Molt Be Blog

The Christian Science monitor has a good sampling of editorials on W's inaugural Freedom-A-Thon from different countries.
I can't say that I disagree with W that it would be nice if there was no more tyranny or oppression, but, that said, I have a few complaints.
(1) We all know that Bush will only ever "bring freedom" (see bombs) to countries that are not our allies and are of some threat or interest to us. Sorry Africa.
(2) Bush has yet to demonstrate an ability to "bring freedom" without bringing bombs and killing people. I understand the whole omelet-making, egg-breaking analogy, but if people are going to die for freedom, they might want to choose to do it themselves.
(3) If Bush really wants to sell freedom, he's going to need to have a better demo to show off at the trade show. I think few can argue that the United States is the most shining example of freedom. We can't build an adequate healthcare system that actually takes care of our own citizens. We can't create a retirement system that takes care of the elderly. Where's freedom when Ashcroft is keeping lists of our library books (then again, when was the last time I went to a library?), Gonzalez is torturing people (personally, I'm sure) and just about anyone can ask me to remove my shoes? These are inconveniences to those of us that do nothing wrong and a real nuisance to terrorists, but nevertheless are an infringement on the "freedom" that Bush touts.
(4) Economic freedom, on the other hand, is something we're a bit closer to being able to show off. Our freedom to be rich or poor is dicatated by nothing other than the class we're born into (wait a second, that's not freedom!) Our version of "freedom" seems fundamentally flawed by its immediate link with capitalism. What is Bush really talking about bringing to these countries? Is it freedom or free trade? Naomi Klein's article in Harper's on the capitalism injection given to Iraq is very telling of why these rich guys suddenly care about spreading "freedom". I have no faith in the neocons that they're actually in this to free the world of tyranny. What possible motive would they have to overthrow tyrannical governments unless it was money? Notice that they're overthrowing governments that don't engage with the US in trade. China? Semi-tyrannical communists, but oh how they love to sell us stuff. They're fine! Saudi Arabia? Entirely tyrannical, terrorist-funding, fundamentalists, but happy to sell us oil. So who's next? We all know. People knew it before the Iraq war even started, especially if they read anything that the neocons had to say at the Project for a New American Century. Say them with me: "Iran and North Korea." It's pretty simple really. The Bush government has people leak little things about these countries to the media all the time. People start to get used to the idea that they're our enemies (remember the axis of evil?) Then, one day, we attack our enemy. This seems entirely natural, I mean, they're our enemy. Granted, they've never really done anything besides trying to be isolationistic with nuclear weapons (remind you of anyone?). Maybe they supported a little terrorism (remind you of anyone?), maybe they invoke God a lot (I won't bother), maybe they really like crappy movies (Kim Jong Il), but either way, we all know who's next.
Ok, where have I gone with this? I'm trying to figure out if there's more to all of this than a Saturday morning rant. I think the real issue I have is that when Bush says "freedom" it means different things to different people. To nationalistic, ethnocentric Americans I think it means their pickup truck and how much they love to buy stuff and how great 'merica is. To some Americans I think it just means a shrug and that George is at it again with his "freedom is on the march" in that weak quavering voice and wondering what Cheney is really up to. To me, it means something that the United States knows little about at the moment. Those who founded this country may have had a good idea what freedom was at some point, but that's been clouded by consumption, greed and politics. You're not free because Wal Mart decided to finally build a store near you and you're not free because you're safe.
Rant over.