What makes something “right”?
When decisions are made in Congress,
there are always people against legislation and for legislation. The “right’
thing for one group of people may be the “wrong” thing for another group. (Example: Affordable Care Act.
Democrats for. Republicans against)
To determine whether I agree with the
statement or not, we must first define my beliefs on what the “right” thing the
American government should do is.
What is right to me is when government
creates legislation that will have long-term net positive impact on humans.
Legislation that will provide the most amount of good for the most amount of
people in the long term is legislation that I am in support of.
Vietnam War
 |
| Agent Orange |
2.
Total deaths are estimated to be around
2,284,000.
3.
It is believed that 3 million people
have been affected
Iraq War
1. Civilian casualties are estimated to be
around 115,044 to 126,199
Afghanistan War
The US Government decided to go to war
in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. These decisions allocated resources that
could’ve been spent on healthcare, infrastructure, education, scientific
research, etc. Instead these decisions have caused suffering, crippling, and
death.
These decisions do not result in any
long-term positive good, and so therefore, I disagree with the statement that I
can “trust the government in Washington to do what is right just about always
or most of the time”. I do not trust the US Gov.
I believe the majority of Americans
have also lost faith in the government, as indicated by this poll.
Perhaps some
of their reasons are similar to mine?
Works Cited
"Cost of the Vietnam War." VAORRC – Vietnam Agent Orange Relief & Responsibility Campaign. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.
Horowitz, Alana. "Afghanistan War Anniversary Marks 12 Years Of Conflict." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 07 Oct. 2013. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.
"Iraq Body Count." Iraq Body Count. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.
"Vietnam: More Than 100,000 Casualties From Explosives Since War Ended." The New York Times. N.p., 8 Dec. 2011. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.
It's interesting that you point out that the government's legislation should have a "long-term net-positive impact on humans."
ReplyDeleteHow good for the world is American hegemony? Multiple great powers trying to keep a balance between them led to World War I, which killed...37 million people. Two great powers locked in the Cold War were a hair trigger away from launching nukes, which would have killed...everyone. Since the advent of nuclear weapons there have been no great power wars, but that came at the risk of nuclear annihilation via US-USSR conflict. Now, American has undisputed hegemony.
What are the other benefits of American hegemony? Democracies are more stable and tend to have a better track record for human and civil rights. Democracies are extremely unlikely to go to war with each other...to the extent that I'm pretty sure it just doesn't happen. American economic dominance is supposed to usher in an era of increased free trade, along with more wealth and a higher standard of living for impoverished countries.
If all those things are true--but especially the part where American hegemony stops major war--would waging minor wars be worth it?
Also, another thing--are governments supposed to do things that are net-positive on a worldwide scale, or net-positive for their own citizens? Should a government pass legislation that benefits other nations at the expense of their own populace? I don't think they should. No rational citizen would support a government that acts *against* their interests. This would destroy the legitimacy of government as a good idea and presumably punt us back into the state of nature (anarchy), which would be...less than ideal.
So, with that in mind, the second point is, is it worth it to wage war and kill hundreds of thousands of civilians in a foreign country to secure your own country's national security?
Great definition of what is "right." I completely agree with the comments about the government diverting funds from health care, infrastructure, education, science research etc. The idea that America is not investing enough in the future brings to mind the Fareed Zakaria article that we read earlier this year. I think the idea of whether America is investing enough in the future is key to answering whether the Government is right most of the time. In terms of short term versus long term interest, the short term always wins in government legislation and this is where I think that government may not always be right. Sure it has noble intentions, it just focuses on the wrong things.
ReplyDelete