A year into Russia’s war on Ukraine, an odd convergence is visible in American political debate on the issue, between voices on both the left and the right opposing US support for the Ukrainians. On the right, this opposition stems both from a Trumpian America First position, and from simple political reflex. Whatever the Biden administration is for, they are against, especially if they can use the issue to cast the president as uncaring about ordinary Americans in places like East Palestine, Ohio, and along the Mexican border. The same people
"Misguided" is extremely kind and generous. And its to my mind the same motivation as the Biden critics. It's allowing them to frame the choice in
the simplest terms of "good" or "bad" behavior by the US.
That's an irrelevant question from a truly intellectual, that is, humanitarian and humanistic standpoint. The thinking person being true to ones actual slelf must ask, What choice is the one with the best impact for the people of the world? Or at least what does the least harm now, under actual conditions?
The "goodness" or "rightness" of US policy is only a relevant question if one positions oneself in relation to governing power of one country. If one wants to pronounce that power right or wrong, under some imagined conditions.
I don't know if you saw my reply to the tweet. But after agreeing with nearly all of this, I was thrown by the last sentence which seemed to undermines it all, by suggesting America is after all the exceptional or indispensable nation - the world doesn't let us rest, even when we want to. What did you mean by it?
It means what it says. You don't have to think of the US as "indispensable" to realize that there going to be moments when, as the most powerful country on earth, it is going to have an important and useful potential role in dealing with international crises.
Maybe then what I'm reacting to is rhetorical. Knowing your own views on US exceptionalism, which I share, it seemed jarring to end on a line that seems to echo Bill Kristol or Madeline Albright: We are benign, but the world just won't leave us alone.
Another very good commentary.
"Misguided" is extremely kind and generous. And its to my mind the same motivation as the Biden critics. It's allowing them to frame the choice in
the simplest terms of "good" or "bad" behavior by the US.
That's an irrelevant question from a truly intellectual, that is, humanitarian and humanistic standpoint. The thinking person being true to ones actual slelf must ask, What choice is the one with the best impact for the people of the world? Or at least what does the least harm now, under actual conditions?
The "goodness" or "rightness" of US policy is only a relevant question if one positions oneself in relation to governing power of one country. If one wants to pronounce that power right or wrong, under some imagined conditions.
As always, Camus' 1946 speech bears re-reading.
thanks, Greg. Agreed!
I don't know if you saw my reply to the tweet. But after agreeing with nearly all of this, I was thrown by the last sentence which seemed to undermines it all, by suggesting America is after all the exceptional or indispensable nation - the world doesn't let us rest, even when we want to. What did you mean by it?
It means what it says. You don't have to think of the US as "indispensable" to realize that there going to be moments when, as the most powerful country on earth, it is going to have an important and useful potential role in dealing with international crises.
Maybe then what I'm reacting to is rhetorical. Knowing your own views on US exceptionalism, which I share, it seemed jarring to end on a line that seems to echo Bill Kristol or Madeline Albright: We are benign, but the world just won't leave us alone.