Talk:American benevolence

I suggest merging "for" and "against" sections and sorting alphabetically. Otherwise the question of "which comes first?" is likely to generate NPOV issues. ~ Peter1c (talk) 14:18, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, just do alphabetical ordering. – Illegitimate Barrister, 12:40, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

On second thought, I don't know if this page should even exist. In my opinion, the quotes should be merged into other pages and this page turned into a redirect. – Illegitimate Barrister, 15:23, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

I suggest keeping the page since benevolence is not precisely the same as exceptionalism. ~ Peter1c (talk) 19:02, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Quotes from sources not usually considered "notable" by Wikiquote editors

• American-led free market capitalism has been the primary driver of the best economic and human rights situation the world has ever seen. We are living in the best of all possible times.
  • C. Zaharias, "If Osama Recommends It, What Does That Tell You?" (30 January 2006), Amazon

Quote

Storey has a quote that says "From the dawn of history the oppressor has always insisted that oppression was good for the oppressed." I don't see how that has anything to do with the topic of American Benevolence. And that's why it should be removed. --2001:8003:4085:8100:247D:4D7A:7DA4:F5AB 04:32, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

It's literally on the name of the source and stated in its Wikipedia page. Gain consensus and stop warring. Rupert Loup 04:36, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

the source is "The duty of the United States towards the Philippine Islands". This page is on American benevolence, not the duties between the United States and the Philippine Islands. --2001:8003:4085:8100:247D:4D7A:7DA4:F5AB 04:39, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

That source is about the American intervension by the US in the Philippines, the quote is about that. It's stated in the Wikipedia page. "he wrote a book brief for the Lodge Committee summarizing the war crimes of the Philippine–American War. From 1905 until its dissolution in 1921 Storey was president of the national Anti-Imperialist League. He perceived that "national subjugation overseas and racial persecution at home were related," which drove his efforts at reform in the United States." Againg, gaing consensus and stop warring. Rupert Loup 04:43, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

I didn't claim that Storey wasn't viewing his quote as "anti imperialist". My assertion is that Storey did not say this quote as having anything to do with the topic of American benevolence. You have not addressed this. --2001:8003:4085:8100:247D:4D7A:7DA4:F5AB 04:49, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

The lead of this page says otherwise and the burden to prove that is not is on you. Rupert Loup 05:04, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

my proof is this - the author doesn't talk about American benevolence in his essay. You have been unable to prove otherwise, and if you can't prove the author was talking about American benevolence then I will remove this quote. --2001:8003:4085:8100:247D:4D7A:7DA4:F5AB 05:34, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

since you have been unable to refute my initial contention I consider this matter resolved and I will be removing the quote. --2001:8003:4085:8100:247D:4D7A:7DA4:F5AB 05:55, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

The topic, and some off-topic quotes, April 27

The topic is "American benevolence," so claims that America is benevolent are on-topic as are claims that America is not benevolent. In Wikipedia, "American benevolence" simply redirects to "American exceptionalism."

Claims that Bush is a war criminal, rambling about "moral interventionist internationalism", and chuckling over America being racist -- they are not quotes ABOUT "American benevolence." I removed said following items, of which only the first is even a quotable quote. HouseOfChange (talk) 17:03, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

• He is a war criminal. He brought about the war against Iraq deliberately, with lies and falsehoods.
  • Jörg Haider, June 17, 2006 [1]

• Nevertheless Kosovo is not the only indicator of a change of mood, of the sort of moral interventionist internationalism which has come to be associated particularly with Tony Blair. ... in fact, after a quarter of a century of doing nothing, the 'international community' in precisely the same year as Kosovo did engineer the independence of East Timor.
  • Adrian Hastings, June 2001 [2]

• Every time you talk about Vietnam, it's always — the Vietnam war is summarized this way, "58,000 American killed and anywhere between 2 and 3 million Vietnamese." There is a distinction between 2 and 3 million, but that's okay. I used to joke all the time — racism in America, is so endemic and so hard to see, but I was always — I used to joke that I was very proud of Bill Clinton because he was the first president, in Kosovo, the former Yugoslavia, since World War II to actually bomb white people.
  • Seymour Hersh, May 10, 2005 [3]

Deceptively edited George Kennan quote

We have about 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population. ... In the face of this situation ... we should cease to talk about vague and ... unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards, and democratization. ... The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better. ~ George Kennan, Head of the US State Department Policy Planning Staff, February 28, 1948

In 1948, George Kennan wrote a secret memo of advice concerning post-War US diplomacy, which you can read in its entirety at WikiSource. One part of the memo is his advice about Asia. Kennan strongly advised against intervening in China's civil war. Truman took Kennan's advice and in 1949 the PRC was successfully established.

From Kennan's advice related to East Asia, a carefully selected portion has been used in several articles to give a false impression. Here's that edited bit, which I just removed.

We have about 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population. ... In the face of this situation ... we should cease to talk about vague and ... unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards, and democratization. ... The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.

Now here's that edited bit with some context restored.

We must be very careful when we speak of exercising "leadership" in Asia. We are deceiving ourselves and others when we pretend to have answers to the problems, which agitate many of these Asiatic peoples. Furthermore,

we have about 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3 of its population.

This disparity is particularly great as between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment... All of the Asiatic peoples are faced with the necessity for evolving new forms of life to conform to the impact of modern technology. This process of adaptation will also be long and violent. It is not only possible, but probable, that in the course of this process many peoples will fall, for varying periods, under the influence of Moscow, whose ideology has a greater lure for such peoples, and probably greater reality, than anything we could oppose to it. All this, too, is probably unavoidable; and we could not hope to combat it without the diversion of a far greater portion of our national effort than our people would ever willingly concede to such a purpose.

In the face of this situation

we would be better off to dispense now with a number of the concepts which have underlined our thinking with regard to the Far East. We should dispense with the aspiration to 'be liked' or to be regarded as the repository of a high-minded international altruism. We should stop putting ourselves in the position of being our brothers' keeper and refrain from offering moral and ideological advice.

We should cease to talk about vague

— and for the Far East —

unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards, and democratization.

The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts.

The less we are hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.

The real context shows how the little bit taken from it is misleading. Kennan was not suggesting that the US should use its wealth to oppress the rest of the world without thought for morality. He was pointing out that US wealth did not give Truman the ability or the right to try to impose US values on the peoples of East Asia. HouseOfChange (talk) 17:31, 27 April 2022 (UTC)