Critical Thinking Assignment
Write out your answers and submit them using the Dropbox in a RTF or Word doc format under the Assignment Course Tools under Critical Thinking Assignment One (where it will be worth a maximum of twelve points. Should America export its version of democracy? Write as if you are telling the president what kind of foreign policy to follow. In order to make a convincing argument, you will need to tell him why this course of action should be followed. To do this, you will need to show the president how it will solve problems in other countries and in the United States. Keep in mind that these problems include the amount of power the government and people have and the economic impacts (on U.S. taxpayers and other countries) involved. Talk about what the US has been doing in Iraq and Afghanistan and what do you think it should do in Libya and Egypt and other similar countries. Here are some viewpoints on exporting democracy:
Link to the Washington Times, a commentary from March 2006[->0] Link to the Washington Post, an article from January 2006[->1]
Dear Mr. President,
The idea that freedom and democracy can be exported all over the world is an ancient dream. Athenian democrats, Russian Bolsheviks and, French revolutionaries to mention only the better-known cases, were convinced that their own political system was good enough to be donated to all peoples. But not even the path to freedom is carpeted with rose-petals: enthusiasm is often mingled with fanaticism; idealism must come to terms with the harsh laws of “Realpolitik”. That’s why the question states, whether if I would export America’s version of democracy? To me I would say that it was a dream for the Americans, so they could provide it for European people. Every Italian recalls the glorious days of the summer of 1944 and the spring of 1945, when the major cities of The countries were liberated by allied troops. We use the term “liberated”. With that being said, we have to think about reality and ask what if we export America’s democracy? It would be saying that, the system in which the highest court of the land can prevent all of the votes from being counted. Or in which the highest court of the land can strike down any law the voters have voted in favor of for any reason at all that that court feels like. That’s why I feel that it’s not worth exporting.
The things that I would ask you to recommend for America is four simple changes in our foreign policies. First off, to be wary of rhetoric as policy. Candidates must have the ability to articulate foreign policy and strategic security objectives in aggregate. Voters should be critical of candidates who are beating the proverbial ‘war drum’ and the world is changing and America needs allies.
I would like to inform you that when I mean to be wary of rhetoric as policy I was saying that Foreign policy and strategic security is a game of calculations. One inimical decision can have a cascading effect that impacts on global security, economy, and stability. So be skeptical of candidates who claim that, “America never leads from behind”. This is a slogan, a reflective quandary, not a plan of action. Voters should apply the same kind of scrutiny to a candidate’s foreign policy that they would, when they buy a car. What kind of mileage is America going to get out of this policy? What kind of warranties is available with a specific course of action? And more importantly what kind of road side assistance is available along the way. The second policy that I meant to describe was to you that it’s an Obstacle to foreign policy and strategic security rarely exists in isolation. Most failure in international relations comes from a robust lack of consideration for indicators that drive conflict. These indicators are usually, political, cultural, and religious. Voters should expect their candidate to understand these indicators,...