Thomas Friedman singing praises for the American Empire

He lamented what a world would be if America could not project power the way it has in an article in the ST today. He said ‘your’ kids won’t grow up in a different America but will grow up in a different world. Die, American kids are going to get walloped if America could not wallop the rest of the world. He is worried that American kids would not be able to push everyone around. He fears a China and the likes of Julian Assange, who could carry as much weight as America. He fears a multi polar world that would not benefit the American kids that much but also the kids of other countries, notably other powers like China, India, Brazil, Russia and the Europeans. And that is simply bad. He was disgusted that China could exercise so much power to keep countries from attending the circus in Norway when Liu Xiaobo was the celebrated clown for the day, and in the company of greater clowns. And China could do it without the use of the aircraft carriers and fighter bombers, but just simple economic power. And he called this an act of perversity, that China is equated as a failed state abusing its new found power, irresponsible is the word. What about America forcing its allies to go to war in Iraq and other theatres of war, in a Coalition of the Unwiling? The American allies have no choice but being muscled in to kill people, invade countries, execute regime change, and be accomplices to the infamous Guantanamo Camp where freedom and human rights were never heard of. And these were the acts of the Evil Empire which he approved of. America is exceedingly responsible as a super power in doing all these things. Make a comparison between China exercising its economic power in not attending a circus and America exercising its military power in commiting acts of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Which is more IRRESPONSIBLE, and more oppressive, abominable? How long and how much more must Asians be preached with such sermons from the West, particularly from the Americans, whose only concern is for their own good. What is good to the Americans, and cruel to others, is still good. What is not good to the Americans, no matter how civil, is not good. Should the world continue to live with such condescending American logic?


Matilah_Singapura said...

Aiyah, he's a progressive liberal hawk -- loves big powerful government, and since the US has the world's most powerful govt together with the UN they should "govern the world" and regulate everything from capitalism, to wage rates, to healthcare to everyone's carbon footprint, to what food we should eat. Control freak!

However, he is a good writer. I don't like his (neo-socialist) politics but do enjoy his work, even if I disagree with what he says.

He is, knowingly or not, a mouthpiece for American foreign adventurism. Like his buddies Hillary and Obama, and Bush and Rice, and Carter and Clinton...and just about everyone in Washington (except Ron ad Rand Paul): "It is America's privilege and duty to LEAD THE WORLD, and this will be done by FOREIGN POLICY, using the US military if necessary"

> How long and how much more must Asians be preached with such sermons from the West <

Fuck the Asians on this one lah. Everyone has the right to express their opinion. If motherfucking Asians have a problem with that, they need to fuck off somewhere and die lah.

Asians and other associated "sub human races" have the right to respond and express their own collectivist control-freak, bat-shit insane idea to the western devils.

Everyone is free to express whatever the fuck they want: fat arse violent Christian whiteys and savage, shit-squatting dog-eating Asians...everyone.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Unfortunately there is a dearth of Asians who could rebut this kind of rubbish in the main media. Or maybe the main media would not publish them.

We need more of the Kishore type. Wang Gung Wu and Tommy Koh are too polite. They need to have spurs stuck onto their backs, then they may make more forceful views on such issues.

Hope the WikiLeaks would probe LKY to stand up and tell the Yanks off.

Matilah_Singapura said...

That's what pisses me off about these "conservative" Asians who believe in their culture too much without challenging the aspects of their culture which hold them back in the dark ages.

They have opportunity and the right to criticise the west back, but they smile their bullshit Asian smiles, bow like subservient coolies, and pretend to kiss the hairy smelly arses of The Great White Masser.

In the west, openly criticising someone who is "asking for it" (or even if they aren't) is no big deal. That is what truthful communication is begins: expressing your true feelings, and building relationships by finding those small precious areas of agreement and concord.

So more Asians, not just the intellectuals, need to criticise, not only the west, but their own governments and cultural aspects which need to be discarded because they no longer are relevant to the times -- where the world is shrinking and barriers are coming down.

This "lose face" shit must be the first thing to disappear from the Asian cultural landscape once and for all. It is complete bullshit, and keeps millions from "stepping out of their comfort zone" by keeping them locked into rpisons based on group approval and validation.

Fuck that shit.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...


You are too well programmed by the West. No modern Chinese cares about face or talk about face. This is only being repeated by the Westerners who claimed to be experts in Chinese affairs but this is the only stuff that they knew.

Even the sick jokes about Kim and his family, attention seekers, must prove manhood because the son is taking over, so fire a few artillery shells to prove he is in charge, a strong leader, etc etc.

For Kim to be able to stay in power for so long, they are not nuts like the US leadership. This is something the Westerners failed to see, but good at making superficial comments.

If you read Friedman's article and most western articles, the face thing is what they are protecting. The world's number one superpower cannot be snubbe by anyone. The West cannot lose out to the East. They went to war and victory or face is the most important thing. How can they pull out, malu lah, lose face lah. But they would not admit it.

Thank you for listening: )

Matilah_Singapura said...

Quite to the contrary redbean.

I don't see why "individualism" should be confined to the west. True, they were the first to develop the idea and take base their civilizations on it -- all the way from Aristotle to the reformation and the renaissance... it was all about The Individual.

Fuck that shit. We are all human beings -- doesn;t matter whether you are Asian -- these rights of being an individual are universal.

Why should the whitey's have all the fun? ;-)

Matilah_Singapura said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Matilah_Singapura said...

Ok, a better response:

China and India dominated the Asian ancient world and led the planet in science, maths, the arts, and commerce -- just about everything whilst Europe was practically dying dark eras of privation, superstitious thinking and corrupt authority.

Although individualism and "free thought" existed, the church and the divine right of kings ruled over the people - their persons, their property and their minds. Then the church fractured during the reformation. It was revolt against "authority" and was based on the idea that every person had to seek "salvation" himself -- it was his own responsibility and he was free to choose to or not. So bye bye Pope -- for the Protestants anyway.

Then the Renaissance occurred -- this is when things really started to take off. The ideas: reason, individual freethought, private property, the existence of natural world and only the natural world (as opposed to a super-natural one), individual freedom and the political collalary: Liberty. (freedom from govt/ state/ monach interference). "Every man is a free man"

What happened: science exploded, as did commerce, and art. Societies changed. Tribalism decreased, individualism increased. China, India and most Asian societies were left in the dust -- the dustin of history, and many Asian nations ended up being "colonised" (conquered), and even after "liberation" still clung onto their collectivist "traditional" cultures based on the unswerving obedience to 'authority'.

China was conquered from within -- first by emperors and feudalism then by Mao. The people endured centuries of extremely brutal treatment -- not from a "conquerer" but from their own.

That shit continues to this very day. You'll find educated Asians still scared to challenge or simply question authority. And all Asian authority whether it is tradition, religion or politics IS FULL OF SHIT

Whose the one still imprisoned by (so-called) "programming"?

Certainly not me ;-)

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

This fear of authority is a deadly concept. It can enslave a whole nation of people. And it is still doing so.

It is a very regressive concept that should be bundled out of the window of civilisation.

Matilah_Singapura said...

> It can enslave a whole nation of people.

Not really.

The people who get hit are the ones too lazy or unable to think for themselves, or are too fearful even to challenge their own beliefs -- beliefs based on what they've been told and also been commanded never to question.

Thankfully, in every societies there are the die-hard stubborn individuals -- the ones who do think for themselves, make their own mistakes and learn these 'expensive' lessons. They are often labelled as "rebels", "non-conformists", "arrogant", "greedy", "selfish", "self-centered", "anti-social", "unpatriotic", "aloof", and "crazy"...the list is virtually endless.

> And it is still doing so. referring to "fear of authority"

Yes, ain't it swell -- guaranteed entertainment value ;-)

Actually there is scientific explanation for this -- there was a time way back when sticking together as a group increased your chance for survival ... (or the whole group got killed due to bad error on the part of its leader).

We are natural social creatures, but some parts of that mechanism is unsuited to today's world of individual empowerment. Societies are a lot bigger now. No longer are they the tribes of a hundred or so hunter-gatherers.

Today's societies number in the multiple millions or billions -- numbers far too large and far too dangerous/ risky to be "led" by one individual or one group -- exclusively If you "follow the leader" and the leader is wrong, entire civilizations can be wiped out and there is no turning back because who then will "question the leader"? Practically no one.

In smaller tribal societies, these losses due to "leader error" were limited to small groups.

To find out more about humans 'natural' tendency to accede to authority, to the point where personal moral standards are willfully bypassed, check out The Milgram Experiment conducted by Stanley Milgram of Yale back in the 1960's, as well as The Stanford Prison Experiment conducted in the 70's.

You couldn't conduct these experiments today because of the current 'ethical standards'.

The Milgram Experiment illustrates how people obey authority.

The Stanford Prison Experiment illustrates how people given authority behave toward people without authority -- even when they both were "friendly" when they were "equal" (no authority) before the experiment began.

Scary shit. And it is REAL.