Will non-Western democracies ever become interested in promoting democracy and human rights?

[compucomp]

As long as “democracy” is continuously weaponized as a narrative to justify white power and superiority then nope.

The West doesn’t care about democracy elsewhere outside their borders at all when throughout history it always supported regime change tactics against ELECTED governments they disliked. So using this as a narrative in their favor simply sounds unauthentically fake and self-serving only.

You mention yourself that India; Brazil; Indonesia have these positions more focused on the internal interests despite being democracies, without really questioning WHY third world countries basically all end up thinking the same regardless if they are democratic or authoritarian.

What a beautiful post. Utter hypocrisy has been a hallmark of Western foreign policy for generations and in Western usage "freedom" and "democracy" are merely code words for slavery and submission to Western imperialism.

Just look at how the supposedly sacrosanct beliefs in free trade and property rights fall by the wayside when it comes to Russian sanctions and Russian assets. Perhaps the only thing preventing the West from seizing Russian assets is a practical one; that China holds $2-3 trillion of Western assets within our borders and you seizing Russian assets would give us just cause to seize yours whenever we want.

[compucomp]

the purpose of this thread is not to discuss "Western hypocrisy", but to discuss whether non-Western democracies may pursue a value based foreign policy, so please stay on topic otherwise I'll have to close the thread.

Imagine being so oblivious and deluded that you can't even acknowledge that the obvious answer to your question is an answer, much less even try to address it.

snipped

Great, then tell me why India, a nation you have a clear affinity towards based on your past posts, went from buying roughly 0 barrels of Russian oil to 2 million a month in 2023? Why it is helping Russia circumvent sanctions by playing oil trader and reselling Russian oil to Europe at a profit? Why has the West condoned this? This is just the latest example of Western hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy. Even in the "clearest example in the world today of right and wrong" the West shows that what's "right" is to serve their interests. I'll be honest, India has done a huge favor to China on this issue because if the West is unwilling to confront India on Russian trade then China will never be diplomatically isolated.

[compucomp]

the purpose of this thread is not to discuss "Western hypocrisy", but to discuss whether non-Western democracies may pursue a value based foreign policy, so please stay on topic otherwise I'll have to close the thread.

Imagine being so oblivious and deluded that you can't even acknowledge that the obvious answer to your question is an answer, much less even try to address it.

snipped

Great, then tell me why India, a nation you have a clear affinity towards based on your past posts, went from buying roughly 0 barrels of Russian oil to 2 million a month in 2023? Why it is helping Russia circumvent sanctions by playing oil trader and reselling Russian oil to Europe at a profit? Why has the West condoned this? This is just the latest example of Western hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy. Even in the "clearest example in the world today of right and wrong" the West shows that what's "right" is to serve their interests. I'll be honest, India has done a huge favor to China on this issue because if the West is unwilling to confront India on Russian trade then China will never be diplomatically isolated.

1. Cause Left wing energy policy has been a disaster for Western Europe and neither have we or Canada truly unlocked our energy potential . Imagine if we produced far more energy here in North America and sold it to Western Europe . Then maybe we wouldn’t need oil from unsavory actors

2. Cause India’s FP is pretty much the definition of realpoltick and while it’s not ideal for us , it’s still better than outright hostility like the CCP or even much better than India’s FP prior to the mid 1990s . Israel/Palestine is a huge example of how India has shifted on foreign policy

Now yes that will prevent a full on alliance but we don’t need a full on alliance either . We just need a case by case relationship to counter the CCP and that’s what we are doing . We aren’t trying to make a full on alliance like you think .

3. It’s ok to be hypocritical on foreign policy . So yes , I’d favor regime change if Canada for example was taken over by a communist or Russian friendly regime but like I said it’s ok to be hypocritical on foreign policy

At least you concede that you're hypocritical while your whole post is an exercise in hypocrisy. You're condoning India's actions while you certainly wouldn't condone the same actions by China or Brazil.

Of course, in your case this is because you're Indian and a strong supporter of India and Modi, so of course whatever they do is acceptable. This is actually another point of hypocrisy, for this forum in particular, but is indicative of Western foreign policies. This forum believes that to be an real immigrant to the US, one needs to assimilate into American culture and leave behind the old country, and likes to claim that I'm a CCP agent or whatever because I refuse to. I actually think this is a reasonable "rule", but then why does this forum accept OSR, when he's clearly Indian and clearly has not left India behind, as he's posted to support the caste system, defend Indian assassinations of Sikh activists, and support the construction of the new Ram temple? Is it because OSR is on your "team" and I'm not on your "team"? What happened to your "rule" here, if you can bend it at will to support who you want to based on arbitrary considerations?