Forced Revolutions/Forced Westernism

[brenden]

note to self; elaborate KP style after Theatre
This was randomly provoked by seeing a Legal Studies thread 'protection of rights' or something along those lines.
Basically, I want to know where people stand on the concept of forcing Westernism on countries for "the greater good" (harry potter, waddup).
I think this is a really interesting topic. One side of me is saying something like It's wrong to ever impose a culture upon others. It's the same sentiment that white settlers had pre-Aboriginal genocide, and who's to say that one culture is better than another when these things are so subjective
And another part of me says something like Well, the other side of you is a bunch of political correctness gone mad; it is immoral not to liberate countries that are perpetuating gross abuses of human rights
In all honesty, the country I'm thinking of is Saudi Arabia. An interesting topic I think, because you could argue from a humanist basis for either viewpoint. This thread could fizzle and die or it could provoke some great discussion so I'm hoping it's the latter. So, AN, is it moral to force liberation on countries that are oppressive or should we stick to our own devices? Go.


edit -> in case someone missed the point, I was alluding towards an invasion, or a war with these countries (even hypothetical countries).

[Yendall]

Positives:

• Advancement in technology and resources
• An improvement in the overall health of the population
• A limitation to violence within the country

Negatives:

• War
• On-going Violence
• Corruption

The text I studied this year, 'The Quiet American', was outlining the positives and negatives of taking democratic control of Vietnam in the 40's/50's. There was a difference between simple sociology and forced control when the protagonist attempted to implement a democratic government into a country already split into Communism and Colonialism. The novel really touched on the effect superpowers have when they intervene in the politics of developing nations, which I think is what you're trying to get at with Saudi Arabia. Greene seems like an 'anti-american' through his writing style, but he showed the controversies surrounding forced ideological implementation/replacement.

Now, Greene was hinting through not only this novel but all his work, that you cannot simply impose a new culture into an already grounded culture (like you said). I mostly agree with this because you would be essentially changing the heritage of a country, however in some cases it results in positivity. For example in East Timor: I went over there in 2011 to see a country full of American aid, alongside various countries who helped out to rebuild the culture after the horrendous murders of the Indonesians not long ago. For those who don't know, East Timor was declared an independent nation after they stood for their rights, shortly after this the Indonesians massacred thousands of Timorese in 1991. "The Indonesian army is reported to have trained and supplied militias imported from Indonesia to terrorise the population". What Australia did at the time was quite minimal, alongside USA and Portugal. Although not long after this Dili Massacre, we decided to re-establish their country by moving forces over there and helping ground their government once more. Whilst we were helping we were implementing our resources and our views into their country, and it is resulting in positive actions. This isn't exactly "forced Westernism" but is simply introducing a new way of living. This sort of lightness when it comes to re-establishing a country is fine in my opinion, it is more when countries try to change another to gain political power that bugs me.
Sorry if this makes no sense, but it sort of hints what i think.

[mr.politiks]

Ok, here's a mildly relevant question: so if there were to be an Arab-spring type revolution in Saudi, do you think the West would support it?

[Genericname2365]

Ok, here's a mildly relevant question: so if there were to be an Arab-spring type revolution in Saudi, do you think the West would support it?

I think they'd (the US/UK) possibly try to suppress it behind the scenes, but if it grew beyond their control then they'd switch loyalties to the side of the revolution.