When confronted with the argument that whatever the United States is doing at any particular time is wrong because so much of the rest of the world thinks otherwise, I typically respond that, like Will Rogers, they don’t know nothin’ but what they read in the newspaper. Or, in other words, they’ve been indoctrinated into the beliefs they have by their governments and their news media. I’ve just found some support for my contention in the great article Hating America by Bruce Bawer (hat tip: Truth, Lies, & Common Sense via Mudville Gazette):
Things are scarcely better in neighboring Sweden. During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, the only time I saw pro-war arguments fairly represented in the Scandinavian media was on an episode of “Oprah” that aired on Sweden’s TV4. Not surprisingly, a Swedish government agency later censured TV4 on the grounds that the program had violated media-balance guidelines. In reality, the show, which had featured participants from both sides of the issue, had plainly offended authorities by exposing Swedish viewers to something their nation’s media had otherwise shielded them from—a forceful articulation of the case for going into Iraq.4 In other European countries, to be sure, the media spectrum is broader than this; yet with the exception of Britain, no Western European nation even approaches America’s journalistic diversity. (The British courts’ recent silencing of royal rumors, moreover, reminded us that press freedom is distinctly more circumscribed in the U.K. than in the U.S.) And yet Western Europeans are regularly told by their media that it’s Americans who are fed slanted, selective news—a falsehood also given currency by Americans like Hertsgaard.
Quite lengthy but well worth a read.
I don’t think Sweden’s a fair example. It’s deep into the Kantian post-conflict universe. Having been there three or four times, I simply can’t imagine those people in a war. They do make nice cars, furniture, and ball-bearings, however.
Dave,
The Pentagon’s own Defense Science Board Task Force takes on the task of determining “why they hate us” (at least in the Muslim world).
Here is a summary from their website:
‘Muslims do not hate our freedom, but rather they hate our policies [the report says]. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the long-standing, even increasing, support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan and the Gulf states. Thus, when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy.’
Here is a link to the report.
http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/2004-09-Strategic_Communication.pdf
By “they” in the context of this post I meant the Europeans (ironically) as I had hoped would be clear from subject matter of the article. I must learn to communicate more clearly.
Actually, it’s still appropriate. I’ve already read the the document for which you’ve supplied the link. So what policies should we change? Should we favor unfriendly regimes over friendly regimes? I’ve long written and argued that the Israelis are not our friends. But any reasonably friendly face looks a lot more friendly when you’re in a tough neighborhood and the Middle East is a very tough neighborhood.
So, other than Israel, what? I agree we should not have overthrown the Mossadegh regime. But it’s clear (at least to me) that the Eisenhower Administration believed that the regime would soon fall to the Communists and be incorporated into the still-expanding Soviet Empire. And, in the context of the time, it was a reasonable guess.
So what else?
I believe that it’s not our democracy and it’s not our policies but it’s the perception of our policies that is the problem. And there’s absolutely nothing we can do about it. When the media are state-controlled and 24/7 the local equivalent of Baghdad Bob is on the air it’s pretty hard to get an alternative message through. Al Hurra is a mighty slender reed for such an organized opposition.