Posted on 08/06/2005 4:05:06 PM PDT by maui_hawaii
Its late... I will try to get back on soon when my brain is in gear....
What is the root of the “American people”—a people that is in the thicket of globalization, a people that is receiving a great number of new immigrants, and a people that lacks a common culture, common race and common religion? What does it use to pull people together? The American historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. explains this way: the United States needs values such as democracy, freedom and human rights now more than any period in its history to keep the country together. From this perspective, the U.S. foreign policy also has to accordingly reflect these “American ideals,” because after all, diplomacy simply serves domestic politics. Thus, to display more American ideology and “pursuit of democracy” in U.S. foreign policy has meant a more robust display of American hegemony in its diplomacy.
I'm gonna hit it too. g'night.
I think you nailed it right there.
This article is bookmarked. This is facinating.
Have a good night....
I would urge you to read it carefully though...
America HAS won thus far (and won't be losing anytime soon) but careful reading shows that this isn't an endearing letter about how great America is...
The Expansion of Democracy Leads to Escalation of Hegemonic Thinking
"Hegemonic Thinking" isn't an endearing term towards America...not by a mile. Its considered a suspicious word...a word of competition and distrust...
Tribune7 posted a good definition of 'hegemony' in his post #33....
And that its strength was significantly augmented by the use of talent from every area of the globe.
The use os talent was serendiptitous. Seeing as we were a nation founded by immigrants it's like being congratulated on using the natural minerals we found.
And he didn't even mention the Jews from Europe creating the A bomb.
He didn't mention that Marx and Lenin were Jews either (his own country's political system of communism being founded by Jews). It was a nonsequiter and there was no reason to bring in religious politics.
He would be just as critical of China for its racist tendencies I have no doubt.
He DIDN'T mention China's current racist politics towards its own on-Han Chinese. The Chinese were/are indeed xenophobic and clannish.
We sure read this with two very different pair of spectables, didn't we?
Here's another interesting read....try this one out...
I'll have a look. Thanks.
This is not a love letter indeed. He basically wants a few things... one being that America should not try to impose its view of democracy on the world, and that China should resist it however they can.
First he explains the logic of hegemony then he is trying to figure out ways to defend China against "American hegemony"...
He simply put wants to see America's decline and hence the communist dictatorship in China to continue forever....
---
In sum, the American ideology based upon the individual right to freedom constitutes the conceptual foundation for the American hegemonism. Domestic democracy constitutes the institutional foundation for this simplistic value system, while expansion of democracy as a result of the development of social diversity makes this value system more adaptable to a wider area, thus forming a “tyranny of the majority” in concept.... This value system has gradually gone beyond white racism and the Protestant “manifest destiny,” manifesting itself in foreign affairs as a special form of American nationalism, causing the ballooning of hegemonic thinking.... Experience in domestic social development has made the Americans rarely mindful of morality while pursuing their national self interest, and made them full of self-righteous desire for world leadership positions....
Since the Cold War gradually came to a close, people have been expecting the decline of the American hegemonism and the arrival of the age of multipolarity. [define multipolarity]
... The rapid disintegration and disappearance of the Soviet Union has been quite unexpected, and the rise of America’s hegemonic status has also been against people’s wishes.... America’s hegemony will never be an eternal situation, but we have to wait to see when history will show us the rapid decline of the United States....
It is unrealistic for now to drag the U.S. from the position of hegemony and to promote other power centers to a higher level, because it is beyond the ability of any nation or group of nations at the current stage. But the outside world can exert influence upon America’s hegemonic policies and actions, analyze and criticize America’s hegemonic thinking....
The 9/11 attacks have been strong shocks to the American hegemony, yet these shocks have not further divided the American society (the organizer of the attacks were not necessarily pre-disposed to have this goal in mind). On the contrary, the attacks have strengthened America’s domestic cohesiveness, further stimulated America’s conservatism, nationalism and xenophobia, thus in reality leading to the formation of a U.S.-led international anti-terror front, and further consolidated America’s hegemonic status. It is thus clear now that to use terrorist acts to struggle against America’s hegemony can only reach the opposite goal. Meanwhile, it is not cost-effective and worthwhile to get into an arms race and military confrontation with the United States....
To effectively impede America’s hegemonic behaviors, in addition to diplomatic dealings in the international arena, we must more deeply understand the politics, economics, society and culture of the United States, so that we can fully take advantage of those factors within the American society that serve to restrain America’s state hegemonic behaviors...
[HELLO!--this sounds like he said 'in addition to opposing them politically (diplomatically) that they should try to take us from the inside out and show us the 'immorrality of our ways' (see above comment about morality)]
Before the U.S. falls from its hegemonic height, in order to shake its hegemonic thinking, we must eradicate America’s unitary ideology of freedom, change America’s nationalism and conceptual framework, make them believe that there are social systems and life styles in the world that are more admirable than America’s....
We can therefore conclude that only when there are no more boisterous assemblies of immigration and visa applicants in front of various American embassies overseas, and only when an outgoing emigration occurs in the United States, will the American hegemonic mentality be extinguished, will the age of multipolarity arrive....
----
For all of you freepers... multipolarity is a stab at America... read this to explain what multipolarity means...
Also the term "hegemon" is an insult in and of itself....he is undoubtedly arguing that our hegemony, or imposing of our views on others (in particular China) should stop and that China needs to help it stop in one way or another....
"Confusionist" Society bump for later
This is a direct contradiction of most Communist ideology which views imperialistic movements as anti-democratic and the last stage of capitalism. None of that is reflected within this article.
I believe you are misinterpreting the word "hegemon" which is a description of an objective reality rather than a real criticism. It is from the Greek word "to lead" and not perjoritive necessarily. Thus, we are recognized as the leader of the world and attained that role for discrete historical reasons which Wang recognizes and which he does not complain about.
The sense of longing for American freedom overhangs this article like a London fog.
Oh, and this will not turn into a 1000 post thread simply because it is too serious. The only things which get to that stage are Civil War revists, whining about Terri's "murder" and other nonsense. If you get two hundred I will be amazed.
It was Pretorian Guards in Rome. But the reason for his amazement is because the use of descendents of slaves flies in the face of the ideology in which he was educated.
My comment on the Jews from Europe was not meant in a religious sense but only that the European origin he ignored.
He was not speaking about China but my sense was that had he done so he would not be supportive of the current regime. This article is a subtle way of reminding the leadership of its own failings particularly ideological ones.
Occasionally? Heck, I get my fill every day.
I would add the following: This guy is a REALIST (kind of) attempting to determine why China's ideology has failed so miserably in challenging the dominance of the US thus far and how China needs to go about challenging us in the future so that China can be in charge of Asia rather than the US.
On top of being a realist (with which I agree to some extent) he is a forward thinker.
Both the quoted scholar and the author of this fascinating article understand something that most observers do not - that America is a historically revolutionary power, which China only dreams of becoming.
Thanks for the ping - your posts were insightful, imho.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.