This essay was anything but objective.
It makes America look like a selfish, incompetent child in relation to other nations and then tries to make us feel better by stating during the very last few lines that we can change for the better. The latter hardly seems like the point of anything when all the while, the essay glorifies the Chinese and their steady rise to fame and fortune. Very, very rarely does the author offer America any sort of positive feedback throughout the essay, if at all.
While I can agree that a lot of times, America doesn't always seem to have the best interests of anybody other than itself in mind, the examples didn't seem to take into account the issues America was facing at the time with terrorism and war. America was under pressure. A few missed meetings sure put up a bad front, but there were other priorities at home to consider. Any other nation would have done the same to protect its people.
The quote from Stephen Johnson of the Heritage Foundation, however, well highlights how America is a tad bit paranoid with its diplomacy, making contracts and restrictions so that if anything goes wrong, it will be in a position of power to act upon it. China, being able to "bargain on the spot without a lot of caveats" sort of just tells me that China rushes into things quickly and, in a sense, leaves itself vulnerable to unfavorable circumstances when dealing with other nations.
Throughout the entire essay, China is painted as a hero while barely touching upon any of the negative qualities that run as rampant there as they do here. This can be seen when the Sino-Japanese relationship is discussed and yet still the author tries to pass the strained relationship as something bad, sure, but something that the Chinese have at least striven to keep under control for the oh, so pure purpose of inter-connectivity.
Perhaps I'm taking all of this a little too personally.
No comments:
Post a Comment