F the EU With those famous words of Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, the era of Wilsonian Liberalism and globalization came to an end. Its not a surprise, in fact it was predicted by Robert Lansing, Woodrow Wilson's Secretary of State, with the following famous words "The more I think about the President's declaration as to the right of 'self- determination,' the more convinced I am of the danger of . . . such ideas . . . . What effect will it have on the Irish, the Indians, the Egyptians, and the nationalists among the Boers? Will it not breed discontent, disorder, and rebellion? Will not the Mohammedans of Syria and Palestine and possibly Morocco and Tripoli rely on it? How can it be harmonized with Zionism, to which the President is practically committed? The phrase is simply loaded with dynamite. It will raise hopes which can never be realized. It will, I fear, cost thousands of lives. . . . What a calamity that the phrase was ever uttered! What misery it will cause!" Indeed, as Lansing astutely remarked, much suffering has been inflicted on humans in the modern era in its name. Part of the problem is that there are different types of people in the world, all of them seeking the power to fulfill their various desires. Because their desires vary, what is one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. Indeed Nelson Mandela was viewed as a terrorist by many in the United States. The following words by Walter Lippmann come to mind: “No man has ever thought out an absolute or a universal ideal in politics, for the simple reason that nobody knows enough, or can know enough, to do it.” So it was inevitable that Wilsonian Liberalism would fail. Consider more words from Lippmann's article "The classic doctrine of liberty consists of absolutes. It consists of them except at the critical point where the author has come into contact with objective difficulties. Then he introduces into the argument, somewhat furtively, a reservation which liquidates its universal meaning and reduces the exalted plea for liberty in general to a special argument for the success of a special purpose. There are at the present time, for instance, no more fervent champions of liberty than the western sympathizers with the Russian Soviet government. Why is it that they are indignant when Mr. Burleson suppresses a newspaper and complacent when Lenin does? And, vice versa, why is it that the anti-Bolshevist forces in the world are in favor of restricting constitutional liberty as a preliminary to establishing genuine liberty in Russia? Clearly the argument about liberty has little actual relation to the existence of it. It is the purpose of the social conflict, not the freedom of opinion, that lies close to the heart of the partisans. The word liberty is a weapon and an advertisement, but certainly not an ideal which transcends all special aims." Self determination centers on the notion of liberty. But as Lippmann pointed out, that word, in practice is no more than a weapon and advertisement. For evidence, we can note that even Hitler has invoked self determination to achieve the power to fulfill his desires. It's over. What's there are people seeking power for themselves and what they believe in, not liberty. Foreign policy elites need to understand this and realize that in a world of nuclear weapons, the best course of action is to create reasonable, mutually agreed sandboxes.
Yes, Obama's Victoria Nuland very much personifies the arrogant US views and positions. Most Americans are blissfully unaware of her actions back in 2014. Most Americans have not a clue that the Ukrainian government is yet another US puppet. Hunter Biden was lucky to get hooked up with Burisma thanks to connections with his father.
