Our interventionist policy and its effect on how others perceive us
In a recent post on September 11th, I criticized our interventionist foreign policy. My main criticism has always been that we waste far too much money on aspects of this, such as defending rich countries.
There's an interesting article in today's Wall Street Journal. It's an opinion piece by James McGregor. In it he talks about how the Chinese government-run media paints the US as engaging in "a cynical plot to destabilize the country (China)." He says this is effective, noting that 59% of Chinese city-dwellers believe the US seeks to contain China.
Now I was not able to see McGregor's face when he wrote that, but I have to assume he was serious. But this is utterly stupid. Of course it is US policy to contain China. That's why we were flying our spy plane near Hainan Island, and why we support Taiwan, and why we maintain substantial forces in South Korea and Japan. I'm wondering what the other 41% of Chinese city-dwellers are smoking.
McGregor's comment demonstrates the tremendous lack of self-awareness among US policymakers who simply cannot see what they are doing and how it is perceived by others.
Earlier in the article he mentions the US criticism of China's growing military spending, while acknowledging that US military spending is dramatically larger, accounting for roughly 50% of all military spending in the world. Our policymakers cannot see that a huge military spender appears hypocritical when it suggests another country is spending too much.
The result of our behavior is a worldwide perception of us as boorish bullies - the Ugly American. As a nation we're so self-righteous that we just can't see this. Teddy Roosevelt suggested we speak softly and carry a big stick. We've got the second part down, but as for the first part, we're not even close.
This reminds me of a joke. Foreigners love this joke. Most Americans don't get it.
What do you call someone who speaks two languages?
Bilingual.
What do you call someone who speaks only one language?
American.
As long as I'm a candidate, I should use this opportunity to brag about something. I'm illiterate in four languages - referring to cultural literacy since I'm pretty boorish myself. But seriously, I speak four languages (Japanese, Spanish, French (un peu) and English).
Now, put together McNulty, Sweeney, Gillibrand, and while you're at it, throw in Hillary, Schumer and George W. Bush. Between the six of them I wouldn't be surprised if none of them speaks another language, but maybe together they get to two or three.
I know, I know, Bush supposedly speaks Spanish. But he ain't too good at English. :-)
There's an interesting article in today's Wall Street Journal. It's an opinion piece by James McGregor. In it he talks about how the Chinese government-run media paints the US as engaging in "a cynical plot to destabilize the country (China)." He says this is effective, noting that 59% of Chinese city-dwellers believe the US seeks to contain China.
Now I was not able to see McGregor's face when he wrote that, but I have to assume he was serious. But this is utterly stupid. Of course it is US policy to contain China. That's why we were flying our spy plane near Hainan Island, and why we support Taiwan, and why we maintain substantial forces in South Korea and Japan. I'm wondering what the other 41% of Chinese city-dwellers are smoking.
McGregor's comment demonstrates the tremendous lack of self-awareness among US policymakers who simply cannot see what they are doing and how it is perceived by others.
Earlier in the article he mentions the US criticism of China's growing military spending, while acknowledging that US military spending is dramatically larger, accounting for roughly 50% of all military spending in the world. Our policymakers cannot see that a huge military spender appears hypocritical when it suggests another country is spending too much.
The result of our behavior is a worldwide perception of us as boorish bullies - the Ugly American. As a nation we're so self-righteous that we just can't see this. Teddy Roosevelt suggested we speak softly and carry a big stick. We've got the second part down, but as for the first part, we're not even close.
This reminds me of a joke. Foreigners love this joke. Most Americans don't get it.
What do you call someone who speaks two languages?
Bilingual.
What do you call someone who speaks only one language?
American.
As long as I'm a candidate, I should use this opportunity to brag about something. I'm illiterate in four languages - referring to cultural literacy since I'm pretty boorish myself. But seriously, I speak four languages (Japanese, Spanish, French (un peu) and English).
Now, put together McNulty, Sweeney, Gillibrand, and while you're at it, throw in Hillary, Schumer and George W. Bush. Between the six of them I wouldn't be surprised if none of them speaks another language, but maybe together they get to two or three.
I know, I know, Bush supposedly speaks Spanish. But he ain't too good at English. :-)
posted by Albany Lawyer at 11:12 PM
2 Comments:
While you may be able to speak 4 languages you do not know the proper use of between and among. This article makes reference to a number of people who you doubt are bilingual. To quote, "between the 6 of them" from where I sit, among the 6 of them is the appropriate usage. I know, picky picky
I said I'm illiterate in four languages. :-)
Post a Comment
<< Home