact that the People In Charge didn't really want democracy a lot of the time to begin with, as they had just wanted either oil, or access to the financial market.
...and what if you could police the world? Why should you have the right to, unless the world elected you? So the British overtaxed their tea to America, but the British still provided stability, protection, connection. That wasn't enough for the Americans, because they wanted, they needed, self-determination, enough that, they fought for it themselves. It was a bloody war, but they were bloody proud if it, they can stand up and say afterwards, that what they have, they fought for themselves, it's their, free of foreign agendas.
Shouldn't the rest of the world have that right too? I do believe in militarily intervention in the case of genocide, I do believe in providing aid, but all who do, must do so carefully, that they do not cause a bigger mess, "first, do no harm", and certainly, before moving to aid others, one must ensure that one's self is healthy, as America is not right now. Fix your damned electoral system, 'clean house'(political/corporate/legal system corruption), your overall infrastructure (remember New Orleans?), do something about your healthcare, your educational system, access, and then you can try governing people that needs a hand.