Reflection #9: To Each, His Own

World Politics this week was much more active and opinionated than usual because we got to talk about our first major topic that applied to our current situation. In my opinion, the most educational, and genuinely interesting aspect of national security was comparing the NSE-68 document from the cold war era, and Obama’s national security policy. To me, the differences seem far more extensive than just the transition from emphasis on the use of hard power to soft power as a means of protecting our people and ideals. It is also a clear representation of the progression of priorities and even social norms to the American people as a whole.

The NSE-68 document supported the idea of defeating the enemy through our most effective means; this is a reflection of the paranoia that was emphasized by the media mostly, but still remained a concern in the average American household. Although part of the strategy was to maintain ties with our allies, these nations were in fact extremely similar to our own. The “us” was more exclusive, and the “them” was more specific. Contrastingly, Obama’s strategy addresses our need to build our image as a more co-operative nation, while still influencing others to understand why they too would benefit from our democratic system.The emergence of political correctness affects the values and therefore the priorities of American society today. The average American child is taught to value equality, while paranoia towards “them” is often exploited by the media and criticized by the average citizen. Today, our concerns are more collective, but at a hegemonic level. Obama says in the current document that “We want a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if other peoples’ children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity.” This is represented through society by the encouragement, and rewarding of those who act as the “bigger person,” and set an example in the hope that others will follow.

While paranoia absolutely still exists, it is renamed “Islamaphobia,” and it is considered more socially unacceptable to call someone a terrorist than it would have been to call someone a communist. Obama emphasizes that we should instead, step back and consider the future of our citizens and ask, “Is there a better way to solve this problem, and also benefit the world as a whole.”

Ultimately, the goal of being permanently “secure” is obscure and ever changing, as observed through these documents. While American national security has always been centered around protection of our people, ideals, and the maintenance of hegemonic influence, the means by which we go bout achieving this security is constantly being explored and in some ways this change in inevitable because global society is also constantly changing. Technology, and the average person’s ability to communicate with such a vast array of global society have caused our methods to also change. Having deadly weapons, while necessary, does not simply solve the problem anymore, and chances are, we will have to change these methods again as the world continues to progress.