By E.J. Dionne Jr., 11/24/2001
W ASHINGTON
''WHY DO THEY hate us?'' was the headline question after the attacks of Sept. 11. After the popular response in Afghanistan to the defeats suffered by the Taliban, perhaps we can conclude that it was the wrong question.
It seems that there are many people in the Muslim world, and in the Third World generally, who don't hate us at all. Much, it turns out, hangs on what the meaning of ''they'' is.
Sure, we can become too self-congratulatory about the Afghan women who are overjoyed to be able to go back to work and school and the Afghan men who are happy to shave off their government-imposed beards. And yes, the United States, like all powerful countries throughout history, can become arrogant in its might and self-deluding when it assumes that everyone wants to be like us.
But the real danger lies in what might be seen as a national bipolar syndrome. This entails a tendency to ignore our virtues entirely at some moments and to see ourselves as the only virtuous nation on earth at others. Oscillating wildly between self-doubt and hubris is a bad idea for nations, as it is for individuals.
''Why Do They Hate Us?'' is not necessarily a bad question if its purpose is to seek a genuine understanding of what others believe about us (correctly or incorrectly) and to examine where the United States has, indeed, failed as a global leader and neighbor.
We should ask ourselves about our relative indifference to the poorest people in the world - an indifference measured by our paltry foreign aid budgets, especially where nonmilitary assistance is concerned. We need to admit that we have allied ourselves with unsavory regimes, sometimes out of necessity. We should not be surprised when we inherit the enemies of those repressive governments. We can examine honestly how our global economic policies affect others and how go-it-alone foreign policy moves can turn even friends into critics.
But doing this should not mean exaggerating the size of the ''they'' out there or ignoring the fact that our core national values - democracy, freedom of speech, press and religion, pluralism, an entrepreneurial spirit, and a basic civic equality - are fundamentally sound and worth fighting for. America's mistakes in the world usually grow from a failure to live up to our values, not from an effort to practice them.
The truth is that the Osama bin Ladens of the world do not speak for the Third World or the Muslim world. Of course, movements and people opposed to particular aspects of American foreign policy will speak out for bin Laden or the Taliban on the theory that the enemy of their enemy is their friend. That doesn't mean they agree with their bizarre view of the world.
And as Benjamin Barber writes in his prescient book ''Jihad vs. McWorld,'' when people are faced with a pure choice between ''the secular universalism of the cosmopolitan market and the everyday particularlism of the fractious tribe,'' many will find more meaning in tribalism. If the choices are so narrowed, the options come down to ''a bloody politics of identity'' or ''a bloodless economics of profit.''
But American values cannot be reduced to economics. As Barber notes, we are also committed to democracy. It is democracy that allows us to celebrate but also mediate our various identities and to subject the market to values such as justice and fairness. And if we can learn one thing from the reaction of many Afghans to liberation from the Taliban, it is that the freedoms democracy underwrites come as a relief to all who have been subjected to radical forms of oppression.
Is it possible for a nation, especially a powerful one, to be confident in its values but humble enough to acknowledge its failings and blunders? Can we avoid the self-defeating view that assumes that nations must either be on the right side of history always or never be worthy enough to participate in its making?
One politician grappled rather thoughtfully with this question. ''I don't think they should look at us with envy,'' this politician said of the rest of the world. ''It really depends upon how our nation conducts itself in foreign policy. If we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us. If we're a humble nation but strong, they'll welcome us. And our nation stands alone right now in the world in terms of power. And that's why we've got to be humble and yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom.''
The politician in question spoke those words during the 2000 presidential debates. His name is George W. Bush.
E.J. Dionne Jr. is a syndicated columnist.
This story ran on page A15 of the Boston Globe on 11/24/2001. © Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper Company.