One of the advantages is that it is not a predictable Left/Right debate, although, of course, there will be aspects reflecting general orientation.
There is nothing objectionable in your formulation, except, from my perspective as a "neocon", a certain bias towards passivity. As you say, the government reflects the values of the people, which means that "national interest" includes behaving in an estimable way, according to one's place in the world. As you also say, there must be discrimination, first, in order not to exacerbate problems, and second, because resources and the tolerance of the people for sacrifice is limited. My objection revolves mainly on erecting as the primary principle "To do no harm". I should think that we want to encourage the development of institutions which will facilitate social stability while remaining responsive to the needs of the populace. In other words, we want to promote "democratic capitalism", through example and aid, and continue to support those multi- lateral institutions which conduce to international stability, offer avenues for more forcible intervention in event of emergency, and ease suffering in catastrophic situations. |
