We were required to check out of the hotel at noon, even though we didn't have to leave for the airport until 7:30 PM. This hotel had very strict operating procedures. During our check-in, they insisted on full payment for the room and even placed a hold on a sum of money for potential room service or phone calls. Now, they were adamant about us vacating the room before the designated check-out time. After a lengthy negotiation, the hotel manager reluctantly granted us permission to temporarily keep one room for storing our luggage. It was quite surprising; Even amid the disaster, with few guests around, they rigorously adhered to these inflexible policies.

The Ford Foundation team arrived punctually, and we boarded the bus, bidding farewell to the bustling New York City. At around 8:30 PM, we arrived at the Kenne Airport International terminal for departure procedures. Stringent security measures were in place, including manual and electronic checks, as well as searches of pockets and clothing for small items. My laptop was also reviewed, and a security officer rescanned it. These measures were necessary to ensure security, particularly in light of the heightened alert status in the United States.

Can the United States maintain a peaceful existence within its borders while concurrently pursuing its assertive foreign policy and harboring potential terrorists on its soil for use against other nations? An October 21 report by the Los Angeles Times acknowledged the presence of a terrorist organization within the United States, involving certain generals and officials from the Saigon government who had fled to the United States and were openly operating against Vietnam. This terrorist group, known as "Free Vietnam," is headquartered in the "Little Saigon" trading district in central Orange County, California, and is led by Nguyen Huu Chanh, aged 52. Chanh confesses to two attempted bombings at Vietnamese embassies in Bangkok and Manila during the summer. He also admitted to covert activities at the Thai-Lao and Thai-Cambodian borders, infiltrating Vietnam for sabotage. In 1998, Chanh was approved by the Thai military and deported to the United States. The Los Angeles Times quoted Phan Thuy Thanh, the representative for the Vietnamese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, stating that Vietnam had called upon the United States to cease its support and sheltering of the "Free Vietnam" group. The United States must investigate those who have committed acts of terrorism against Vietnam. As of now, the United States has not issued an official response, but a State Department representative said, "The U.S. government is concerned about the possibility of individuals violating our laws, and we have warned them." It remains uncertain how effectively these "warnings" from this powerful nation are being heeded, as these Vietnamese-American terrorists continue their activities outside the bounds of the law, collecting funds from overseas Vietnamese to further their nefarious objectives. Additionally, there are unnamed terrorists and Cuban exiles living openly in the United States. Therefore, it raises the question of whether the United States truly aims to fight global terrorism or merely seeks to fight those who oppose the U.S. government. It indeed prompts reflections on the words of Stephen M. Walt, a professor of international politics at Harvard University, who remarked, "It would be highly hypocritical if we expect the world to cooperate against a terrorist group that we are not willing to cooperate against other terrorist groups in other countries."

Sitting there, waiting for the plane for three hours, I observed and contemplated. The terminal was nearly empty, mostly occupied by Chinese passengers, including many women and children. Passengers were scattered across the seats, with some nodding off. It was the airline employees who appeared to be diligently performing their duties. I couldn't help but wonder who among them, whether it was the cheerful young lady checking tickets, the portly security officer, or the African-American cleaning staff, would become victims of the ongoing wave of layoffs in the U.S. aviation industry. The investigation into the losses caused by the September 11 disaster continued, yielding grim statistics. Cleaning up the debris at the former World Trade Center site in New York, initially estimated to take six months, now required at least a year, with total damages reaching $105 billion. The United States was entering its 10th recession since World War II, grappling with economic losses from an international economic hub, coupled with an aggressive war abroad, making it challenging to quickly revive its economy. Ultimately, the hardships would continue to impact American workers through layoffs and unemployment. Therefore, the diligent work of airport employees, like those I observed at Kenne Airport International, might serve as a self-protective measure for American workers to avoid being laid off, don't you think?

For American workers, the threat of terrorism, attributed by the government to Osama bin Laden, may seem vague and distant. The real and tangible threat is the fear of being laid off by American employers, and people must find ways to combat it.

Traveling within the United States, amid opulent cities with towering buildings and abundant goods, I can't help but sense that the people here are constantly striving to survive. They push themselves to compete, to trade, to complete their tasks, and to avoid unemployment. They push themselves to secure employment. Even someone as diligently trained and committed as Marisa Lopez, whom I described earlier, struggled to find stable employment. Life in the United States is a life of intense competition. This competition has fostered a dynamic but also a harsh and stressful way of life.

As I reflect on the United States while composing these words, the enduring sense of an industrious, ever-changing life remains vivid in my mind. It is undeniable that Americans, through their hard work and intelligence, have made significant contributions to the development of human society. Their innovations and technological advancements are noteworthy gifts that humanity should duly appreciate. In the sphere of culture, Americans have crafted values that cannot be denied, establishing dynamic and effective methods that we should cherish and draw inspiration from.

In terms of cultural management, Americans have devised an approach uniquely suited for a nation characterized by diversity, youthfulness, and dynamism. This approach hinges on openness and acceptance, facilitating the seamless integration of diverse cultural influences from abroad into nearly all aspects of American life. It also enables domestic activities to flourish while embracing their own culture, which, in turn, freely radiates to all corners of the world. Journeying across the United States, one can witness or hear about the cultural contributions of various ethnic communities coexisting and enriching the spiritual life of America. These contributions span architectural marvels, works of art, languages, and lifestyles from France, Spain, Italy, England, the Netherlands, Sweden, Portugal, Africa, and more. Even the quintessential symbol of American culture, the Statue of Liberty, was not an American creation. It was a gift from the people of France, which Americans have proudly adopted as a symbol of their national identity. It is difficult to find another nation in the world that embraces foreign cultures as enthusiastically as the United States does. I believe this spirit of acceptance will continue to expand limitlessly, as long as it serves the interests of the United States. America is among the nations that have received a significant number of Nobel Prizes, applauding humanity's acknowledgment of its substantial contributions to the world. What's particularly commendable is the fact that numerous Nobel laureates, hailing from diverse countries like Israel, France, Germany, and Japan, have chosen to make America their home. According to a recent study by the Foundation for American Policy (NFAP), since the year 2000, immigrants have been recipients of 38% of the Nobel Prizes awarded to Americans in the fields of chemistry, medicine, and physics. Looking at the period from 1901 to the present day, immigrants have accounted for 35% of the Nobel Prizes awarded to Americans in these fields, which amounts to 109 out of 311 prizes. America attracts a wealth of talent from all around the globe and provides them with the conditions to nurture and manifest their abilities. This enduring commitment to talent cultivation makes the glory rightfully America's to claim!In terms of cultural assimilation, unlike us, who often blend and transform foreign cultures to create a culture with distinct national characteristics, Americans incorporate foreign cultures by amalgamating them with their existing culture, thus forging new cultural values. To illustrate this principle, one can observe that the United States was shaped by waves of immigration, with numerous ethnicities converging on a land devoid of long-standing cultural traditions. Furthermore, the culture of the Native Americans, with its indigenous characteristics, had already dwindled by the time of European arrival. The second crucial factor is the decentralized governance system in the United States, where local authorities enjoy a significant degree of independence from the federal government, granting various regions the autonomy to establish their own cultural regulations. The U.S. Constitution lacks provisions on culture; instead, it empowers each state and locality to set their cultural guidelines. Cultural management responsibilities are not assigned to the President or Congress by the Constitution, resulting in rare federal government intervention in cultural policy.

America tends to prioritize financial policies related to culture rather than concentrating solely on cultural policy. Tax laws introduced since the early 20th century allow individuals to support the arts while benefiting from deductions on their income taxes. By the 1960s, the establishment of the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) provided a federal mechanism for consistent, long-term support for the arts. Up until 1979, the National Endowment for the Arts received federal funding that regularly increased. Nevertheless, debates regarding investment in culture at the federal level have persisted.

In July 1997, the House of Representatives voted to abolish the National Endowment for the Arts, but in November 1997, the Senate voted on whether to eliminate federal funding or allocate funds to individual states, granting each state the autonomy to determine its own allocation and overturning the House of Representatives' decision. This standoff left both chambers without a 1998 budget for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). During this time, the U.S. President expressed his intention to veto the entire budget plan if funding for the NEA was not secured. Ultimately, the President's stance had to be respected. Every country requires socio-political stability, and culture consistently plays an active role in creating and maintaining that stability. Therefore, whether one agrees with it or not, the government must also invest in culture.

In any case, state funding for the arts has primarily increased at the local level, often through local authorities or arts agencies. Contrary to common belief, individuals are the primary contributors to the arts, presently constituting 77% of all donations to the arts. Foundations have also consistently played a pivotal role in supporting culture. Thanks to these factors, cultural and artistic endeavors in America have thrived, albeit within the context of competition, which sometimes leads to the dissolution of theaters and cultural organizations that cannot sustain themselves.

Cultural development is further facilitated by Americans' adeptness at propagating, disseminating, and replicating successful examples. While they may not originate administrative organizational models for the arts sector, effective organizations swiftly disseminate their influence across the country and even globally. Consequently, a series of other organizations emerge, operating based on the models and experiences of these successful ones. For example, the Lincoln Center Art Education Institute, effectively operating for over 25 years, has expanded its collaboration with 250 schools across 61 school districts in three U.S. states. Moreover, it has served as a model for 21 similar organizations, including 19 within the U.S. and two abroad.

The historical conditions, cultural landscape, and management mechanisms outlined above have contributed to America's extraordinarily rich and diverse culture, particularly at the local and regional levels. Thanks to these factors, Americans, including workers, have had relatively high-level access to culture, although disparities between the rich and poor persist.

Continuing on the topic of the openness of American culture, it facilitates the dissemination of cultural products across continents. Radio, television, movies, and the Internet, which Americans have consistently mastered, have enabled them to spread their culture to virtually every corner of the world. This massive export not only allows Americans to share their ideas with humanity but also generates substantial profits. Culture plays a significant role in the structure of U.S. exports. At one point, in 1995, products from Hollywood studios were the primary source of revenue from U.S. exports. This underscores why the United States has actively championed copyright enforcement and, at times, elevated the issue of copyright to a matter of human rights. Nevertheless, it's essential to recognize that these efforts primarily benefit Americans rather than authors from countries other than the United States.

Trên cùng của Biểu mẫu

Regarding the export of political culture, carried out through propaganda and psychological warfare, the United States maintains a position of superiority, as I discussed in detail earlier. In summary, it's a culture of coercion and domination that has had significant detrimental effects on people worldwide.

The principles of freedom, democracy, and unequal human rights that the U.S. government consistently promotes in our country and many other nations can be interpreted as an encouragement for citizens to challenge their own government and potentially engage in activities that the U.S. government supports, even if it involves destabilizing state institutions disliked by the U.S. However, the U.S. government's stance on freedom, democracy, and human rights significantly diverges when applied to American workers or those who dare to oppose the U.S. government.

We have observed the harsh treatment and, at times, brutality that the U.S. employs against individuals labeled as terrorists or even mere suspects of terrorism. American newspapers have reported that the FBI and U.S. investigators are considering the use of severe interrogation techniques, including torture, on terrorism suspects. In slightly over a month following a disaster, the U.S. government interrogated more than 800 people, a majority of whom were innocent, and arrested over 150 individuals, not all of whom were proven criminals. The U.S.'s "anti-terrorism" approach appears inconsistent. Perhaps inconsistency is a characteristic of American political culture, as such contradictory behavior seems to manifest itself frequently.

At one point, the United States boycotted the United Nations Conference discussing the implementation of the United Nations Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. On other occasions, the U.S. sowed discord, leading to the failure of the International Conference on global biological weapons to reach a consensus and issue a resolution after two weeks of meetings. Yet, the U.S. consistently expresses concern about other countries possessing nuclear or suspected biological weapons.

On November 13, President Bush signed an order allowing the government to bring those accused of terrorism to trial in a special court instead of a regular civilian court, citing the need to safeguard classified information. This marked the first instance since World War II that the United States has permitted the establishment of a special military court. Throughout U.S. history, only two instances have warranted military court trials: during the Civil War for those plotting to assassinate President Lincoln, and during World War II for individuals who sabotaged America under President Roosevelt. However, in the case of individuals involved in disturbances in the Central Highlands, the Vietnamese government chose to conduct public trials in civilian courts, even though the U.S. criticized Vietnam for violating human rights. Moreover, the United States attempted to introduce legislation concerning human rights in Vietnam, with the aim of establishing a legal framework for U.S. intervention in a sovereign nation. However, due to strong opposition from our people and support from the global community, this malevolent scheme was thwarted.

When evaluating a person's or a country's culture based on their behavior, the U.S. government's arrogant and aggressive approach, its inclination to resort to violence as the initial option, may give the impression of being one of the most uncultured entities in the world.

Taking a comprehensive view of American culture, it is characterized by cultural diversity, yet it can be distilled into two primary currents - the non-transcendent culture of the American government and the democratic culture of genuine Americans. The democratic culture does not fall into the category of folk culture found in ancient societies but represents a scholarly culture that also plays a pivotal role in society. These two cultural currents run parallel to each other, each with distinct objectives, yet not without instances of influence on one another. On occasion, the non-transcendent culture must adopt progressive elements from the democratic culture to garner the support of the people and foster a positive image for the government. Conversely, there are times when the democratic culture is tainted by the negative aspects of the non-transcendent culture. Once the democratic culture attains a dominant position, it is certain that the United States will undergo significant changes, and its image will become endearing to humanity.