IR Reaction Paper

My parents left after we ate breakfast, and because I had gotten up early (despite daylight savings ending), I was too tired for a while to be motivated to do any sort of work.  So, after watching some episodes of the Legend of Korra and skyping with Anisha for about an hour and a half, I got started at around 2 in the afternoon.

Please don't mind, but this post will be notes for me, since I want to finish the rest of the readings for tomorrow before starting up on this reaction paper.

There was one article which argued that when the United States intervenes in other nations with the use of military force, and goes there promoting democracy (and not just claiming to promote it, but actually taking steps to promote it), that invaded nation has a better chance of becoming democratic and staying democratic.  Now, while I really don't believe this is as much the case as the author claims, I don't have the statistical background to attack the empirical evidence.  (Why can't you fools use calculus or differential equations or something!  Bah.)

Thus, I think my reaction paper is going to go in this sort of direction: if we assume that the author's theory is 100% true, it is still a very dangerous mode of thinking.  With this evidence and claim, leaders in the U.S. can begin to authorize further military interventions for the purpose of democratization.  Now, this is pseudo-imperialistic (and I might be generous in saying that) and therefore, the people of the U.S. would be paying the costs, for the most part.  Another author argued that imperialism drags Parliament's (in the U.S. case, Congress') attention away from very important domestic issues, and that is most likely what would happen if we began following a foreign policy which stressed military intervention in non-democratic regimes (that we didn't like).  (Ignore the fact that we sort have already done this in terms of Iraq.)  Therefore, in terms of just that, it is dangerous, but this theoretical policy is noxious also to our international reputation.  If we take on a greater role as the "police of the world" and spread armies thin trying to democratize across the globe, there is a high chance that people will be less than happy with us.  Besides the fact that we will be promoting our own sense of American democracy, we will be seen as encroaching on the sovereignty of other states.  It is an easy way to perhaps lose allies and make non-democratic regimes angry with us.  We can be open for more hate, and perhaps, attacks.

I believe I can argue all this, and it is a pure reaction, so I'm just hoping that this sort of thinking is what my professor is looking for in these papers.  I have not written one for World yet, so...one can only hope.  I need to take the leap, at the very least.  I might be able to use some quotes from Hobson's book to bolster my points, also.  That should be good.


Unrelated, but my parents bought me winter-themed Oreos.  The filling is red and that makes me happier than it really should for a 22 year old.  But fuck you, they taste better when the cream is coloured.  Especially if it is red.


Also this is my 100th post!  I feel like I should put a celebratory gif but I am lazy.