A COMMONER COMMENTS

Diminishing Democratic Integrity

Two AP articles presented side by side at the top of page 6A in the June 5th Laurinburg Exchange exemplify the brilliance of our great nation's founding father's insight concerning freedom of speech.  One addressed the current debate about exchanging Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl for five Taliban Guantanamo detainees.  From local residents to national political leaders, their is much discussion, some of it heated, on both sides of this issue, but freedom of speech allows such discussion.  The other article addressed the twenty-fifth anniversary of China's Tiananmen Square massacre.  Whether it was done deliberately or inadvertently, the placement of these two articles demonstrates the superiority of our system of government.

The third paragraph in other article read:  "China allows no public discussion of the events of June 3-4, 1989, when soldiers backed by tanks and armored personnel carriers fought their way into the heart of Beijing, killing hundreds, possibly thousands, of unarmed protesters and onlookers."  The article stated:  "Chinese censors scrubbed domestic blogs and social media websites of comments marking the crackdown," and reported around the clock surveillance of the relatives of Tiananmen Square victims, and even restrictions on relatives visiting their graves.

Although I much admire our founding father's insight, I am seriously troubled by decisions made by American political leaders in recent times.  How did a nation so opposite of our democratic principles gain our "Most Favored Nation" trade status?  How many U.S. industries have been closed and moved to Chinese sweat-shops since 1989, when the Chinese military so clearly demonstrated how little the Chinese government rates American democratic integrity?  Why would the leaders of our nation, which has existed for over two centuries only because freedom of speech allows protest of injustice, which leads to political correction, open the door for further exploitation of the politically and democratically deprived Chinese people?

As for the globalization excuse; have low-wage Chinese sweat-shop workers and displaced American workers benefited, or the U.S. owners of Chines sweat-shops?  As for the free trade excuse; what has been traded, other than American jobs for cheap Chinese labor?  Or have you noticed the American brand names on those imported "Chinese" products?  Who has gained from venture capitalism - Chinese and American workers, or the globalists now avoiding U.S. taxation and regulation as they exploit the cheap labor of a nation that allows no public discussion or protest of political wrongdoing, and massacres any who try?   

What does U.S. capitalistic exploitation of cheap Chinese labor do to our claim of democratic superiority in the eyes of other nations?

Think about it, please!


Robert C. Currie Jr.