Please America - don't hide in the shadows...
We often hear about how the Internet has created a 'world without borders', where hopefully people of all races, creeds and political opinions can meet free from censorship or political intererfence.
So as I read Thomas Friedman's column today I felt sad that America seems to be withdrawing from the world, having been instrumental in creating a system that can break down barriers.
For so many people, including myself, America is a symbol of hope, of freedom, of opportunity for all; yet for many people now, America feels more like the child who is sulking and has taken their ball home because they don't want to play anymore, so nor should anyone else.
It would be a sad irony indeed that as the Internet helps the stereotypes to get broken and freedom to ring out across the world, America chooses to stand back and hide in the shadows.
So as I read Thomas Friedman's column today I felt sad that America seems to be withdrawing from the world, having been instrumental in creating a system that can break down barriers.
For so many people, including myself, America is a symbol of hope, of freedom, of opportunity for all; yet for many people now, America feels more like the child who is sulking and has taken their ball home because they don't want to play anymore, so nor should anyone else.
It would be a sad irony indeed that as the Internet helps the stereotypes to get broken and freedom to ring out across the world, America chooses to stand back and hide in the shadows.
5 Comments:
Is America really withdrawing from the world? This nation, along with its allies, are exposing Iraq and Afghanistan to democracy and freedom at this very moment. This can't be done from the "shadows." I wouldn't take the nation's stricter immigration policies as a sign of a withdrawl into some form of neo-isolationism either.
In the article referred to by the original posting, I thought this segment was extremely telling: In part it is the awful barriers that now surround the U.S. Embassy in London on Grosvenor Square. "They have these cages all around the embassy now, and these huge concrete blocks, and the whole message is: 'Go away!' " said Kate Jones, a British literary agent who often walks by there. "That is how people think of America now, and it's a really sad thing because that is not your country."
This is an awful image to have of our nation, America. As a true-blooded American, I want the world to know the strength and power behind our culture and vision for the future. While these "barriers" are built around American Embassies to protect those working in the building, the American government must do some better PR about its strength. Such PR has taken place since the Iraqi conflict, but more neeeds to be done to demonstrate the common goal and vision of the American government. We, as Americans, must not let the road-side bombs and frequent attacks on our embassies scare us away from being proud for our actions to spread democracy, but instead show the world the "good" taking place because of our actions. Yes, we were attacked on 9/11, and we were attacked in Pearl Harbor - and we showed then, we must move forward to demonstrate our strength and pride in democracy. America has nothing to be shameful for...now France on the other hand...thats a another story...
I don't think our invasion and occupation of Iraq have done much for our image in the world. In fact, it is probably affecting world opinion more than any increased security at our embassies.
I would feel better about increased security, if there were any logic to it. But we constantly hear about huge vulnerabilities that still exist at our airports and borders, and we stop at anything that might offend the Saudis - home of 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers.
I think more Americans would feel safer, and be safer, if the borders were secured. This seems the logical place to start.
Please check out my post at Hegemon, too long for a comment, in response to Peter C.
while i really enjoyed the analogy of the playground, i must disagree with the assumption that america is retreating from the world, or a growing dislike for global participation--though, i see how it can be taken that way.
you seem to think that america is hiding in the shadows. but really, it seems to me anyways, that america is instead afraid of its own shadow.
in lieu of your sulking analogy, its more of an abused dog syndrome. at first the dog is open and loves every person--america loves and wants to advance all nations and have them visit america. but, the dog was abused (ie 9/11...though, the attack on pearl harbor doesn't really apply to Friedman's article b/c of differing circumstances). afterwards, the dog is very aggressive in order to prevent future abuses.
the aggressiveness is a result of the dog's realization of its "inferiority" to the abusive person (which is why it will ultimately submit and usually lay on its back when directly confronted). which then parrells the us for this: america was aggressive towards afghanistan and iraq, but still knew its weaknesses--thus, your increases of security. at the heart of it, the "dog" still loves that person. the us still wants to be a part of the global community and wants to welcome everyone of differing backgrounds, but because of its past, it gives off mixed signals. so while it will eventually allow global influences, its a lot more tricky and intricate process.the core feeling is fear, not hatred or isolationist feelings.
fear instilled into the general american population by the current administration is the reason for the drastic increased "security" procedure. thus, Friedman's call for a national commission is moot until the administration stops promoting that fear into the american people.
it really just solidifys fdr's quote "we have nothing to fear, but fear itself"
Post a Comment
<< Home