Why Do Western Leaders Hate Their Citizens?
The actions of Western countries are self-destructive. The question is why.
In the past and partially to this day, countries acted in their best interests. When those interests collided with those of other countries, the solution could come either through diplomacy, war, or potentially some form of arbitration.
Let’s try an example. Imagine the US building a series of coal-fired power plants near the Canadian border. The addition of electrical capacity offers the US many advantages: cheaper electricity, electricity availability to more citizens, and greater national capacity for extreme weather conditions. Everything is going well until the US adds so many units that Canadians begin to suffer from pollution wafting from the new plants onto their territory. There are multiple potential solutions to the problem including but not limited to the US cleaning up smokestack exhausts, reducing the number of power plants, or paying Canada for damages. In any solution the US and Canada would both try to maximize their national interests. That was the way the world worked until about twenty or thirty years ago.
This simple example stands in stark contrast to the behavior of Western nations today. Whereas some of the worst actors in the world—think Russia, China, Iran—continue to focus on their national interests, Western countries have adopted international goals that often are at odds with the clear needs and interests of their own citizens. Have you noticed the tractor protests in Holland, Germany and France? Hundreds of tractors shut down major roads and commerce. The farmers in France have said that they wish to effectively starve Paris. Why?
In today’s iteration of international negotiations, countries like China and India continue to think of the benefits of their citizens, if only to guarantee the stability of their governments. These ostensibly developing countries refuse to commit themselves to any program that would reduce energy production or economic progress. They still think as rational countries have always thought: how can I maximize my interests? Their behavior, which one might call normal, stands in stark contrast to that of the Western powers. When they negotiate on climate and other issues, they often look from what they claim is a global perspective and thus often ignore or work against the clear interests of their own people. The tractor protests are a result of European governmental decisions to reduce the use of nitrogen fertilizers and/or significantly cut livestock numbers. The decisions themselves definitely act against the local population. Reduced synthetic fertilizers can only mean less crop production, higher food prices, and more unemployed farmers. Not one of these outcomes is beneficial to the local population. One only has to look at Sri Lanka and the famine and political unrest that occurred when they took this WEF-encouraged path of banning nitrogen fertilizers to see that the program is a disaster. If governments in Amsterdam, Berlin, and Paris can follow policies that harm the electorate that put them into office, what recourse do citizens have other than to protest and replace their leaders?