"Liberal Interventionism" is a Scam

20 June 2011

Tom Fowdy's Blog

"Liberal Interventionism" is the biggest scam ever in the scope of modern world foreign policy issues. A total con; its an excuse for countries to invade other countries to reap their own rewards and benefits, not to actually "bring freedom" to the country that is being invaded. That is rarely the case and in many cases the means are not justified behind such "attacks".

Throughout the 20th and 21st centuries we have witnessed many wars and invasions which are supposed to be bringing "freedom" to the nations being attacked. In most cases this is not the intention or even the outcome of suck attacks. Lusts for oil and power overshadow the actual interests of freeing nations from authoritarian and fascist minded regimes. Usually, "it's an authoritarian nation" is just a petty excuse to justify such invasions. Whereas the actual number of deaths caused by the actual invasion in itself usally outnumber the amount of people who were being killed in the country away during peacetime; which makes it all the more pointless. Thus this foreign policy idea is a sham, and the Iraq war and the Suez crisis stand as testimonies to why this is so.

There are hundreds of authoritarian nations in the world today where the people have no civil liberties and human rights, yet these "western police" nations such as the USA and the UK take no interest whatsoever in invading or intervening them nor does the Liberal ideological con of the United Nations. So why ignore hundreds of horrific nations yet pick on one or two are not even amongst the worst? This shows that in reality, governments do not really care about the people of nations, rather they simply seek to meet their own corrupt ends.

There are 54 nations in the world ranked by the global democracy index as"Authoritarian Regimes". Why aren't we invading them? To be ranked an authoritarian regime by this index means that the state is being ran like a dictatorship, the people have no freedom of speech, no freedom of expression, no rights against the government, nothing. Yet we aren't invading them and we aren't about to. So how can liberal interventionism be real? We're being lied to.

Countries ranked as "Authoritarian regimes" by the Economist Intelligence Unit:

Madagascar

Kuwait

Mauritania

Jordan

Ethiopia

Fiji

Burkina Faso

Cuba

Bahrain

Nigeria

Togo

Algeria

Cameroon

Comoros 

Nigeria

Gambia

Belarus

Angola

Kazakhstan

Gabon

Rwanda

Azerbaijan

China

Qatar

Egypt

Vietnam

Swaziland

Republic of the Congo

Oman

Guinea

Tunisia

Zimbabwe 

Yemen

United Arab Emirates

Tajikistan

Afghanistan

Sudan

Eritea 

Syria

Djibouti

Democratic Republic of the Congo

Laos

Guinea Bissau

Libya

Iran

Equatorial Guinea 

Saudi Arabia

Central African Republic

Burma

Uzbekistan

Turkmenistan

Chad

North Korea

Most of the nations listed. We are not interested in "getting rid of the leader" or "pretending to protect the people". Some of these nations have nuclear weapons too, we aren't really bothered about changing them. Just the ones we see an interest in. In these countries, hundreds are getting killed everyday or executed, or imprisoned. The internet is censored, the media is censored. Horrific things happen and we never hear of them. Our governments aren't interested in changing them, this is why liberal interventionism really is a delusion to make us think that governments care, clearly not. They have no intention to bring peace or stability in the world when you have so many of these nations with corrupt and tyrannical governments. Our press don't even report most of them; they are too busy seeking the oil in Libya and thus are on a crusade to demonize and get rid of Muammar Gaddafi, he is no where near the worst out of all the leaders out of the countries I have listed above. Like him, most of the countries have had the same leader for 20/30/40 years and have done the same horrific things against the people, if not worser things.

If we are interested in intervening in "some of them". Then I'd like to see us take down every authoritarian regime, or otherwise simply leave all of them alone and stop picking on some of them to suit our greedy interests. So its either all or none we invade or take or leave it. We probably shouldn't be waging war against any of them or bombing them. It isn't for a good cause or even a just one.