The globalists must be truly desperate to go with this angle.
Objectalone on
People won’t change. We know the difference between vice and virtue, and “hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue.” Once we’ve put our hand on the stove, like we apparently have to do every few generations, some kind of functional, hypocritical, international rules based system will coalesce.
Tranquil_Neurotic on
What in the? Western “Rules based order” was and is shite. It just came to the forefront when West clutched their pearls when the war came to their continent. There’s no going back now.
Almostfoundit on
I am of the opinion losing the rule-based order would be unfavourable to us, yes, but one cannot equate the rule-based order to hypocrisy. The article explains hypocrisy is seen through double standards, then goes on to say:
>A world in which powerful states no longer feel compelled to justify themselves morally is not more honest—it is more dangerous. When great powers feel obliged to justify their behavior in moral terms, weaker states gain leverage.
Which is something hypocrisy plays no role in, given that it’s a mindset that leads said great powers to circumvent the rule of law, not the thing that compelling them to follow it.
Another noteworthy fragment:
>Throughout the Cold War, the United States justified its leading role in the international order by using the language of democracy and human rights, even as its actions fell short of those ideals. That hypocrisy did not go uncontested. Allies and nonaligned states alike repeatedly invoked American rhetoric to criticize U.S. behavior and demand greater consistency between the principles the United States was championing and what the country was doing in practice. This pressure yielded tangible results.
Almost like we could say the system works best when hypocrisy fails.
I feel required to come to the conclusion that the author of this article decided to use a shocking headline as a form of clickbait and tries to cling to it as the actual narrative, which I worry might lead to disinformation.
fuggitdude22 on
Hypocrisy, at its core, permeated history. This is nothing new. The USSR supported decolonization or anti-imperialist movements (FLN, Viet Cong, or the PKI) around the world, however, it didn’t abstain from partaking in imperialist ventures itself by invading Hungary and Afghanistan.
By the same token, the American Founding Fathers loathed being treated as pawns of the British Empire. After acquiring independence from British Rule, they proceeded to march West and emulate the British transgressions imposed upon the Native Americans eventually even genociding them.
For an international rules based system to ever function properly, there needs to be equal enforcement of norms and rights. That is impossible to manifest into reality when the strongest states (United States, Russia and China) frequently violate them by launching unprovoked offensive wars.
DruidPeter4 on
What horseshit. Of course hypocrisy provided some constraint, but can you imagine an abusive husband saying to his wife that his hypocrisy allowed her to escape beatings sometimes, and use that as a justification for why she’ll miss him? You can either maintain your interests long term or you can damage them long term in exchange for pushing short term gain. Big countries think they can get away with shit that doesn’t apply to them, until it does, and the cycle continues. Bleh.
MeatPiston on
Everyone says they hate the west but they love the money, stability, investment, culture, science, rules based order…
karlitooo on
Article about the end of the rules based order but only talks about Trump… come on. If the US wants to f around the US needs to find out. So called hypocrisy “of the west” is just trump. Enforce the damn rules.
The rules based order can and should continue, excluding countries that won’t follow the rules. Surely that’s the entire point. Not shrug and say “oh I guess rules don’t work” the second somebody with scars and facial tats shows up.
Removing US as a partner and breaking its stranglehold on key technologies should be the focus of western countries now. Get their bases out, get their businesses out, get the culture of violence out. Build our own tech, keep profits local, build alliances with nations that share our values, end alliances with scumbags.
Why should Europe let countries that don’t treat their citizens like human beings dominate in our markets. It’s low iq to require employees to have protections but act surprised when companies use 996 labour out manoeuvre you. It’s low iq to let the US threaten Europe but let them stage military forces there.
Don’t do business with people who exploit your values to ruin you. Don’t negotiate with people who come in bad faith. If a bully tries to take your lunch, hurt him. Same applies to any other country. If you act like our enemy you should be treated as such.
8 Comments
The globalists must be truly desperate to go with this angle.
People won’t change. We know the difference between vice and virtue, and “hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue.” Once we’ve put our hand on the stove, like we apparently have to do every few generations, some kind of functional, hypocritical, international rules based system will coalesce.
What in the? Western “Rules based order” was and is shite. It just came to the forefront when West clutched their pearls when the war came to their continent. There’s no going back now.
I am of the opinion losing the rule-based order would be unfavourable to us, yes, but one cannot equate the rule-based order to hypocrisy. The article explains hypocrisy is seen through double standards, then goes on to say:
>A world in which powerful states no longer feel compelled to justify themselves morally is not more honest—it is more dangerous. When great powers feel obliged to justify their behavior in moral terms, weaker states gain leverage.
Which is something hypocrisy plays no role in, given that it’s a mindset that leads said great powers to circumvent the rule of law, not the thing that compelling them to follow it.
Another noteworthy fragment:
>Throughout the Cold War, the United States justified its leading role in the international order by using the language of democracy and human rights, even as its actions fell short of those ideals. That hypocrisy did not go uncontested. Allies and nonaligned states alike repeatedly invoked American rhetoric to criticize U.S. behavior and demand greater consistency between the principles the United States was championing and what the country was doing in practice. This pressure yielded tangible results.
Almost like we could say the system works best when hypocrisy fails.
I feel required to come to the conclusion that the author of this article decided to use a shocking headline as a form of clickbait and tries to cling to it as the actual narrative, which I worry might lead to disinformation.
Hypocrisy, at its core, permeated history. This is nothing new. The USSR supported decolonization or anti-imperialist movements (FLN, Viet Cong, or the PKI) around the world, however, it didn’t abstain from partaking in imperialist ventures itself by invading Hungary and Afghanistan.
By the same token, the American Founding Fathers loathed being treated as pawns of the British Empire. After acquiring independence from British Rule, they proceeded to march West and emulate the British transgressions imposed upon the Native Americans eventually even genociding them.
For an international rules based system to ever function properly, there needs to be equal enforcement of norms and rights. That is impossible to manifest into reality when the strongest states (United States, Russia and China) frequently violate them by launching unprovoked offensive wars.
What horseshit. Of course hypocrisy provided some constraint, but can you imagine an abusive husband saying to his wife that his hypocrisy allowed her to escape beatings sometimes, and use that as a justification for why she’ll miss him? You can either maintain your interests long term or you can damage them long term in exchange for pushing short term gain. Big countries think they can get away with shit that doesn’t apply to them, until it does, and the cycle continues. Bleh.
Everyone says they hate the west but they love the money, stability, investment, culture, science, rules based order…
Article about the end of the rules based order but only talks about Trump… come on. If the US wants to f around the US needs to find out. So called hypocrisy “of the west” is just trump. Enforce the damn rules.
The rules based order can and should continue, excluding countries that won’t follow the rules. Surely that’s the entire point. Not shrug and say “oh I guess rules don’t work” the second somebody with scars and facial tats shows up.
Removing US as a partner and breaking its stranglehold on key technologies should be the focus of western countries now. Get their bases out, get their businesses out, get the culture of violence out. Build our own tech, keep profits local, build alliances with nations that share our values, end alliances with scumbags.
Why should Europe let countries that don’t treat their citizens like human beings dominate in our markets. It’s low iq to require employees to have protections but act surprised when companies use 996 labour out manoeuvre you. It’s low iq to let the US threaten Europe but let them stage military forces there.
Don’t do business with people who exploit your values to ruin you. Don’t negotiate with people who come in bad faith. If a bully tries to take your lunch, hurt him. Same applies to any other country. If you act like our enemy you should be treated as such.
Europe: Stop being so dumb. Grow a backbone.