|
These sorts of topics grow tiresome very quickly, but I think I'll jump in and say my piece before it degenerates further.
The main question posed by Tiesto14, I think, was why people of other other countries are so quick to jump up and criticise the US. I agree, that too often the US is villified needlessly, and that a lot of people tend to dwell on the faults that the US has rather than any positives it may have. I think it should be pointed out, firstly, that any "attack" (although I don't think this is really the right word) on the US, made generally, is not usually directed at its inhabitants, but usually more towards the government and anyone else who may follow its particular ideologies. We are not stupid: we understand that the United States is a big place, and as such many different types of people, with different views and opinions inhabit it. When we criticise the US, it is important to understand that the criticisms are levelled, usually, on a political or cultural level, never on a personal level. Anyone who gets personally offended when any criticism is levelled at the country they arbitrarily found themselves born into, needs to get their thought processes sorted out. The second you take personal offence at any criticism levelled at the country you inhabit, then you enter the realm of patriotic fundamentalism, and you are no better - idealogically - then the fundamentalistic terrorists America is trying so hard to irradicate.
Sadly though, so many American people are indoctrinated with this sort of patriotism, which leads inevitably to the infallibility complex demonstrated quite nicely by Orbax above.
| quote: | | yes they are. They are all illiterate, stupid, fucks. Their government knows that the easiest way to tame a population is to keep it ignorant. |
All middle-eastern people are "illiterate, stupid fucks"? Nice one man. Good to see that logic hasn't gotten in the way of your blinding xenophobia. And I agree entirely with your view about taming populations through ignorance: teaching nothing but American history and geography in schools should ensure that the paranoid, xenophobic rationale lives on I'm guessing.
I'm not sure whether there was any tongue-in-cheek in this post (and I certainly hope there was) but it's this pig-ignorance about anything beyond the American shores that is part of the reason for this growing anti-American sentiment around the globe. You are quick to point out your country's positive involvement in external affairs (Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq etc) but the reality is, it only seems to participate in the betterment of the globe where its own interests are at stake - the Kyoto Protocol anyone? You were quick to lauch attacks on Afghanistan, but where were your peace-keeping troops in Fiji and East Timor recently? The Australian government asked repeatedly for the help of the United States in these countries - not unreasonable given that Australia has fought beside the US in virtually every war this century - but because the unrest in Fiji and East Timor was unlikely to in any affect your country, Australia was given the cold shoulder. Despite our comparitively small military force, it was basically up to us alone to keep the peace in these two nations. And I'm sure there are other similar examples of "selective altruism" but I think I've made my point.
| quote: | | Think why America is so powerful. Do you even know? Or do you think power is something you dig up like a pot of fuckin gold at the end of a rainbow. Ignorant shit man, ignorant. Talkin like we just HAPPEN to have power. Like we got it like we left a tooth under our pillow and a little fuckin fairy came prancing along, waved its wand and POOF america is powerful. |
America was built on a certain set of ideals otherwise unheard of at the time. The men who built the nation of America were great men, very wise and learned. They had seen the misery caused in states ruled by monarchs or other totalitarianistic leaders, and saw the opportunity to create a nation based on worthwhile, objective values. And they succeeded. The declaration of independence and the original American constitution represent a political dawn - that of democracy and capitalism - that has since spread right around the world and, by and large, benefited it greatly. The men who founded America were great men, and the priciples that America was founded on are among the most forward-thinking ever (even though most of them are actually taken from the philosophies of the European political philosophers of the day. Several of the more memorable phrases in the Declaration of Independence - "We hold these truths to be self evident", "All men are created equal", "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" and so on - were actually taken, virtually word for word, from Englishman John Locke's Second Treatise).
It was these principles that immediately gave the US a head start over the rest of the world. It's capitalist ideals allowed it to create the seeds for the massive economy we see today, and when World War 1 decimated European economies, the US was free to stand up and use its economic power to muscle its way into the position of political power it finds itself in now. It didn't come into power because it was the "best" country, it came into power because it had implemeted the capitalist ideals much earlier than other countries, and because the collective empires of European countries began to crumble, lessening their own power as a result, leaving the door vacant for a new superpower.
Anyway, I don't think all this is particularly relevent, but since you seemed to be implying that America became as powerful as it is today simply because it worked harder than the other countries I think it's only fair to point out that, to a large degree, this is a fanciful myth.
| quote: | | ''With great power comes great responsibility'' (courtsey of Spiderman, the movie, lol) |
And that was to be my next point. If you wish to self-righteously lay claim to a position of power, then you have to be expected to bear the brunt of the criticism. You not only should be criticised more, but also need to be criticised more to ensure that there is some degree of balance in the planet, and that it isn't subtley taken over by US political, economic and social ideals.
If you were ever to find fault in your country, you wouldn't blame the guy who runs the store down the road for it. It's not his fault if the trade-gap is widening. He is in no position of power to change things. Instead you go to the president, or to your congressman, someone who is in a position of power to make a difference. Thus, for the rest of the world to see the US slowly eating up the planet's resources (4% of the population, 25% of the resource consumption) and either being too hasty to intermediate in a conflict or not hasty enough, then the rest of the world is free to ask the most powerful country on the Earth why it acted in such a fashion. If the president starting hoarding away your country's resources so as to make himself richer, and then either acted in an overly draconian manner, or an overly indifferent manner, then it's to be expected that you would reproach him for it.
And the analogy concerning the president either abusing or not using enough of his power runs parallel with the current global situation. I hope you understand where I'm coming from.
| quote: | | About "Europeans trying to make themselves look better bashing America" I partly agree. Lots of politicians with minority complexities in Europe will often use the US as the big bad wolf, but when that is said, you shouldn't brush aside all european criticism on these grounds alone I think. Sometimes, we just might be right. |
Exactly, agree entirely.
Some anti-American sentiment may be born of an inferiority complex, or of envy of some kind, but it's irrational to assume that all of it must be. This is where we come back the to "infallibility complex" I spoke of before - so many Amercians have been so deeply indoctrinated with the "greatness" of their land, that they are unable to think objectively and identify any faults it may have. No country is perfect, I agree entirely, but so long as imperfections are acknowledged, and some attempt is made to rectify them, then it is hard to have any qualms with the operation of such a country. If, however, a country has faults obvious to the rest of the world but, for some reason, not to the inhabitents of this country, then you are free to question why this should be the case. Anti-Americanism isn't something that's spawned up overnight as a result of "envy" or the feeling of inferiority, and to view it in such a way is dangerously naive. People do not fly planes into massive buildings out of envy alone. There are far more complex causes than this. I'm not saying what happened on Sept 11 was right or in any way justifiable, but I'm saying that the US has failed to take heed of the criticisms levelled at it, and that, in some ways, such an horendous catastophe was inevitable.
Instead of analysing why they may be so hated by certain people overseas, the US government just came to the conclusion that goes something along the lines of "we are always right, therefore they are entirely wrong to reproach us" and nothing was learned. I'll repeat, yet again, that what happened on Sept 11 was entirely inhumane, unjustifiable and monsterous, but that the sentiment behind the actions, perhaps, was not so much so.
Anyway, at this point I would like to point out once more, that I have nothing specifically against America, and I certainly do not have anything against any of its citizens. My qualms are with certain policies of American government, and some of the general principles that currently underlie the stereotypical American mode of thought, that is all. And I certainly did not intend to cause offence, which leaves me with one simple guideline: if you did find yourself personally offended by any of this, then you're probably one of the people I'm talking about.
Anyway, enough. 
|
