The World View of the United States

by **SoKat** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:05 am

I try not to hate anyone and i cant say i truely hate any american. Like any nation it's filled with different people. In The US there seem's to be an incredibly large percentage of ignorant people but that could simply be that they are unconcerned with anything not american.

Could start off with the native american thing. If you dont know what the "Native American thing" is then dont bother asking. Added to the fact an overwhelming majority are ignorant of it and unsympathetic.

Englishmen created the USA. Then other englishmen who call themselves american fight other englishmen from england so they dont have to pay taxes to england. Then those americans buy black people to do there work. Then they free them yet hatred is so ingrained within them that to this day it's one of the most generally racist nation's in the world. It's government contridicts itself by saying one thing which is shown to the world then acting another way. Then those racist american buisnessmen invade weaker nations illegally based upon american propaganda....Much like with japan and viet nam, And because of that many people die, Many people raped, Many fat white american buisnessmen get richer.

The thing is that the US government spicifically is much like a virus. It eat's and destroy's and infect's then move's on. And all the while conditions american's and lie's to them. And unfortunatly the result it alot of dumb arrogent people.

...Yet knobody will do anything about it because america has lot's and lot's of money. Originally america's wealth was earned at the labor of other people who in turn are still treated like $#%^.

Or there's WW2 which it seem's has a different history within american then to the rest of the world.

There's also Viet Nam, Or Rowanda, Iraq ect, ect, ect.

Or little thing's such as the fact the US get 97% of it's natural resources from places like Canada, Including hydro. Which they need. Yet $#%^ on them aswell as many other nation's......then when american's travel they wear little canadian, german, australian ect flag patches, pin's ect. And are real friendly as non-american's. Yet once back on their own soil talk alot of $#%^.

Meh.

I think the worst thing about American culture is the arrogance combined with the apathy. Lots of complaining but not enough people actually exercising their civic duties and voting.
I think it is a Miracle that we have so far not had a nuclear exchange with someone else of the many someone elses who also have nuclear missles. The less water, food, and other natural resources there are to go around in the world, the more challenging it will be to avoid total war.
I am very embarrassed the U.S. did not sign the Kyoto Agreement. We are like the ancient Romans in the latter days of the Empire. Complacent, spread too thin, and trying to distract ourselves with circuses.
Nationalism is the bigger version of tribalism. Us versus Them. We are all stuck on this little planet together. I am now feeling too pessimistic to be logical, so I am going to stop talking. :oops:

by **Chucky** » Sun Oct 28, 2007 7:54 pm

My view is that a dark page in history is coming to a close, because George Bush Jnr will soon be ousted; as will John Howard (Australia); and Tony Blair (UK) is already gone. There is no doubt at all in my head that he [Bush] has made the world a more dangerous place to live.

This 'terrorism' phenomenon will not be beaten by military. It will be beaten by tackling poverty and other social problems at grass-roots and ensuring that these 'jihadists' feel that they are loved and not to feel that their only option is to enlist in terrorism.

America is a wonderful nation - I'm sure of it - but your government looks upon the rest of the world with arrogance & paranoia.

Kevin.

by **Chucky** » Sun Oct 28, 2007 7:55 pm

I like your small-print digital-noface! :wink:

by **jester** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 10:40 pm

You tell em DN. I grew up in Australia and had to return to Not-so-great Britain in 1972. The way I see it, there are two main reasons for the hatred displayed against the US, and they branch from the same root. The stereotypical American is presented as a loud, proud, rich (comparitive to most of the rest of the general world population) and confident guy, and many Europeans (particularly the Brits) are really jealous - they'd love to be more extrovert, but they're conditioned to be "well behaved" (who by, I wonder?). For the same root reason, Eurpopeans find the behaviour of the stereotypical American distasteful... even vulgar. Oh, I almost forgot - American wild west films are full of guys with itchy trigger fingers...and now they're in charge of "the button" :roll:

Mick

by **Chucky** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:31 pm

Hey, I live just across the waters in Ireland. I'd certainly agree that some Britains are conditioned to be well-behaved but it's obviously not true for all of them. Regarding us - the Irish - we don't particularly mind the Americans. I mean, so many of us have connections there (over 1,000,000 Irish people emigrated there during the Great Irish famine).

Personally, I have nothing against Americans; but I do against their current government. I find the stereotypcal American to be a lovely person that has the right attitude in life.

Kevin.

by **digital.noface** » Tue Oct 30, 2007 1:48 am

Chucky wrote:My view is that a dark page in history is coming to a close, because George Bush Jnr will soon be ousted; as will John Howard (Australia); and Tony Blair (UK) is already gone. There is no doubt at all in my head that he [Bush] has made the world a more dangerous place to live.

Don't invest too much hope in a new age of political altruism and universal peace. There will be the same kind of $#%^ on the successors' record 1 decade from now.

This 'terrorism' phenomenon will not be beaten by military. It will be beaten by tackling poverty and other social problems at grass-roots and ensuring that these 'jihadists' feel that they are loved and not to feel that their only option is to enlist in terrorism.

The theory is nice, and in fact, correct. However realising this theory can prove difficult when the leaders of both our countries and the 'jihadists'' countries don't want that to happen. Obviously given economic prosperity the average man has a lot more to lose in becoming a martyr, but how does one bring economic prosperity to a nation plagued with a government which consists basically of a junta of bandits that got lucky some decades ago? Crippling corruption, no guarantee on property rights, and widespread lawlessness make economic development prohibitively difficult. Literally the only way to bring economic development to countries like this (i.e. most of africa and parts of the ME) is military intervention. However this method is in itself undesirable due to the fact it often isn't successful, it is extremely expensive, offers little reward to the intervener, and is all in all bad PR. My personaly solution (You're gunna love me for this

)? A return to colonialism. Sort of. Colonialism was altogether a bad thing last time it was in full swing, but not entirely. For some, under the brutal and racist control of the dutch and portuguese, it was a horrible experience which raped their culture and country, only to leave it with nothing (Did you know that the dutch, upon leaving indonesia, destroyed all of their railways and telegraph networks rather than leave it to the savages?). However for others, whilst not entirely pleasant, it has afforded them a place in the first world after picking up the infrastructure left behind. What we need is a kind of regulated benevolent and consensual system of big brother colonialism. The colonies are protected against violation by some kind of charter, and the master states are entitled to some measure of benefit for taking up the weight of it's underdeveloped little brother.

America is a wonderful nation - I'm sure of it - but your government looks upon the rest of the world with arrogance & paranoia.

Kevin.

by **chickadee** » Tue Oct 30, 2007 5:53 am

A MOST entertaining topic, and DN I have never appreciated your viewpoint so much. I will try to add what I can on the subject and some of the points people have brought up from my perspective as an American, and then duck to avoid the rotten tomatoes hurtling toward me.

Think of the U.S. as an only child. Only children are truly not selfish or ignorant to the feelings of others as most people seem to think... I have known several, and most are delightful people. It's just that they are isolated and therefore think of themselves first because they don't know the difference. Europe, for example, is a tight-knit family with rugrats running all over the place. Each one is distinctly different with its own language and personality, but they are so closely intertwined that they must get along and learn to play well with others. Yes, Canada is here, but he is pretty quiet and keeps to himself, and central and south america are so different culturally that they are like distant cousins we have a hard time relating to. We like the idea of visiting our former brothers, but it seems our upbringing being so distant has changed us. We no longer understand one another.

Slinging guns was quite necessary in the "Old West" I assure you. There simply wasn't any law and order... they were making it up as they went along because everything they knew from the Old World just didn't work in the new. So, you became your own police and had to rely on yourself to create order where there was little or none. I really do think that the Wild West mentality explains a lot about the United States. Protect your own or no one will (and death is always just around the corner).... that sort of thing.

With globalism taking over, we now have immediate access to the rest of the world. Although it is truly an eye-opening discovery for the common people of the U.S. to see how other people live, it is extremely new (until 50-100 years ago, very few could afford to travel overseas). As a nation, we are still struggling to find our place.

At the end of WWII we congratulated ourselves on a job well done along with our good buddy, the UK. The government reinforced that image. We still feel very proud of that outcome, and there are plenty of holocaust films to remind us of it.

As a people, we feel compelled to "stick our nose in" other people's genocides and wars, but the government both then and now do it only for what they perceive as the best way to protect our interests (not an uncommon thing for governments to do). However, we were founded by Christians who believed that "to whom much is given, much will be required" and the public at large still thinks that way. When we don't intervene, we feel like people point at us and gripe about the rich kid who is resting on his laurels amidst pandemonium. It's a double-edged sword. The government appeals to our desire to "help those in need" in order to achieve its own agenda (again, this applies to any administration, not just the current one). Sometimes it works, sometimes not.

In conclusion, we truly want to be liked, but change isn't easy (as Europe well knows). We come to the party with underdeveloped social skills, an insecure self-image, and a general sense of unbelonging which is continually reinforced by our supposed inability to "measure up" to european standards. Personally, I embrace our uniqueness--both good and bad. I get tired of hearing Americans spout self-loathing when I think an attitude of choosing our future without denying our own history and how it has shaped us could be far more productive.

by **digital.noface** » Wed Oct 31, 2007 4:59 am

A'ine wrote:Uh oh, here i go, now.

I know of a society that has over 4 million people in attendance today. It is a " kind of regulated benevolent and consensual system of big brother colonialism."

It is not formed nor regulated by religion, it is, however made up of traditions and concepts formed by

1) basic universal spiritual principles gleaned from religions all over the world

2) medical and psychological theories of healthcare

3) autonomous colonies or homegroups as they are called in this society, that are consensually regulated if they make decisions that harm other homegroups or the society as a whole

4) a central office comprised of the only paid workers in the entire society...paid to answer phones, do typical office type work.

5) The society has one main purpose...and it's traditions protect and maintain that purpose .

6. There is no government...there is a "reverse hierarchal-type" system that "runs" it, as it were, with the "colonies" taking their votes via group representation to a district meeting per each month, and a district representative taking his district's group conscience to an "area assembly", and the area delegated rep takes his area's comprised conscience to the Annual Conference meeting held once per year in April...and in this way, the groups tell the 11 committees designed for the 11 different services offered by this society what to do. And then, the delegates take the combined final group conscience back down through the channels, once again, to each homegroup member which is then handed a record of attendance and meeting minutes from the conference.

7) the service committees work, therefore, non paid...for this society, rather than the colonies submitting to the hierarchy.

There are no dues or fees. This society has a very simplistic tradition of self support, where each group or colony passes a basket at each meeting held daily or several times a week, and each member puts in a dollar or two. If someone can't contribute, nothing is ever said, and noone is ever refused.

9) Noone is required to have the same religious beliefs, political beliefs, etc., in fact, those opinions are outside the scope of it's practice, and would in fact interfere with the primary purpose.

10) It's been in existence since 1934, Carl Jung was one of it's favorite fans, it has the highest production rate of any society ever offered to this primary purpose, and it's members are free to come and go as they please...and somehow? It just keeps on ticking and growing. And delivering.

11)"The colonies are protected against violation by some kind of charter, and the master states are entitled to some measure of benefit for taking up the weight of it's underdeveloped little brother....in this society, the charter is the Traditions and the Concepts, and the measure of benefit is instead experienced by all who contribute...both up the reverse hierarchal ladder to the groups or colonies, back down to the committees formed for the 11 services provided.

Theres a very simple snapshot of the "politics" of this society.

It's AA. Antiquated. Simplistic. Works better than any society I have been interested in at this point...or any government...for that matter. It doesnt' litigate, it has no opinions on other folks' business, and it's run by a bunch of drunks. How about that...a bunch of narcissistic personality types! One would think...anarchy.

Oh, and just to touch lightly on how this society today enfolds Kevin's concept of caring for the needs of those who apparently many political figures feel need attacking vs. altruistic help...

The 12th step in AA is all about the primary purpose of helping worthless, stinking, self deprecating drunks...the basic blight of society...the vacuumns that the world abhors, as Gareth's signature shares.

Nahhhh............really? What a bunch of BS. Yah...consensual colonialisation with a benevolent big brother...hmmm....sounds odd, and yet, somehow incredibly functional, doesn't it?

written by the "Queen of AA" for the "King of Everything Else"

Actually that is a decent parallel. What I am suggesting would basically be AA on a national level. The perpetually hopeless nations so trapped in poverty in corruption would have to surrender themselves to a stable higher power, who would then use this position of ultimate authority under grander still regulations to aid and heal the helpless country in it's charge. The only problem is that the biggest problem facing the nondeveloping world is corruption- corrupt governments that take more than the economy can give. How interested would these governments be in surrendering their power for the greater good? Which means instead you need to strongarm it in through the UN, or personally through US style occupation.

by **digital.noface** » Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:12 pm

A'ine wrote:yes, there of course is the same flaw in AA in that there are far more alcoholics than not who go on to die wasteful deaths because they won't simply listen..suit up and show up. It's all for that ONE that walks through the door...we never know who it will be...

I agree...i don't think that expecting corrupted governments to suddenly jump at the bait of altruism is even realistic.

One mission in LA uses bologna sandwiches to entice more drunks...and it works!

Cheap...effective...we don't care in AA WHY people work the steps, ...you know all that #######4 you hear about "you have to recover just for yourself " well...i suppose that principle may apply in some circles...but in application with corrupted groups or individuals...it doesnt really matter! If i just do the action, whether for the sandwich or so somebody i like will date me if i get sober?
Its all good! WE dont' care WHY they work the steps...if they work the steps...the corruption will change ultimately...

So...what do the governments want that we could give in this type of setting...??? I don't know.

Money. Any corrupt government of a nondeveloping nation who hands over their country to the Colonist Anonymous program gets money. Lots of money, more than they'd have if they continued to run the country themselves. The catch being that the money is in native currency, and thus their wealth is tired not only to the country, but the country's development. You factor them in as a cost and stick them on a payroll. They get more money than they had before, and no longer have to do anything, whilst at the same time looking like good guys for relinquishing control and doing a good thing for their country.

The World View of the United States

ADVERTISEMENT

Who is online