Romanticism

Yesterday in comments I lamented how much we tend to romanticize the rest of the world but didn’t elaborate on it. I’ll remedy that now.

The world is a harsh, rough place and most of the people in it have different views of what’s right or wrong than we do as well as different ideas about family relationships, men and women, sexual mores, basic rights, and so on. Many envy our prosperity but that doesn’t mean they want to adopt our way of life. Many would like to have material prosperity like ours but retain their own ways of doing things.

We and the Europeans live in what are, effectively, walled gardens. Those gardens have been protected by distance, oceans, mountain ranges, laws, our willingness to enforce our laws, and the poverty of so many of the people of the world. Modern transportation has eroded the effectiveness of distance and natural barriers as well as reducing the cost of travel. Our laws have moderated over time and in many cases we aren’t even willing to enforce those.

So, what do I mean by “romanticism”? Thinking the world isn’t a harsh place, that everyone wants their society to have the broad freedoms we have enjoyed, That people do not bring their own notions of right, wrong, and social order when they come here, or that we can alter our basic attitudes or social arrangements at will without repercussions are all romanticism.

6 comments… add one
  • Guarneri Link

    I don’t know who we is, but I don’t see much romanticism.

    The vast majority of corporatists advocate lax immigration enforcement out of a mix of practical need for employees and a cynical check on wages. The vast majority of democrat pols and operatives don’t give a damn about separating parents from children (they sure were quiet under Obama) but they do see potential votes and a campaign issue. And further, they are perfectly willing to sacrifice the fortunes of Americans and, in particular blacks, to do it.

    As for l’affair Khashoggi, it’s a microcosm of that harsh, rough world, but also a rather recent and selective outrage, one might even say convenient, with which to attempt by some to tie to Trump and his policies. As noted elsewhere, the Saudis are scumbags and no one deserves to be murdered, but we aren’t in Kansas anymore.

    From where I sit it’s not romanticism, it’s an unfortunate mix of selective naïveté, lack of a moral compass and real politik.

  • steve Link

    “(they sure were quiet under Obama) “- With Obama it was not done deliberately as a matter of policy.

    “attempt by some to tie to Trump and his policies.”

    Certainly some truth there, but then it was Trump who made such a big deal about making Saudi Arabia his first international visit. Trump who decided to do the sword dance with them. When you make an extra special effort to tie yourself to another country you are going to suffer if that country misbehaves. Our first president actually warned us against doing this.

    Steve

  • jan Link

    Hmmm…and what about all the efforts made for Obama to tie himself to terrorist regime of Iran, and earlier with Cuba, Chavez’s Venezuela, and even Putin (with the reset button, and “I’ll be more flexible when reelected” mic slip-up.)

    As for Trump’s 1st visit to the ME, did you not catch his stern speech to the 50 plus kings etc., regarding moderating their countries, updating their economies, and decreasing terrorism? Or, was it simply the traditional sword dance that caught your eye, as well as the scorn of the MSM?

  • The only legitimacy the House of Saud has resides in its relationship to the Wahhabi ‘ulema. The notion that one can separate one from the other is without foundation. Trump can say whatever he wants to the Sauds. They won’t do it.

    From an Islamic point of view the only legitimate government is a theocracy and, since there is only one God, there can only be one theocracy. Kings, sultans, shahs, presidents are all equally illegitimate.

  • steve Link

    “Hmmm…and what about all the efforts made for Obama to tie himself to terrorist regime of Iran, and earlier with Cuba, Chavez’s Venezuela, and even Putin (with the reset button, and “I’ll be more flexible when reelected” mic slip-up.)”

    Which of those countries did he visit in person? Please link to the pictures of Obama dancing with the leaders of those countries. Obama helped enact strict sanctions on Iran which helped bring them to the table to negotiate the nuclear deal. There was no special relationship with Venezuela. Yup, he wanted to normalize relations with Cuba. How awful, after all, our years of isolating them has been so successful.

    Steve

  • Gray Shambler Link

    We, (westerners) don’t live in Shangri-La, and we are far, far from the ideal, but the basic principles that form our shared wealth are there for any nation to choose. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, personal property rights defending my 1992 LeSabre, and whatever Warren Buffet happens to own now. I don’t care what he says, if you tax away all the profit from his investments he’ll react accordingly. Let people keep most of the fruits of their labor and their labors will increase. Any nation forward looking enough to free their entrepreneurs can share in the “good fortune” of western European nations.

Leave a Comment