http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/04/opinion/04thu1.html
Gloom But Not Doom
NYTimes unsigned Editorial
Published: December 3, 2008
-----
My Commment: #49.
December 04, 2008 9:52 am
Link
December 4, 2008 1:30 am
"Dreaded multipolarity?" The New York Times "dreads" many and diverse faces and voices at the table of the 21st century?
The writer(s) of this editorial confound cause with consequence (example coercive power, greedy consumption, unrelenting meddling can ignite pathological retaliation) and the writers fail to recognize that US supremacist unipolarity and exceptionalism are the root cause of much dissent and suffering across geopolitical regions and within sovereign nation-states.
The NYTimes editorial concludes:
Their (NIC) report on the concept states that “leadership is not an entitlement; it has to be earned and sustained. Leadership that serves common goals is the best way to inspire the many different peoples of the world to make shared commitments.” That is a good place to start.
But this conclusion reiterates what has gone before, instead of repudiating U.S. exceptionalism. The US continues to see itself as a pre-emptive leader instead of engaging in empathic consensus for the Greater Collective Good. Does the rest of the world need to be "inspired" by the U.S. sitting at the head of the table, or can we project the possibility that even the least of individuals, groups and nation-states can get their fair share when they come/are allowed at the table?
In fact, the beginning of the end of the "dreaded" unipolarity of US exceptionalism is cause for cautious celebration and audacious hope.
Are we there there yet?
Chithra KarunaKaran
http://www.EthicalDemocracy.blogspot.com
Ethical Democracy as Lived Practice
Showing posts with label U.S. exceptionalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label U.S. exceptionalism. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Monday, November 10, 2008
Covert Aggression Under the Guise of Counterterrorism
Today, the NYTimes reported that a 2004 secret order had been issued authorizing U.S. attacks on suspected "terrorists" in 20 sovereign nation-states.
The New York Times published my comment on this report:
NYTimes blog
The U.S. has a right to defend its own territory against attacks.
But wait. What gives the U.S. the right to carry out attacks (which frequently end in the death of innocent civilians), into sovereign states that are themselves trying to curb extremist elements within their own borders?
Is this "secret order" an act consistent with ethical democracy or are these actions illegal, arrogant, futile, counter-productive and likely to unleash a backlash?
The perilous Cheney-Bush Ideology of Exceptionalism (" we are so special, there's nobody in the entire world quite like us so we can do whatever we want, invade, occupy, kill, threaten, impose sanctions, etc. etc."), has led the U.S. headlong into a dangerous and futile engagement OUTSIDE its own territory and WITHIN the territory of sovereign states.
This covert aggression has clearly inflamed civilian sentiment especially when local residents lose a family member who is not involved in any extremist activity.
Don't we by now know about the failures of U.S. "intelligence"? This lose-lose strategy will hopefully be halted, beginning in January 2009. Otherwise it will signal a continuation of the same failed policy of the Cheney-Bush regime.
Regime change, Bush-Cheney to Obama-Biden, cannot afford to be merely symbolic.
Chithra KarunaKaran
— EthicalDemocracy, http://www.EthicalDemocracy.blogspot.com
The New York Times published my comment on this report:
NYTimes blog
The U.S. has a right to defend its own territory against attacks.
But wait. What gives the U.S. the right to carry out attacks (which frequently end in the death of innocent civilians), into sovereign states that are themselves trying to curb extremist elements within their own borders?
Is this "secret order" an act consistent with ethical democracy or are these actions illegal, arrogant, futile, counter-productive and likely to unleash a backlash?
The perilous Cheney-Bush Ideology of Exceptionalism (" we are so special, there's nobody in the entire world quite like us so we can do whatever we want, invade, occupy, kill, threaten, impose sanctions, etc. etc."), has led the U.S. headlong into a dangerous and futile engagement OUTSIDE its own territory and WITHIN the territory of sovereign states.
This covert aggression has clearly inflamed civilian sentiment especially when local residents lose a family member who is not involved in any extremist activity.
Don't we by now know about the failures of U.S. "intelligence"? This lose-lose strategy will hopefully be halted, beginning in January 2009. Otherwise it will signal a continuation of the same failed policy of the Cheney-Bush regime.
Regime change, Bush-Cheney to Obama-Biden, cannot afford to be merely symbolic.
Chithra KarunaKaran
— EthicalDemocracy, http://www.EthicalDemocracy.blogspot.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)