Topic: Human Rights
The Opposite of the Right Thing It's 20 years after Tiananmen Square. What happened to America's anti-communism?by John Kusumi
(centrist liberal)
Friday, May 29, 2009
In the days of the Cold War, the West was well aware that there was a "free world" opposing a "world of tyranny." The only thing that we needed from tyrants (of the Middle East) was to import oil. Concerns about national security stopped us from investing in the Soviet Union. There was containment of the Soviet sphere, and divestment from the tyrannical regime in South Africa.
There is still a free world and a world of tyranny, and China is the leading state of that latter bloc. But, the practices of the West--regrettably--have changed.
U.S. leadership of the free world was faulty. Seemingly, in Bill Clinton's "globalization," there are no remaining threats or bad guys, and prior to George W. Bush and 9/11 in the United States, the very word evil was becoming politically incorrect. Commentators chose not to point out the faults of Mainland China, preferring to avoid giving offense to China's communists, dictators, tyrants, and thugs.
Western China policy, post-Tiananmen, has been characterized by coddling tyrants, offering kid glove treatment to Beijing, and a blind eye for the human rights abuse and further atrocities in China. Indeed, free trade and the Olympics have been rewards for the bad behavior and mass murder as seen in China's record.
However, Eastern Europe remembers being under communism. Poland has had lots of activism for Chinese human rights. In the West, the powerful turned a blind eye to human rights, but the people--civilians--carry on with human rights activism. And thankfully, some states (including Germany, Canada, and Japan) have had leaders who can be termed anti-communist. Edward McMillan-Scott, MEP, has been excellent on the issue of Chinese human rights.
It may be that at the end of day, human rights are inconvenient to the powerful, who like things just the way they are. However, public institutions are supposed to represent the public interest, and no civilians anywhere should like the ominous precedents that are set by China's treatment of civilians (or by the tacit endorsement of same by Western governments).
Under regrettable leadership from the United States, the West made its China policy malleable to industrial concerns that wanted to optimize their bottom lines and balance sheets. Much money is made from China's misery and near-slave-labor conditions. However, history will look back at this period as a disgrace and a discredit to the West, which should not buy freely from China (as it helps and enriches that regime--the Communist Party). The West has been doing the opposite of the right thing.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 13 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of John Kusumi only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. John Kusumi is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
In actuality, China is no longer communist, it is fascist. And as I recall, the Western democracies were more tolerant of fascism than communism prior to World War II, and that resulted in World War II.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
