Excerpts from a very interesting op-ed by David Brooks in the New York Times:
In the wider public conversation, it was sometimes assumed that nations all around the world would admire the success of the Western democracies and seek to imitate us. It was sometimes assumed that as people “modernized” they would become more bourgeois, consumerist, peaceful — just like us. It was sometimes assumed that as societies modernized, they’d become more secular, just as in Europe and parts of the United States. They’d be more driven by the desire to make money than to conquer others. They’d be more driven by the desire to settle down into suburban homes than by the fanatical ideologies or the sort of hunger for prestige and conquest that had doomed humanity to centuries of war.This was an optimistic vision of how history would evolve, a vision of progress and convergence. Unfortunately, this vision does not describe the world we live in today. The world is not converging anymore; it’s diverging...Looking back, we probably put too much emphasis on the power of material forces like economics and technology to drive human events and bring us all together... The fact is that human behavior is often driven by forces much deeper than economic and political self-interest, at least as Western rationalists typically understand these things...First, human beings are powerfully driven by what are known as the thymotic desires. These are the needs to be seen, respected, appreciated. If you give people the impression that they are unseen, disrespected and unappreciated, they will become enraged, resentful and vengeful. They will perceive diminishment as injustice and respond with aggressive indignation.Global politics over the past few decades functioned as a massive social inequality machine. In country after country, groups of highly educated urban elites have arisen to dominate media, universities, culture and often political power. Great swaths of people feel looked down upon and ignored. In country after country, populist leaders have arisen to exploit these resentments: Donald Trump in the U.S., Narendra Modi in India, Marine Le Pen in France.Second, most people have a strong loyalty to their place and to their nation. But over the past few decades many people have felt that their places have been left behind and their national honor has been threatened. In the heyday of globalization, multilateral organizations and global corporations seemed to be eclipsing nation-states.In country after country, highly nationalistic movements have arisen to insist on national sovereignty and to restore national pride: Modi in India, Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey, Trump in the United States, Boris Johnson in Britain. To hell with cosmopolitanism and global convergence, they say. We’re going to make our own country great again in our own way. Many globalists completely underestimated the power of nationalism to drive history...The problem is that Western values are not the world’s values. In fact, we in the West are complete cultural outliers.
Way more at the link, from which I've already excerpted too much.
"peaceful — just like us"
ReplyDeleteWell... So peaceful, indeed : wars in North Korea, Vietnam, Bay of Pigs, Grenada, Panama, Persian Gulf, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Afghanistan, Iraq 2X, Northwest Pakistan, Somalia and Northeastern Kenya, Operation Ocean Shield (Indian Ocean), Libya, Syria, Yemeni…
and all those that have been unofficially supported (Iran, Ukraine...). And Guantanamo and Abu Grahib, etc., etc.
When I read this article, I wonder where this journalist thinks he lives? In the land of fairies and unicorns?
The United States has been one of the most war-prone countries in its short history.
My reading of the piece is that "peaceful - just like us" is not the journalist's viewpoint. It's a historic viewpoint that he is mocking because it does not represent the world we live in.
Delete