Judge Not, Lest Ye Be Judged

[Frodo]

i ask you all -is it too much to ask that we live up to our own standards?

China, Others Criticize U.S. Report on Rights
Double Standard at State Dept. Alleged

By Edward Cody
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, March 4, 2005; Page A14

BEIJING, March 3 -- China accused the United States on Thursday of using a double standard to judge human rights in other countries, adding to a list of nations suggesting that the government that produced the Abu Ghraib prison abuses has no business commenting on what happens elsewhere.

"No country should exclude itself from the international human rights development process or view itself as the incarnation of human rights that can reign over other countries and give orders to the others," Premier Wen Jiabao's cabinet declared, three days after the State Department criticized China in its annual human rights report.

The Chinese retort, which contained a long list of what it labeled U.S. human rights abuses at home and abroad, came directly from Wen's cabinet, giving it more weight than a Foreign Ministry comment or editorial. In addition, it used unusually direct language -- for example, charging that the United States "frequently commits wanton slaughters during external invasions and military attacks."

A number of other countries criticized in the U.S. report expressed a similar view, that the Bush administration has compromised on human rights and has no standing to chastise others. Such responses often follow Washington's annual report, but the reaction has become more intense and more readily voiced since U.S. abuses of Iraqi and other prisoners were publicized around the world last year.

"Unfortunately, [the report] once again gives us reason to say that double standards are a characteristic of the American approach to such an important theme," the Russian Foreign Ministry declared after reviewing the report. "Characteristically off-screen is the ambiguous record of the United States itself."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3840-2005Mar3.html

[Richard]

i ask you all -is it too much to ask that we live up to our own standards?

It certainly isn't my standards.  I'd just ignore the rest of the world.

[John Dibble]

While I don't feel the United States government is perfect, I hardly think it's that bad, or going by any double standard. For one, the vast majority of our human rights abuse is not upon our own people - can China say the same? The first objective of any government should be to protect it's citizens - all other objectives are secondary.

Also, while Abu Ghraib was indeed a human rights abuse that I condemn, it pales in comparison to many of the things done by governments like China's, or even worse, North Korea's.

If you can't recognize the differences in degree, you need to reanalyze the situation.

[Jake]

Because the actions at Abu ghraib were sanctioned by our government.  Ok, exit stage left.  China slaughters 100,000 people, doesn't make the news. A rogue group of sick, messed up individuals abuse some prisoners, the whole world says America is a bad country.  That is the double standard here.  America is always wrong.

[Cashcow]

Uh, since when does China get to criticize the U.S. on human rights?

[Jake]

Oh, where do you find this toilet paper, Le Monde maybe?

[Polkergeist]

In this thread we have the same old story. Someone critisises America  and gets a chorus of

'You think America is always wrong'

That's a load of crap.

America is never always wrong as she is never always right.

When we have a government run by people it will always exhibit the flaws of people: vanity, greed etc. That goes for all nations

That being said, America would have never got to where she is today (in most cases) respected leader of the free world with out being more right than wrong.

But America has been wrong in the past and will be wrong again.

But if you view life through of the  (mostly-right-wing) ever patriotic glasses or though the (mostly-left-wing) ever dissenting glasses. You will always have a distorted picture of the virtues and pitfalls of a national government.

[angus]

While I don't feel the United States government is perfect, I hardly think it's that bad, or going by any double standard. For one, the vast majority of our human rights abuse is not upon our own people - can China say the same? The first objective of any government should be to protect it's citizens - all other objectives are secondary.

Also, while Abu Ghraib was indeed a human rights abuse that I condemn, it pales in comparison to many of the things done by governments like China's, or even worse, North Korea's.

If you can't recognize the differences in degree, you need to reanalyze the situation.

Authoritarian propaganda only works on those already predisposed toward authoritarianism.  You will never understand that.  And it's probably just as well.  I'm a little surprised that any American or Westerner, in general, would take such propaganda seriously.  I'm tempted to suggest that the progenitor of the thread is probably intelligent enough not to either, but it's a tough call, really.  We can leave it up to the reader to decide whether it's attempted provocation or genuine gullibility.

[angus]

 Le Monde

Le Monde is actually a pretty respectable source for news, IMHO.

(this is the part where Al is tempted to tell me I'm a fool but he won't)

Yeah, yeah, I know they're running the Michael Jackson story on Page one of the International Page, but hey, who isn't?  Anyway, you know the French eat that sensationalistic crap up.  It's like an entire nation of Fox News heads, as it were.  Ouch.  Still, in a very real sense Le Monde is a sort of vehicle for the projection of the economic and social values of the French cultural elite, much the same way as the NYT is the USA.   Give the paper its due.

The French take on the Jackson case, by the way, is kinda funny, but no more idiotic than the NYT take on the case.  Here's the latest, s'il vous plait:

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/dh/0,14-0@14-0@2-3210,39-24566547,0.html

Note the use of the phrase  " le chanteur n'avait jamais agi de façon inappropriée avec son frère de 13 ans"  which, roughly and (rustily) translated means "the singer had never acted in an inappropiate way with the 13 year old brotther" 

Now, how is that any different than the sort of sensationalistic crap the the American cultural elititsts at our nations Number One newspaper would print?  Seriously.


Please interpret this as follows:

1.  Angus is tired of hearing about Le Procès du Michael Jackson
2.  Angus is tired of French-bashing
3.  Angus is really tired of having to hear from uninformed posters.
5.  Angus can't find his valium.  or the 4 key.

[David S]

While I don't feel the United States government is perfect, I hardly think it's that bad, or going by any double standard. For one, the vast majority of our human rights abuse is not upon our own people - can China say the same? The first objective of any government should be to protect it's citizens - all other objectives are secondary.

Also, while Abu Ghraib was indeed a human rights abuse that I condemn, it pales in comparison to many of the things done by governments like China's, or even worse, North Korea's.

If you can't recognize the differences in degree, you need to reanalyze the situation.

I agree although I think we should mind our own business. China's internal issues are not our problem as long as they don't try nationalizing American interests there.