The news industry is a business and like any business in need of a growing customer base, it needs to exaggerate its own importance. This is true even of state-owned outlets that rely on high viewership to justify handsome subsidies from various governments. As such, just as a bakery might hoist a sign reading: “the finest bread in the world” or a tobacconist would print a banner reading: “award winning smooth tasting tobacco”, so too do news outlets need to promote their own alleged excellence with similar hyperbole.
This is just business and business is a healthy thing. However, just as one wouldn’t take an advertisement for bread or tobacco as seriously as one might take a legal document, one should also view news content with a similarly healthy dose of enlightened scepticism.
If in fact western news broadcasters were genuine – meaning, if they were not economically reliant on pretending that their output is more important than it actually is, stories covering events like the Hong Kong protests would be prefaced with: “and here’s a story that won’t impact any of your lives and that you’re probably not interested in”. Of course such a statement wouldn’t be read out on news television any more than a clothing shop would post a sign saying “sale on all outdated and generally unwanted women’s clothes”.
In this sense, among the class of people who frequently watch the news in western countries, there’s a tendency to first of all inflate the importance of any given story and secondly, there arises a tendency among those with overactive imaginations to envisage themselves as the liberal imperialist saviours of “oppressed” masses in a far away land. Even in the age of 24/7 communication and a globalised economic order, this seemingly outdated mentality still remains.
Implicit in this liberal imperial saviour complex that is feed by self-important newsmen and newswomen is a supine hatred of one’s own people and one’s own culture. The liberal imperialist yearns for far off places about which he knows little but which he nevertheless desires to remake in his own image. Such contempt does the liberal imperialist have for his own people that he pretends to be able to grant special rights to those in far away places that he would never agree to give those in his home city or town.
For the liberal imperialist, the idea of living without servants and without luxury is contemptible beyond all other imagined situations. What’s more is that the liberal imperialist must likewise live in a manner that is physically separated from one’s fellow man of “lower breeding” (aka a lower social class). But living in splendid isolation from one’s own people is not enough for the liberal imperialist. The liberal imperialist must justify this detachment from the local townspeople or village people by arousing his interests through pseudo-immersion into a foreign culture.
However, whilst the liberal imperialist often goes native, he only ever goes semi-native. Within the liberal imperialist’s mentality is always the notion that he is superior to those in the far off land that he has temporarily adopted as his own. As such, the liberal imperialist seeks to impose his ways irrespective of how much this violates the laws and offends the customs of the people he pretends to be “saving”.
The liberal imperialist is one who runs away from problems at home so that he can create problems abroad and then appoint himself “problem solver in chief” without consulting with those over whom he seeks to “divinely” rule. Because of 24/7 news television and the internet one needn’t even board a ship across the oceans in order to develop this mentality. One can do it without leaving one’s home. Thus, one sees 19th century liberal values with 21st century technological characteristics.
This is what is presently occurring among wealthy westerners who are threatening and condescending towards China over the internal situation in Hong Kong. Since 1997 Hong Kong has returned to being an integral part of China and as such Hong Kong’s sovereignty is indivisible from that of China. All elements of the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration have long been fulfilled and as such, this historic document is merely a reference point when discussing past events but it does not directly impact present trends. The one country-two systems model continues to operate successfully within a sovereign Chinese state.
These basic facts are kryptonite to the liberal imperialist who cares more about meddling in someone else’s land than in fixing the very real problems in his own land. This is why Donald Trump as a traditional conservative has said nothing about Hong Kong thus far even though he will certainly be under pressure from liberal imperialists in both Washington and London to do so. Donald Trump does not want alien elements to maliciously change the cultural characteristics of his country and he does not seek to change the cultural characteristics of foreign lands. As such, whilst Trump’s hard-line protectionism is old fashioned, so is his quintessentially conservative respect for Westphalian sovereignty. As such, this variety of conservatism is far more placid than vicious and self-righteous liberal imperialism.
This does not stop the liberal imperialists form being aroused into action by western news outlets whose embellished rhetoric feeds their egos like a prostitute feeds a pimp’s purse. The fact that a minority brainwashed children in Hong Kong continue to stoke the emotions of liberal imperialists from abroad is little different than a whore seducing a wealthy client in order to gain economic enrichment on the black market.
The true reality is that people in western societies care about their own democracy and their own freedoms being eroded by the very same liberal imperialist elites who seek to cynically promote such concepts abroad. The liberal imperialist is nothing if not a fantastical hypocrite who in reality seeks to inflict suffering on foreigners after growing bored of inflicting suffering on his own people living in a perennially wretched state.