Your Thoughts Exactly

George Bush, in his inauguration speech, focused on the Untied States as the promoter of freedom, democracy, and justice throughout the rest of the world, in an attempt to overwhelm the opposing forces of tyranny that exist in the world today. Bush cleverly did not mention how he was planning on going about spreading these values, rather focusing on the abstract: the forces of good versus the forces of evil, common human rights, etc.

Realistically, the conquering of “tyranny,” is an unachievable goal in a four year term. But I want to focus on Bush’s speech from the very, very, big picture: as a summary of the key values of the West, (Europeans and their descendents.) We believe in freedom, we believe in human rights, as institutionalized in key documents such as the Bill of Rights or the UN Charter, extended over time to different groups of people. (Women, minorities.) We believe constitutional democracy is the best form of government to create a society that protects these universal values. Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, or Green, I believe most westerners agree with these points.

But what is the source of these values, that are hammered into us from the time we begin school and assimilating information? I believe that the original source is Christianity, with the key premises revised based on the overwhelming wealth of scientific information discovered about the world around us in the last four centuries. Which side you derive these values from, the Christian or the Scientific, goes a long way towards determining your stance on several issues, and is probably the best argument for schism in ideals between groups of people within these Western governments.

While these values have been accepted in the West nearly universally, there exist other places in the world whose histories and societies are shaped by other key factors. In the Middle East, the source of ideology is not Christian thought, but Islam and is derived system of a patrimonial society. The other key factor is not self-modernization but imperial modernization: ideas and facts brought by foreign sources who ruled, divided, and reshaped groups of people and land to their whim. While these Western sources don’t rule in name any more, their influence is still felt. This imperialist strain extends to Asia and Africa as well.

With the world globalizing, the question is, are the Western values actually universal? Can they be accepted by foreign societies that don’t have the cultural history of the West? Is it our place to force these values onto the rest of the world, or should we passively let other societies determine their own way of operating? Freedom and Democracy are certainly the main abstract ideas of the West. Are they the right ideas for all of humanity? And how far do we have to go to bring these ideas to people who don’t want them, and don’t understand them?

Tough questions. I believe the only way to spread these values universally it to let those peoples and countries integrate the positive aspects of basic human rights with their own cultural backgrounds: a process that may take a century or more to accomplish. Unfortunately, it appears the Bush administration wants to force these ideals on certain parts of the world, using the War on Terror, as its justification, and a fundamental belief in the superiority of Western ideals as its will. At some point, Bush and the rest of the West need to take a reality check on their quest, to make realistic goals with achievable outcomes that don’t result in excessive loss of life. Will this happen? On second thought, don't answer that question.