July 4th, 1776, marks the birth of the United States of America as the continental congress based in Philadelphia declared the 13 British colonies as independent, sovereign states seceding from the crowns control. That fateful day compounded the lessons from the age of enlightenment into what American Founding Father, George Washington, would call the “last great experiment for promoting human happiness” after the hard fought war for independence from the monarchy of England (“The Great Experiment: George Washington and the American Republic”). Such lessons were used to teach the generations of Americans to come the need to maintain democracy, resist imperialism, and protect the rights mandated to each member of mankind. . Following the
…show more content…
Every incident of the United States militarily or politically implementing itself into the affairs of another nation, following World War II, has been in some form to promote the ideals of democracy and protect mankind's basic rights. Thus the question is raised: What happens to democracy’s place in the world should America cease it’s campaign to foster it? According to Henry Kissinger, author of the book “Diplomacy”, there are three main schools of thought on American foreign thought. The most prevalent school focusing on the need for the United States to mold international politics through the building of alliances and use of power only when the cause is just. However, those who seek neutrality on part the the U.S. are in sharp contrast to the beliefs of the “shapers”. The primary argument of these “abstainers” focus around the rise of globalism and the lack of a great foe that threatens the American superpowers established dominance(Maynes). Such an argument holds no ground as Allen Lynch, author of “Russia and Its Neighbors: U.S. Policy Changes”, revealed concerns the U.S. government holds over the potential of the Russian Federation attempting to regain lost territory(Lynch). Should these concerns come to fruition, then America must contend with the new sense of imperialism stemming from the fallen Soviet …show more content…
For example, the United Nations adopted a series of covenants focused entirely on guaranteeing fundamental human rights to all peoples of Earth in 1966(Kjaerum). Current American ambassador, Nikki Haley, sums up the United States stance on human rights with great precision, “The first argument he offered for paying more attention to this subject was that human rights are inalienable rights. When we embrace human rights we embrace the values that are held, among others, by all the world’s major religions. Indeed, one of the purposes of the United Nations is “respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.” Ambassador Moynihan did not stop with arguing that protecting human rights is the right thing to do. He also argued that it’s the smart thing to do. And it is”. This statement by Ambassador Haley embodies the stance taken by the U.S. and the pressure it places on the United Nations to take greater action to protect and serve(Haley). However, as seen from her stern words, America’s eyes are viewing nothing more than empty promises and idleness on the part of the peace keeping organization. Thus yet another question remains to be answered: Who shall fill the nearly empty shoes of a peace keeping force which fails to secure peace? The United
Every incident of the United States militarily or politically implementing itself into the affairs of another nation, following World War II, has been in some form to promote the ideals of democracy and protect mankind's basic rights. Thus the question is raised: What happens to democracy’s place in the world should America cease it’s campaign to foster it? According to Henry Kissinger, author of the book “Diplomacy”, there are three main schools of thought on American foreign thought. The most prevalent school focusing on the need for the United States to mold international politics through the building of alliances and use of power only when the cause is just. However, those who seek neutrality on part the the U.S. are in sharp contrast to the beliefs of the “shapers”. The primary argument of these “abstainers” focus around the rise of globalism and the lack of a great foe that threatens the American superpowers established dominance(Maynes). Such an argument holds no ground as Allen Lynch, author of “Russia and Its Neighbors: U.S. Policy Changes”, revealed concerns the U.S. government holds over the potential of the Russian Federation attempting to regain lost territory(Lynch). Should these concerns come to fruition, then America must contend with the new sense of imperialism stemming from the fallen Soviet …show more content…
For example, the United Nations adopted a series of covenants focused entirely on guaranteeing fundamental human rights to all peoples of Earth in 1966(Kjaerum). Current American ambassador, Nikki Haley, sums up the United States stance on human rights with great precision, “The first argument he offered for paying more attention to this subject was that human rights are inalienable rights. When we embrace human rights we embrace the values that are held, among others, by all the world’s major religions. Indeed, one of the purposes of the United Nations is “respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.” Ambassador Moynihan did not stop with arguing that protecting human rights is the right thing to do. He also argued that it’s the smart thing to do. And it is”. This statement by Ambassador Haley embodies the stance taken by the U.S. and the pressure it places on the United Nations to take greater action to protect and serve(Haley). However, as seen from her stern words, America’s eyes are viewing nothing more than empty promises and idleness on the part of the peace keeping organization. Thus yet another question remains to be answered: Who shall fill the nearly empty shoes of a peace keeping force which fails to secure peace? The United