Hillary Clinton is a commie symp.
That's a familiar line from the rabid right, which hasn't yet gotten the news that the Cold War is over. Google the secretary of state's name and "communist," and you'll get over a million links, some of them to neo-Nazi websites. Folks say the craziest things on the Internet. I just didn't expect the Washington Post to make the same argument.
In a recent editorial, the Post lambasted Clinton's speech on human rights in which she quite sensibly added "oppression of want" to the traditional concerns with the oppression of tyranny and torture. "Ms. Clinton's lumping of economic and social 'rights' with political and personal freedom was a standard doctrine of the Soviet Bloc, which used to argue at every East-West conference that human rights in Czechoslovakia were superior to those in the United States, because one provided government health care that the other lacked," the Post opined.
I can just visualize Hillary Clinton and her speechwriters over at State sifting through arcane historical texts for inspiration. They pull a book from the shelf. It's old and hasn't been touched in quite a few years. Is it Marx's Capital? Lenin's State and Revolution? No, it's the collected speeches of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. In his famous "four freedoms" speech from 1941, FDR identified "freedom from want" as "economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants -- everywhere in the world." Sounds a lot like "oppression of want" to me.
Or maybe Clinton and her team simply perused United Nations documents for inspiration. The concept of human security, which has been a staple of international politics for the last two decades, draws together threats to the political, economic, and military security of individuals and communities. The UN's 1994 Human Development Report defined human security as "safety from such chronic threats as hunger, disease and repression" as well as "protection from sudden and hurtful disruptions in the patterns of daily life -- whether in homes, in jobs or in communities."
The Human Security Network, meanwhile, brings together a number of countries that never belonged to the Soviet Bloc -- Canada, Austria, Mali, Costa Rica -- to explore comprehensive approaches to human trafficking, AIDS, climate change, and the like.
Or maybe the Clintonistas read our own Just Security report, which applied the human security approach to U.S. foreign policy. Hmm, FDR plus the UN plus Foreign Policy In Focus: That is a suspicious lineage.
The Post complained that the Obama administration, "working with friendly but unfree countries, [would] choose the easy route of focusing on development, while downplaying democracy." It cited Clinton's speech in Morocco on engagement with Islamic countries.
Strange, I don't remember the Post complaining about the Bush administration -- or any of its predecessors -- prioritizing economic relations with such undemocratic countries as Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Washington has always downplayed democracy in order to secure access to oil and cement military ties with such countries. Now it may (or may not) downplay democracy in order to improve the lives of ordinary people. Obviously that's a more unpardonable sin.
We've seen the hard right dust off the language of red-baiting during the debates over health care, the economic stimulus, and the proposed jobs bill. Those views have leaked into the mainstream. Meanwhile, the terrorist-as-the-new-communist argument has lost its zing. After all, we are fighting overseas contingency operations, not a war on terror any longer. So, brace yourself for the new new anti-communism, which identifies "communist sympathizers" like Hillary Clinton as the real threat to America. Talk about boring old re-runs.
The Cold War is over. Long live the Cold War...
For the rest of this article or to sign up for FPIF's World Beat newsletter, please click here.
There's a reason why we regulate capitalism, because "buyer beware" wasn't a good motto for a society. If you wan't to disagree, then don't blame a company if you get sick and/or a love one dies, afterall it was your fault for not researching the product enough.
Why anyone would quote the Soviet Union when it comes to free anything is beyond me.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/4735087/Hillary-Clinton-Chinese-human-rights-secondary-to-economic-survival.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/21/clinton.china.asia/
This from a former first lady, Senator and presidential candidate who has claimed moral leadership on womens rights based on a speech delivered in China to the UN Conference on Women in 1995.
http://voxygen.net/classes/contemporary-public-address/hillary-clinton-womens-rights-speech/
Actions of course speak louder than any words, particularly when rhetoric is often insincere, careless or "misspoken in the moment.." Now that she is in a postion of power to address human rights internationally, there is really little record of leadership and action on human rights on which to judge this SoS. Perhaps inaction speaks louder than words.
Oh, the paradox!