LogFAQs > #928760263

Mead posted...

Most of this just sounds like false both sides-isms

Not really. That would only be the case if I was discussing moral equivalency (which I am not) as opposed to realpolitik (which I am).

As much as Americans as a people would like to believe otherwise, the US government as an entity doesn't give a single shit about human rights. We have a tendency to intervene only when there is tangible political benefit for us to do so, and willfully ignore all manner of abuses around the world in scenarios where we get nothing out of it. If a nation doesn't have oil, or other resources, or isn't a major economic power that may eventually threaten our own influence, we tend to blissfully ignore whatever they're up to and allow any amount of atrocities or civil rights violations to occur. It's why we rarely pay attention to anything in sub-Saharan Africa, or South America, or parts of Asia that aren't China. And that's without even getting into thornier issues like Guantanamo Bay still being a thing.

And other nations absolutely see the world that way, and are well aware of that fact. Which means our voice on the world stage means a lot less from a moral perspective (because most people who aren't already our explicit allies already consider us hypocrites), and it's really only our military and economic strength that gives us anything resembling authority in global debates.

In a perfect world, we WOULD care about human rights issues in and of themselves. We SHOULD be willing to take moral stances and not just let realpolitik dictate policy. But we don't live in that world.

As long as we see Russia as a larger potential threat than Turkey (and it likely always will be, for multiple reasons), we'll bend over backward to justify Turkey's inclusion in Western alliances designed to impede Russian influence. Just like how we've supported Saudi Arabia for decades in spite of it being more or less the direct source of a lot of the funding and support for militant Islam that has led to modern global terrorism.

We really only take official stances on moral issues when it directly benefits us in some way. Or when the entity we're condemning is so worthless that we lose nothing by doing so. Like it or not, that's very much the world we live in.

And no, that doesn't mean that I, as an individual, can't support Kurdish independence or Hong Kong independence or gay rights in Russia or shit on the Saudi crown prince for having people murdered, or whatever other moral stance comes to mind. But I'm also aware that the United States as a distinct political entity isn't going to do so unless we profit from it in some way.
---

"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family