Okay then…wow…
Firstly, I believe the point you are trying to make is that the world hates the US because of it’s foreign policy. However you fail to acknowledge A) The US was a largely isolationist country prior to World War 2 and it was this ideology that prevented America from joining the war in Europe after Germany blitzkrieg-ed the hell out of most of the western world. Lesson learned…Be proactive in the dismemberment of totalitarian regimes BEFORE it becomes an issue for the world as a whole. This and the fact that countries like Japan, Germany, the former Soviet Union, and South Korea have actually benefited in terms of basic human rights and economic industry due to US military action against oppressive forms of government. And B) You assume the UN and NATO forces have been in strong opposition to the current “War on Terror” to warrant the collective wag-of-the-finger towards America’s nose based on our foreign policy. This is simply not the case. There are quite simply too many variables;, economic, cultural, and political to say the world has all teamed up and agreed to not like the US. Like some sort of girl-club who just wont talk to Stacy till she gets a new haircut…It is inherent human nature to root for the underdog and to view the person with the most power as a bully. This ideology is seen in entertainment and the economy and supports that view time and time again.

As for your second paragraph, I would like to see one instance, just one, when an american politician threatened economic or military pressure against a developed foreign government when basic human rights were not on the table. It just does not happen like you claim. And if you are honestly going to make a fuss that the fact the US looks towards its own interests in some of its foreign policy then please let me know of a single governmental body that does not have its own best interests in mind while being active in the global-political playing field. And if the United States’ best interests involve disposing of unruly dictators and warlords so that society as a whole may flourish then sure, America is guilty.

To address the third paragraph….Honestly, I’m not sure what you think a “Free-Market” is but it has little to do with Democracy as a form of government. If you have trouble defining what the “1%” is, then let me tell you. The 1% take in a quarter of yearly income and hold possession of 40% of the wealth, plain and simple. It is this disparity between income of the 1% with the other 99 that cause animosity between demographics. This is only one of but perhaps the biggest reason why developing countries dislike the rapid advancement of the western culture.

BTW, I am not sure how you would define a country without wide-spread access to education, healthcare, technology, free-speech, food and water…etc. But I believe that would define one as having “less opportunity”, no? Seeing as how you yourself are able to access a computer I would define you as not being among the 4.67 billion people without internet access. And I’m willing to bet that you are also not among the billion or so people who are chronically hungry (Those who wake up hungry, go hungry throughout the day, and go to sleep without eating a single meal). You very much live in a country of opportunity. So when you take personal offense to me describing a country as having “less opportunity”; it speaks more to your ignorance of what “less opportunity” truly means, and more to your own subjective anti-government beliefs than actual fact. I’m willing to bet you’ve never stepped foot in a third-world country or talked to the people there.