International Isolation

There seems to be two main schools of thought when it comes to policies of international isolation.

With various elections closing in around the world, the topic of immigration and isolation is once again up for debate. This is a major issue in the upcoming British election with the debate bringing into question the position of the United Kingdom within Europe and the wider world. The fear of immigration in this country seems to stem from a theory that the people of these islands are a 'pure' race of some sort that is losing their birth right of land to outside forces. Indeed, many people that are seemingly tolerant of immigration believe that they are doing a favour to people that arrive from other countries and that they owe a debt.

The United States of America highlights another perspective on isolation. A major turning point in the history of the United States of America undoubtedly came at the point that Roosevelt forced the country to enter the wider world. Ever since this time, citizens of the country and citizens of other countries have debated the actual effects that these policies have created. Indeed, to be elected president of the USA, a by-line relating to how the country will lead the world in some respect always plays well. But as this policies continued they seemed to have become far more self-interested. That is not to say that they are any more or less selfish than the initial decision to enter World War 2. The most prevalent world view is now that this country gets involved for their own benefit and no others. In this sense the USA is just as isolated as any anti-immigration leaning government.

In both of these cases, very rigid lines are drawn up in relation to isolation. It must be stressed that countless people in these countries do not follow these extremely simplified patterns. The important point is that their governments are frequently perceived to behave in this way. Unfortunately this has the effect of painting all citizens of the country with the same brush. This dehumanises countless people as I believe the main effect of isolationist policies is to undermine the common connection we all have.

To block people from entering a country or to offer help only when it helps a certain country is to emphasise man-made borders and to undermine real, border-less connections.

-The English Student

Haitian Leverage

The first question countless people ask when observing external disaster: how can this benefit me?

While politicians may not admit to such callous emotions it almost certainly will cross their minds at some point. The Haitian disaster that has claimed the lives of at least 200,000 has inevitable been hi-jacked by such self-serving people. For governments and politicians there seems to be two main strategies of self-interest.

For smaller nations the strategy is one of self-promotion. For many reasons it is in the best interest of these governments to give generously to the people of Haiti. Doing so highlights the humanitarian spirit of the country and raises their international profile. If a country can boast a high ratio of donated money per citizen they will garden acclaim from all over the world. Larger 'world powers' face a different sort of playing field. Countries like the U.S. and the U.K. have frequently made claims to lead the world through decency and compassion. If they fail to live up to these expectations in this crisis then their entire ethos will be undermined. These powers need to act in order to preserve themselves. Obama does not want another Katrina.

So should we decry this hollow form of 'charity'? Indeed, does it even count as charity if the giver gains from it? I am tempted to take the line that our idealogical basis of charity is flawed and as such should be addressed, This would negatively affect the short term aid policy while hopefully creating a more generous and compassionate world in the long term. But the state of events in Haiti simply does not allow me to comfortably make this claim.

These people need aid and for once, the end might actually justify the means.

-The English Student