What's new

Why and how the US must confront Burma's Rohingya genocide

Your country really need to go miles to be humanitarian like the western countries. Try to accept the bitter truth.

Is that why a Bangladeshi blew himself up in New York last week, and another Bangladeshi tried to murder the British Prime Minister before that?

It seems you guys have a love/hate relationship with the West.

But if you ask Donald Trump very nicely he might help you out, just pretend not to be a Muslim.
 
. .
Since when the Chinese get the authority? I really like to know.

Hey man, you are the one who wants to worship the West, the problem is that if you beg in front of Donald Trump and tell him you are a Bangladeshi Muslim, he is more likely to have you shot then to help you out. Especially after what happened in New York last week.

Because clearly America is well known across the world for loving Muslims, having killed over 1 million in the Iraq War alone. Not even mentioning the countless other invasions of the Middle East in the same decade.
 
.
Hey man, you are the one who wants to worship the West, the problem is that if you beg in front of Donald Trump and tell him you are a Bangladeshi Muslim, he is more likely to have you shot then to help you out. Especially after what happened in New York last week..
@Chinese-Dragon
Again, this tone and style is very close to a feudal lord and his slave. Try to mind your language, because bangladeshi Muslims are not your vessel that you can talk to them in such rude way if their opinion go against you.
Because clearly America is well known across the world for loving Muslims, having killed over 1 million in the Iraq War alone. Not even mentioning the countless other invasions of the Middle East in the same decade.
And what China is doing to uighur Muslims? I was just talking about the world politics . If China was in the place of USA, they would do the worse and their current love to miyanmer proved a lot.

Atleast westerns are not trying to lebel rohingyas as terrorist and miyanmer army as angels who are fighting in order to save themselves.
In the end there is no alternative way for muslim countries to gain better military power, because at the end of the day, all so called allies will act selfishly for their own interest.
And also don't forget the one time eternal love between Pakistan and United States and with Saudi Arabia. Now the relationship is fading.

In the world politics no eternal friendship exist. Life is very harsh and unfair.
 
Last edited:
.
India agrees with you, why don't you team up with them and fight against China? For example, by backstabbing China on Sonadia port? :P

So, China didn't support Bangladesh because of some port? Sounds really weird.

A project may not happen for a multitude of reasons. And in this case, it was political. If you want it badly, you should focus on the Indians instead of focusing on the Americans. Seriously, don't underestimate them (Indian).

I doubt if China would've done so had it happened given their depth of interests in Myanmar and fact the China's south western provinces need investment. It can certainly help the poorer parts of central China.

Is that why a Bangladeshi blew himself up in New York last week, and another Bangladeshi tried to murder the British Prime Minister before that?

It seems you guys have a love/hate relationship with the West.

But if you ask Donald Trump very nicely he might help you out, just pretend not to be a Muslim.

Bangladesh does not carry out any anti-American activities because we are not deeply impacted by their policies and military adventures.

You wanna talk about a love-hate relationship? Talk to the Pakistani and Middle Easterners because they are the ones who are deeply impacted.

Hey man, you are the one who wants to worship the West, the problem is that if you beg in front of Donald Trump and tell him you are a Bangladeshi Muslim, he is more likely to have you shot then to help you out. Especially after what happened in New York last week.

Because clearly America is well known across the world for loving Muslims, having killed over 1 million in the Iraq War alone. Not even mentioning the countless other invasions of the Middle East in the same decade.

How about the fact that all permanent members of the UNSC are a bunch of primitive assholes? Would that make it easier for you to understand the point sir?

The first Gulf War should have been finished right back then. Why did they leave it unfinished, I do not know. Saddam was a jerk.

Case in point is Afghanistan, America's longest running war. A war that goes on for long is a futile one. The War on Terror has shown that there is no fame, no glory. Only death. The mistake they made was that they opted for deadly military force against the ones they perceived masterminded 9/11. That was like pouring fuel over fire. Then, came Iraq, Daesh, and brought us here. Are we a truly more secured world than let's say the 90's? The answer is no.

While the Americans were struggling to satisfy their hunger for vengeance, China was able to successfully build up itself, its relations, strategy among others that make a nation truly powerful with America being a mere shadow here in Asia. When future generations of Americans look back in history, they regret it.

Not everything opts for a military solution (apart from certain exceptions of-course). There's a wisdom why the police and the military are separate. The police protects the citizen of the nation, while the military fights and destroys the nation's enemies. When we put those together, the enemies become the people. Terrorism is largely a social problem and doesn't always have to opt for a military solution. It just makes things worse.

The young men who flew those planes into the WTC towers were not military men flying bombers serving some powerful nation. They were not part of the Afghan military. They were civilians from different nationalities who were frustrated, and the urge for power to stop Israel (in their view) from slaughtering Palestinians. The Israeli Palestinian conflict started when an Israeli military jeep rammed into a group of Arab civilians (an accident of-course). The Arabs started protesting, and the Israeli soldiers started shooting and the cycle continues and brought us here.

Here, meaning Muslims vs. non-Muslims. Us vs. them mentality. I think it is safe to say that Muslims aren't worthy of human goodwill in light of 9/11 be they wherever they are. The events in Rakhine along with the lack of strategic will (including from the US and its allies) is a testament to that reality. Certainly, their military regime had successfully exploited the situation to keep their population compliant.

See how a simple car accident can have so much impact all over? Only if the Americans were being more calculative. Like I said, they will regret it in the future. Luckily for them, they are a Democracy, multi-cultural that invites different lines of thought which leads to creativity, new technology and most importantly, their citizens have rights.

I don't think China does too well in that regard (rights). Makes one wonder what a world lead by China would look like if that is the case. Not too great seeing from this point of view. Asia certainly isn't Europe as seen in the Balkan Wars.

And lastly sir, we are not your errand boys. Keep that in mind.

Wishing you and your family a very happy prosperous new year.
 
.
I don't think China does too well in that regard (rights). Makes one wonder what a world lead by China would look like if that is the case.

You don't need to worry about that, China will never be the "world leader". It is against our core principles, one of which is to "Never seek hegemony". And the Chinese people will never tolerate our tax money being spent on wars halfway across the world, in Nicurargua or Mexico or anything like that. The Chinese government exists to further the interests of the 1.3 billion Chinese citizens, not Nicuraguans and not Mexicans.

Americans were being more calculative. Like I said, they will regret it in the future. Luckily for them, they are a Democracy, multi-cultural that invites different lines of thought which leads to creativity, new technology and most importantly, their citizens have rights.

Well then you are in luck. Your beloved USA and your beloved Donald Trump is still the "world leader" (despite their recent moves to pull out of the United Nations over the Jerusalem vote).

You can petition them for help anytime you want, and I'm sure they will give out plenty of verbal platitudes and token sanctions, but nothing that will change anything on the ground in Myanmar. After all, Suu Kyi's "democratic regime" was installed by America in the first place. And they both share a strong distaste for the Muslim world in general.
 
.
Iam very serious, but if you want their help, you need to show them that you have oil...
Fake it!!! Show them false data, they will surely help you!!!:enjoy:
 
.
Bangladesh' diplomatic way of confronting Myanmar - Import rice from Myanmar and asks the world to put sanctions on them :enjoy:
 
.
You don't need to worry about that, China will never be the "world leader". It is against our core principles, one of which is to "Never seek hegemony". And the Chinese people will never tolerate our tax money being spent on wars halfway across the world, in Nicurargua or Mexico or anything like that. The Chinese government exists to further the interests of the 1.3 billion Chinese citizens, not Nicuraguans and not Mexicans.



Well then you are in luck. Your beloved USA and your beloved Donald Trump is still the "world leader" (despite their recent moves to pull out of the United Nations over the Jerusalem vote).

You can petition them for help anytime you want, and I'm sure they will give out plenty of verbal platitudes and token sanctions, but nothing that will change anything on the ground in Myanmar. After all, Suu Kyi's "democratic regime" was installed by America in the first place. And they both share a strong distaste for the Muslim world in general.

How do you think China will become developed and stay there? It needs resources and allies.
This does not mean that China needs to be like US in invading other countries for their resources but it does mean it needs a multitude of allies around the globe.
Right now China has two and the main reason is that one(Pakistan) is poor and has a need to use China to balance India and the other one(Myanmar) is poor and is a world pariah now.
I for one who has always been supportive of China and am sorry to see China's leaders make such a strategic miscalculation as in supporting a regime that has just practised ethnic cleansing. The world has just tasted a glimpse of what a Chinese lead world will be like and most do not like it at all.
 
.
Your beloved USA and your beloved Donald Trump is still the "world leader" (despite their recent moves to pull out of the United Nations over the Jerusalem vote).

A lot of people in the US (even in the current administration) don't agree with Trump on US foreign policy - even with him being the president. He has been appointed by election, but he is answerable and impeachable to the population.

That is the beauty of a democracy, of which the US is a shining beacon. That is what makes the US an example to the world and the leader of the free world.

Clearly you have not studied US politics enough or visited the US. I await your enlightenment.
 
.
That is what makes the US an example to the world and the leader of the free world.

It's quite incredible that we have so many people singing praises of the USA even though they spent the last few decades waging war and invading Muslim countries (leading to the deaths of over a million innocent Muslims in the Iraq War ALONE), they have been at the forefront of demonizing Muslims in the world media, and their President is an avowed Islamophobe, one of the reasons he was elected into office in the first place.

Yet Bangladeshis here want to pin all their hopes on the USA, that is fantastic. I wish them luck.
 
Last edited:
. .
It's quite incredible that we have so many people singing praises of the USA even though they spent the last few decades waging war and invading Muslim countries (leading to the deaths of over a million innocent Muslims in the Iraq War ALONE), they have been at the forefront of demonizing Muslims in the world media, and their President is an avowed Islamophobe, one of the reasons he was elected into office in the first place.

Yet Bangladeshis here want to pin all their hopes on the USA, that is fantastic. I wish them luck.

Pardon me for saying this - but your skewing of the facts is breathtakingly spectacular.

I cannot fathom whether this is either because you don't know, or you intend to deliberately confuse.

a) I sing praises of the US, UK and European civilization because they have championed human freedom and justice far, far beyond their own borders. The Scandinavian countries particularly so.

b) The idea of them championing human freedom and justice did not simply come from an intent to colonize and exploit third world countries, those are ideas that more or less work. Look at Singapore (granted - with some reservations).

c)The US has publicly been critical of 'militant' Islam, not all Muslims, as expected. Even Trump has carefully tiptoed around calling 'all' Muslims as terrorists. And he is the 'loosest cannon' we have in the US. I am a Muslim. My rights as a Muslim to practice my religion as I deem fit is guaranteed by the US constitution, more than they ever will be in anyplace in China. I know so - I practically grew up here and have lived here most of my adult life.

d) I have been to many places in China on business and a Chinese person like yourself trying to question this anti-terrorism stand from the US and call it 'demonizing Muslims' only means that you have no idea what it means. China has to evolve at least another fifty years to be as civilized (in values of inclusion, civic principles and commonly accepted/subscribed social institutions) as that of the United States. People go back and forth between the US and China all the time and we all know where societal values stand. This is open for all to see. The leaders of China send their kids to be educated in the US, not the other way round. Money by itself is no guarantor of civil values, it takes a couple of generations with money to learn civil behavior and principles.

e) At this juncture of history - the Chinese govt. cannot claim to champion rights of Muslims across the world. It is engaged in petty opportunism, as we saw in the sad Rohingya episode a few months back, just like Russia and India. That is not the mark of the world's leading civilization. I am fairly certain you are not claiming China to be such. An opportunist govt. cannot be the thought leader of the free world. It takes a far bigger posture principle-wise to stand for what is RIGHT, not where one's petty business interests lie.
 
Last edited:
.
Pardon me for saying this - but your skewing of the facts is breathtakingly spectacular.

I cannot fathom whether this is either because you don't know, or you intend to deliberately confuse.

a) I sing praises of the US, UK and European civilization because they have championed human freedom and justice far, far beyond their own borders. The Scandinavian countries particularly so.

b) The idea of them championing human freedom and justice did not simply come from an intent to colonize and exploit third world countries, those are ideas that more or less work. Look at Singapore (granted - with some reservations).

c)The US has publicly been critical of 'militant' Islam, not all Muslims, as expected. Even Trump has carefully tiptoed around calling 'all' Muslims as terrorists. And he is the 'loosest cannon' we have in the US. I am a Muslim. My rights as a Muslim to practice my religion as I deem fit is guaranteed by the US constitution, more than they ever will be in anyplace in China. I know so - I practically grew up here and have lived here most of my adult life.

d) I have been to many places in China on business and a Chinese person like yourself trying to doubt this anti-terrorism stand from the US as and call it into question as 'demonizing Muslims' only means that you have no idea. China has to evolve at least another fifty years to be as civilized (in values of inclusion, civic principles and commonly accepted/subscribed social institutions) as that of the United States. People go back and forth between the US and China all the time and we all know where societal values stand. This is open for all to see. The leaders of China send their kids to be educated in the US, not the other way round.

e) At this juncture of history - the Chinese govt. cannot claim to champion rights of Muslims across the world. It is engaged in petty opportunism, as we saw in the sad Rohingya episode a few months back, just like Russia and India. That is not the mark of the world's leading civilization. I am fairly certain you are not claiming China to be such. An opportunist govt. cannot be the thought leader of the free world. It takes a far bigger stand principle wise to stand for what is RIGHT, not where one's petty business interests lie.
Very good explanation brother ! Now let's see what Chinese fellows react on this !
 
Last edited:
.
Pardon me for saying this - but your skewing of the facts is breathtakingly spectacular.

I cannot fathom whether this is either because you don't know, or you intend to deliberately confuse.

a) I sing praises of the US, UK and European civilization because they have championed human freedom and justice far, far beyond their own borders. The Scandinavian countries particularly so.

b) The idea of them championing human freedom and justice did not simply come from an intent to colonize and exploit third world countries, those are ideas that more or less work. Look at Singapore (granted - with some reservations).

c)The US has publicly been critical of 'militant' Islam, not all Muslims, as expected. Even Trump has carefully tiptoed around calling 'all' Muslims as terrorists. And he is the 'loosest cannon' we have in the US. I am a Muslim. My rights as a Muslim to practice my religion as I deem fit is guaranteed by the US constitution, more than they ever will be in anyplace in China. I know so - I practically grew up here and have lived here most of my adult life.

d) I have been to many places in China on business and a Chinese person like yourself trying to doubt this anti-terrorism stand from the US as and call it into question as 'demonizing Muslims' only means that you have no idea. China has to evolve at least another fifty years to be as civilized (in values of inclusion, civic principles and commonly accepted/subscribed social institutions) as that of the United States. People go back and forth between the US and China all the time and we all know where societal values stand. This is open for all to see. The leaders of China send their kids to be educated in the US, not the other way round.

e) At this juncture of history - the Chinese govt. cannot claim to champion rights of Muslims across the world. It is engaged in petty opportunism, as we saw in the sad Rohingya episode a few months back, just like Russia and India. That is not the mark of the world's leading civilization. I am fairly certain you are not claiming China to be such. An opportunist govt. cannot be the thought leader of the free world. It takes a far bigger stand principle wise to stand for what is RIGHT, not where one's petty business interests lie.



China has to evolve at least another fifty years to be as civilized (in values of inclusion, civic principles and commonly accepted/subscribed social institutions



Yeah...


Not just fifty years, more like 100- 200 years. Seems like after 20 years of bombing on Muslim' heads worldwide, your beloved US empire gonna collapsed soon.

Losing to China is hardly the worst thing that could happen to us. Losing ourselves is.

James Traub is a contributing editor at Foreign Policy, a fellow at the Center on International Cooperation, and author of the book "John Quincy Adams: Militant Spirit."

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/a-ty...illed-after-gunman-shoots-at-officers.536469/

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/u-s-falling-apart-like-soviet-union-collapse-ron-paul-says.536212/

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/us-police-kill-a-man-on-his-knees-begging-not-to-be-shot.532700/

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/utah...showing-kids-classical-nude-paintings.536295/

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/trumps-foreign-policy-and-the-american-empire-in-decline.535712/

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/gunman-kills-two-at-houston-garage-takes-his-own-life.536206/


https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/multiple-people-shot-in-southern-california-2-dead.536204/

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/las-...cared-58-people-more-than-500-injured.521089/

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-us-has-reached-the-last-stage-before-collapse.535443/



The US has reached the last stage before collapse


Joe Skipper/Reuters

  • In this op-ed, James Traub argues that America has become “decadent and depraved.”
  • He explains what decadence means, and how it's tied to corruption.
  • “Decadence is usually understood as an irreversible condition — the last stage before collapse,” he writes.


In The History of the Decline and Fall of The Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon luridly evokes the Rome of 408 A.D., when the armies of the Goths prepared to descend upon the city.

The marks of imperial decadence appeared not only in grotesque displays of public opulence and waste, but also in the collapse of faith in reason and science.

The people of Rome, Gibbon writes, fell prey to “a puerile superstition” promoted by astrologers and to soothsayers who claimed “to read in the entrails of victims the signs of future greatness and prosperity.”

Would a latter-day Gibbon describe today’s America as “decadent”? I recently heard a prominent, and pro-American, French thinker (who was speaking off the record) say just that.

He was moved to use the word after watching endless news accounts of U.S. President Donald Trump’s tweets alternate with endless revelations of sexual harassment.

I flinched, perhaps because a Frenchman accusing Americans of decadence seems contrary to the order of nature. And the reaction to Harvey Weinstein et al. is scarcely a sign of hysterical puritanism, as I suppose he was implying.

And yet, the shoe fit. The sensation of creeping rot evoked by that word seems terribly apt.

Perhaps in a democracy the distinctive feature of decadence is not debauchery but terminal self-absorption— the loss of the capacity for collective action, the belief in common purpose, even the acceptance of a common form of reasoning.

We listen to necromancers who prophesy great things while they lead us into disaster. We sneer at the idea of a “public” and hold our fellow citizens in contempt. We think anyone who doesn’t pursue self-interest is a fool.

We cannot blame everything on Donald Trump, much though we might want to. In the decadent stage of the Roman Empire, or of Louis XVI’s France, or the dying days of the Habsburg Empire so brilliantly captured in Robert Musil’s The Man Without Qualities, decadence seeped downward from the rulers to the ruled.

But in a democracy, the process operates reciprocally.

A decadent elite licenses degraded behavior, and a debased public chooses its worst leaders. Then our Nero panders to our worst attributes — and we reward him for doing so.
“Decadence,” in short, describes a cultural, moral, and spiritual disorder — the Donald Trump in us. It is the right, of course, that first introduced the language of civilizational decay to American political discourse. A quarter of a century ago, Patrick Buchanan bellowed at the Republican National Convention that the two parties were fighting “a religious war … for the soul of America.”
Former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) accused the Democrats of practicing “multicultural nihilistic hedonism,” of despising the values of ordinary Americans, of corruption, and of illegitimacy. That all-accusing voice became the voice of the Republican Party. Today it is not the nihilistic hedonism of imperial Rome that threatens American civilization but the furies unleashed by Gingrich and his kin.
The 2016 Republican primary was a bidding war in which the relatively calm voices — Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio — dropped out in the early rounds, while the consummately nasty Ted Cruz duked it out with the consummately cynical Donald Trump.
A year’s worth of Trump’s cynicism, selfishness, and rage has only stoked the appetite of his supporters. The nation dodged a bullet last week when a colossal effort pushed Democratic nominee Doug Jones over the top in Alabama’s Senate special election.
Nevertheless, the church-going folk of Alabama were perfectly prepared to choose a racist and a pedophile over a Democrat. Republican nominee Roy Moore almost became a senator by orchestrating a hatred of the other that was practically dehumanizing.


Targeted tax cuts
Second, and no less extraordinary, is the way the tax cuts have been targeted to help Republican voters and hurt Democrats, above all through the abolition or sharp reduction of the deductibility of state and local taxes. I certainly didn’t vote for Ronald Reagan, but I cannot imagine him using tax policy to reward supporters and punish opponents.

He would have thought that grossly unpatriotic. The new tax cuts constitute the economic equivalent of gerrymandering. All parties play that game, it’s true; yet today’s Republicans have carried electoral gerrymandering to such an extreme as to jeopardize the constitutionally protected principle of “one man, one vote.”

Inside much of the party, no stigma attaches to the conscious disenfranchisement of Democratic voters. Democrats are not “us.”

Finally, the tax cut is an exercise in willful blindness. The same no doubt could be said for the 1981 Reagan tax cuts, which predictably led to unprecedented deficits when Republicans as well as Democrats balked at making offsetting budget cuts.

rtr2xase.jpg
The ancient Colosseum is seen during an heavy snowfalls late in the night in Rome February 4, 2012.Gabriele Forzano/Reuters

Yet at the time a whole band of officials in the White House and the Congress clamored, in some cases desperately, for such reductions. They accepted a realm of objective reality that existed separately from their own wishes. But in 2017, when the Congressional Budget Office and other neutral arbiters concluded that the tax cuts would not begin to pay for themselves, the White House and congressional leaders simply dismissed the forecasts as too gloomy.

Here is something genuinely new about our era: We lack not only a sense of shared citizenry or collective good, but even a shared body of fact or a collective mode of reasoning toward the truth.

A thing that we wish to be true is true; if we wish it not to be true, it isn’t. Global warming is a hoax. Barack Obama was born in Africa. Neutral predictions of the effects of tax cuts on the budget must be wrong, because the effects they foresee are bad ones.

It is, of course, our president who finds in smoking entrails the proof of future greatness and prosperity. The reduction of all disagreeable facts and narratives to “fake news” will stand as one of Donald Trump’s most lasting contributions to American culture, far outliving his own tenure.

He has, in effect, pressed gerrymandering into the cognitive realm. Your story fights my story; if I can enlist more people on the side of my story, I own the truth. And yet Trump is as much symptom as cause of our national disorder.

The Washington Post recently reported that officials at the Center for Disease Control were ordered not to use words like “science-based,” apparently now regarded as disablingly left-leaning. But further reporting in the New York Times appears to show that the order came not from White House flunkies but from officials worried that Congress would reject funding proposals marred by the offensive terms.

One of our two national political parties — and its supporters — now regards “science” as a fighting word. Where is our Robert Musil, our pitiless satirist and moralist, when we need him (or her)?

A democratic society becomes decadent when its politics become moraly and intellectually corrupt
A democratic society becomes decadent when its politics, which is to say its fundamental means of adjudication, becomes morally and intellectually corrupt. But the loss of all regard for common ground is hardly limited to the political right, or for that matter to politics.

We need only think of the ever-unfolding narrative of Harvey Weinstein, which has introduced us not only to one monstrous individual but also to a whole world of well-educated, well-paid, highly regarded professionals who made a very comfortable living protecting that monster. “When you quickly settle, there is no need to get into all the facts,” as one of his lawyers delicately advised.

This is, of course, what lawyers do, just as accountants are paid to help companies move their profits into tax-free havens. What is new and distinctive, however, is the lack of apology or embarrassment, the sheer blitheness of the contempt for the public good.

When Teddy Roosevelt called the monopolists of his day “malefactors of great wealth,” the epithet stung — and stuck. Now the bankers and brokers and private equity barons who helped drive the nation’s economy into a ditch in 2008 react with outrage when they’re singled out for blame.

Being a “wealth creator” means never having to say you’re sorry. Enough voters accept this proposition that Donald Trump paid no political price for unapologetic greed.

The worship of the marketplace, and thus the elevation of selfishness to a public virtue, is a doctrine that we associate with the libertarian right. But it has coursed through the culture as a self-justifying ideology for rich people of all political persuasions — perhaps also for people who merely dream of becoming rich.

'The last stage before collapse'
Decadence is usually understood as an irreversible condition — the last stage before collapse.

Decadence is usually understood as an irreversible condition — the last stage before collapse.
The court of Muhammad Shah, last of the Mughals to control the entirety of their empire, lost itself in music and dance while the Persian army rode toward the Red Fort. But as American decadence is distinctive, perhaps America’s fate may be, too.

Even if it is written in the stars that China will supplant the United States as the world’s greatest power, other empires, Britain being the most obvious example and the one democracy among them, have surrendered the role of global hegemon without sliding into terminal decadence.

Can the United States emulate the stoic example of the country it once surpassed? I wonder.

The British have the gift of ironic realism. When the time came to exit the stage, they shuffled off with a slightly embarrassed shrug. That, of course, is not the American way. When the stage manager beckons us into the wings we look for someone to hit — each other, or immigrants or Muslims or any other kind of not-us.

Finding the reality of our situation inadmissible, like the deluded courtiers of the Shah of Iran, we slide into a malignant fantasy.

But precisely because we are a democracy, because the values and the mental habits that define us move upward from the people as well as downward from their leaders, that process need not be inexorable. The prospect of sending Roy Moore to the Senate forced a good many conservative Republicans into what may have been painful acts of self-reflection.

The revelations of widespread sexual abuse offer an opportunity for a cleansing moment of self-recognition — at least if we stop short of the hysterical overreaction that seems to govern almost everything in our lives.

Our political elite will continue to gratify our worst impulses so long as we continue to be governed by them. The only way back is to reclaim the common ground — political, moral, and even cognitive — that Donald Trump has lit on fire.

Losing to China is hardly the worst thing that could happen to us. Losing ourselves is.

James Traub is a contributing editor at Foreign Policy, a fellow at the Center on International Cooperation, and author of the book "John Quincy Adams: Militant Spirit."

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Business Insider.

Read the original article on Foreign Policy. "Real World. Real Time." Follow Foreign Policy on Facebook. Subscribe to Foreign Policy here. Copyright 2017. Follow Foreign Policy on Twitter.

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-r...urce=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer-defense
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom