1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Why Do They Hate Us?

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by DonnyMost, Jul 23, 2007.

  1. DonnyMost

    DonnyMost be kind. be brave.
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2003
    Messages:
    47,443
    Likes Received:
    17,091
    I found this article to be really insightful. About growing up with dual allegiances to warring cultures.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/20/AR2007072001806.html


    'Why Do They Hate Us?'

    By Mohsin Hamid
    Sunday, July 22, 2007; Page B01

    LONDON Recently, I found myself in Dallas, a place I'd never been before. As a Muslim writer, I felt about going there pretty much the way an American writer might have felt about heading to the tribal areas of Pakistan: nervous, with the distinct suspicion that the locals carried guns and weren't too fond of folks who look like me.

    So I was surprised by the extraordinary hospitality I encountered on my trip. And I still remember the politeness with which one elderly gentleman addressed me in a bookshop. He held a copy of my latest novel, "The Reluctant Fundamentalist," and examined the face on its cover, comparing it to mine. Then he said, nodding once as if to dip the brim of an imaginary hat: "So tell me, sir. Why do they hate us?"

    That stopped me cold. I've spent almost half my life in the United States, arriving from Lahore, Pakistan, with my parents in 1974 when I was 3 after my father was accepted to a PhD program at Stanford. I learned to sing "The Star-Spangled Banner" years before I could sing the Pakistani national anthem, played baseball before I could play cricket and wrote in English before I could write in Urdu. My earliest memories are of watching "Star Trek" and "MASH" while my parents barbecued chicken in the back yard. I was an American kid, through and through. Part of me still is.

    But when I was 9, I moved back to where I came from. And because where I came from was Pakistan and I was about as all-American as a foreign-born brown boy could be, my perspective a quarter-century later on the question of why "they" hate "us" is perhaps a little more textured than most.

    For one thing, part of me identifies with "they" and part with "us." For another, growing up in Pakistan in the 1980s let me see firsthand the devastating effects that the best of U.S. intentions can have.

    Talk about why so many Muslims hate the United States these days, and you'll hear plenty of self-flagellation, at least in some quarters of post-9/11 America. I have too much affection for the United States to join in. These people make up the "We deserve to be hated because we're bad" school of thought, which is simplistic and unhelpful. It is simplistic because there are 300 million different components of the "we" that is America. And it is unhelpful because it ignores so much that is good about the nation.

    Part of the reason people abroad resent the United States is something Americans can do very little about: envy. The richest, most powerful country in the world attracts the jealousy of others in much the same way that the richest, most powerful man in a small town attracts the jealousy of others. It will come his way no matter how kind, generous or humble he may be.

    But there is another major reason for anti-Americanism: the accreted residue of many years of U.S. foreign policies. These policies are unknown to most Americans. They form only minor footnotes in U.S. history. But they are the chapter titles of the histories of other countries, where they have had enormous consequences. America's strength has made it a sort of Gulliver in world affairs: By wiggling its toes it can, often inadvertently, break the arm of a Lilliputian.

    When my family moved back to Pakistan, I was given a front-row seat from which to observe one such obscure episode. In 1980, Lahore was a sleepy and rather quiet place. Pakistan's second-largest city was still safe enough for a 9-year-old to hop on his bicycle and ride around unsupervised.

    But that was about to change. Soviet troops had recently rolled into Afghanistan, and the U.S. government, concerned about Afghanistan's proximity to the oil-rich Persian Gulf and eager to avenge the humiliating debacle of the Vietnam War, decided to respond. Building on President Jimmy Carter's tough line, President Ronald Reagan offered billions of dollars in economic aid and sophisticated weapons to Pakistan's dictator, Gen. Mohammed Zia ul-Haq. In exchange, Zia supported the mujaheddin, the Afghan guerrillas waging a modern-day holy war against the Soviet occupation. With the help of the CIA, jihadist training camps sprung up in the tribal areas of Pakistan. Soon Kalashnikov assault rifles from those camps began to flood the streets of Lahore, setting in motion a crime wave that put an end to my days of pedaling unsupervised through the streets.

    Meanwhile, Zia began an ongoing attempt to Islamize Pakistan and thus make it a more fertile breeding ground for the anti-Soviet jihad. Public female dance performances were banned, female newscasters were told to cover their heads and laws undermining women's rights were passed. Secular politicians, academics and journalists were intimidated, imprisoned and worse.

    One part of this was particularly unpleasant for those of us entering our teens: the angry groups of bearded men who began enforcing their own morality codes. They made going on dates risky, even in a fun-loving city such as Lahore. Meanwhile, a surge of cheap heroin -- the currency often used to buy the allegiance of Afghan warlords -- meant that Pakistan went from having virtually no addicts when I was 9 to having more than a million by the time I completed high school, according to a lecture that a U.S. drug-enforcement official gave at my school.

    People all over the world talk about how things were better when they were young. In Lahore, we got into the habit of talking about how they were better last month.

    In 1988, Zia died in a suspicious plane crash. The Soviets were driven out of Afghanistan in 1989, shortly before I left Lahore for college in the United States. When I mentioned the final campaign of the Cold War to my fellow freshmen at Princeton, few seemed to know much about it. Eighteen years later, most people I meet in the United States are astounded to learn that the period ever occurred. But in Pakistan, it is vividly seared into the national memory. Indeed, it has torn the very fabric of what, when I was born, was a relatively liberal country with nightclubs, casinos and legal alcohol.

    The residue of U.S. foreign policy coats much of the world. It is the other part of the answer to the question, "Why do they hate us?" Simply because America has -- often for what seemed good reasons at the time -- intervened to shape the destinies of other countries and then, as a nation, walked away.

    There is so much about the United States that I admire. So when I speak of that time now, and encounter the pose of wounded innocence that is the most common American response, I am annoyed and disappointed. It is as though the notion of U.S. responsibility applies only within the 50 states, and I have no right to invoke it.

    How then does someone like me reconcile his affection and frustration? Partly by offering a passionate critique. And partly by hoping for change -- by appealing, as the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. did, to what is most attractive about the United States, to what it claims to stand for, to what is best in its nature.

    Americans need to educate themselves, from elementary school onward, about what their country has done abroad. And they need to play a more active role in ensuring that what the United States does abroad is not merely in keeping with a foreign policy elite's sense of realpolitik but also with the American public's own sense of American values.

    Because at their core, those values are sound. That is why, even in places where you'll find virulent anti-Americanism, you'll also find enormous affection for things American. That's why Pakistani rock musicians listen to Jimi Hendrix and Nirvana, why Pakistani cities are full of kids wearing blue jeans and T-shirts, and why Pakistanis have been protesting to give their supreme court the same protection from meddling by their president held by its model: the Supreme Court of the United States.

    All of which leads us to another, perhaps more fruitful question that Americans ought to consider: "Why do they love us?" People abroad admire Americans not because they back foreign dictators but because they believe that all men and all women are created equal. That concept cannot stop at the borders of the United States. It is a concept far greater than any one nation, no matter how great that nation is. For America to be true to itself, its people must broaden their belief in equality to include the men and women of the world.

    The challenge that the United States faces today boils down to a choice. It can insist on its primacy as a superpower, or it can accept the universality of its values. If it chooses the former, it will heighten the resentment of foreigners and increase the likelihood of visiting disaster upon distant populations -- and vice versa. If it chooses the latter, it will discover something it appears to have forgotten: that the world is full of potential allies.

    I'm one of them. I do not currently live in the United States, but I still believe in its potential for good. And like so many who wonder how our new and more integrated world can be built on a foundation that is humane and just, I look to the land where I, a writer, first learned to write, and allow myself to dream.

    mohsinhamid@hotmail.co.uk

    Mohsin Hamid's most recent novel is "The Reluctant Fundamentalist."
     
  2. pirc1

    pirc1 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2002
    Messages:
    13,971
    Likes Received:
    1,701
    Actions have consequences.
     
  3. NewYorker

    NewYorker Ghost of Clutch Fans

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2002
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    41
    Very few people will admit to the negatives that a group they identify does.

    Just as the Japanese don't admit to the horrors of their gov'ts past, and just as Muslims have trouble accepting that Muslims pulled of 9/11.

    The same way Americans are. I think it's human nature. And it may help explain why every empire crumbles.
     
  4. nyquil82

    nyquil82 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    Messages:
    5,174
    Likes Received:
    3
    Then why do the people who try to quiet those raising reservations in our country call themselves patriots?

    I think judging by America's greatest export, entertainment, the rest of the world loves American people and culture, even some of our supposed worst enemies. I think most of the people in the world dislike our government and military a lot more than our culture and people.
     
  5. tinman

    tinman Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 1999
    Messages:
    97,960
    Likes Received:
    40,579
    The US always has good intentions, but sometimes makes mistakes and supports the wrong people.. kinda like when the Rockets needed a veteran SF and signed Scottie Pippen thinking that was the right thing to do.
     
  6. ima_drummer2k

    ima_drummer2k Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2002
    Messages:
    35,636
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Because they hate us!

    Sincerely,

    [​IMG]
     
  7. RocketMan Tex

    RocketMan Tex Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    18,452
    Likes Received:
    116
    No question about it. That's why I'm voting for the Spielberg/Tarantino ticket in 2008. :D
     
  8. yuantian

    yuantian Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Messages:
    2,849
    Likes Received:
    8
    good intentions does NOT justify anything you do. good results from bad intentions > bad results from good intentions
     
  9. tinman

    tinman Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 1999
    Messages:
    97,960
    Likes Received:
    40,579
    you're right.
    when am i going to get that cheaper gas? i'm tired of this!
     
  10. Dairy Ashford

    Dairy Ashford Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    14,505
    Likes Received:
    1,832
    Nice change of pace from the Bruckheimer administration.
     
  11. giddyup

    giddyup Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    20,464
    Likes Received:
    488
    The author's premise is that the problem is that the US intervenes with good intentions and then abandons wholly-- leaving serious unresolved issues.

    Isn't this exactly what is about to happen in Iraq?
     
  12. RocketMan Tex

    RocketMan Tex Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    18,452
    Likes Received:
    116
    Yep. Too much chest-pounding and violence in the Bruckheimer administration... :D
     
  13. weslinder

    weslinder Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Messages:
    12,983
    Likes Received:
    291
    http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst072307.htm

    Exposing the True Isolationists

    July 23, 2007

    Last week, I wrote about the ideology of globalism and how it underlies certain government policies. Managed trade agreements, international military adventurism, and amnesty for illegal immigrants all emanate from this ideology.

    Yet globalism has a consequence that is, if we are to believe the rhetoric of its greatest proponents, entirely unintended. Globalists often label those of us who resist their schemes as “isolationist.” Yet it is, somewhat remarkably, the globalists themselves who promote policies that isolate our nation from the rest of the world.

    In terms of modern politics, isolationism is not so much an approach to American foreign policy as it is the result of the policies enacted by proponents of globalism. From offensive statements about “Old Europe” (as differentiated from “New Europe”), necessitated by the desire to justify a military presence in Iraq, to conflicts at the WTO, the flowery rhetoric of the neo-conservatives often takes vicious turns when unrealistic policies meet with reality.

    In their hopes to remake the world in their image, the globalist elite who run much of America’s policy-making apparatus simply further isolate our country from the rest of the world. By claiming a moral superiority that is so evidently absent when the effects of their policies are witnessed, neo-conservatives have made America seem hypocritical to many abroad.

    America is now held in low esteem in many nations, not because we follow our own interests, but because the elites make claims that are not reflected in reality. They have, for example, undertaken economic sanctions in an entirely new way in recent years. When they wanted to take aim at Iraq and Iran, they imposed sanctions against those countries, but also against countries doing business with those countries. This meant we were in no position to negotiate with our adversaries, and we also could not rely on support from our allies.

    Yet this globalism often bumps into itself, because of our second party sanctions against Iran, our international commitments to the space station, for example, were put into jeopardy. Also consider the fiasco that happened as a result of sanctions on Iraq. Thousands of Iraqi children starved to death, causing (according to the 9/11 commission report) great resentment against America, yet some managed trade was allowed to continue, managed of course by the globalists in the UN oil for food program. This program resulted in yet another UN scandal.

    Despite the protestations of the neo-conservatives, this UN program is not the only example of personal enrichment that comes to the mind of those who doubt America’s authenticity due to these policies. Does anybody remember Richard Perle’s resignation from the defense policy board?

    To reset the debate in a way that reflects reality, it is important for us to reject the idea that the choice is between globalism and isolation. Instead we must stand firm for national sovereignty, constitutional republicanism and international cooperation. We should realize that America’s current isolation is simply a consequence of globalism gone awry.
     
  14. DaDakota

    DaDakota If you want to know, just ask!

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 1999
    Messages:
    124,091
    Likes Received:
    32,983
    Wait a minute, so the RUSSIANS invade Afganastan and we aid the rebels, and it is our fault for walking away?

    Yes our foreign policy has been quesitonable, but everyone's foreign policy has been questionable.

    England, France, Germany, Russia, Japan, China....everyone......

    DD
     
  15. pirc1

    pirc1 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2002
    Messages:
    13,971
    Likes Received:
    1,701
    I never said this is only a problem for the united states. The mess in the middle east is created for the most part by the Europeans after world war II. However, currently there is no country that tries to dominate the world stage like the united states, when you get involved in everything, there will be negative consequences when things don't go right. Ask how people felt about the old USSR and I am sure you will get mostly negative responses too.
     
  16. Sishir Chang

    Sishir Chang Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    11,064
    Likes Received:
    8
     
  17. Sishir Chang

    Sishir Chang Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    11,064
    Likes Received:
    8
    To head off your the point I think you are getting at is that we should then stay in Iraq what the author is saying that US intervention is bound to be problematic. That the good intentions that the US often tries to act with are themselves problems.
     
  18. DaDakota

    DaDakota If you want to know, just ask!

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 1999
    Messages:
    124,091
    Likes Received:
    32,983
    The problem with US foreign policy as I see it, is our inconsistency as to whom we support.

    If we only supported rebels or government that were trying to set up democracies, then we would probably be less hated, but we consistently prop up dictators and religious zealots which in the end will only turn around and bite us back.

    That is the main problem with foreign policy in my opinion.....we are a hypocritical nation.

    DD
     
  19. NewYorker

    NewYorker Ghost of Clutch Fans

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2002
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    41
    I wouldn't say our intentions are always "good".

    We support people who will help our objectives. That's not good. That's power politics. We've knowingly supported death squads and people with horrible histories. We've done pretty callous and cruel things, and not winked an eye. Oh, we're relatively benevolent compared to the other empires in history, but all empires are oppressive and bully - and we are no different.
     
  20. pgabriel

    pgabriel Educated Negro

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    42,773
    Likes Received:
    2,995
    we're consistent, we support us, if it benifits us, we'll make a cause out of it
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now