How united is the United States of America really?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

I am being serious here. Like was the last Civil War really the be all, end all civil conflict and internal power struggle to settle the fate of the entire country annd was this truly a permenant thing?

When I look at the majority of the 50 states, they are all more or less different countries unto themselves with different culture. New York is a different Culture compared to Texas.

All I am saying is what were the reasons the USA has not suffered rampant internal conflicts as Rome did? Or even post French Revolution Europe? What's your secret America?

(I have been constantly adding new sentences in this OP in Edit because I am still trying to get my ideas across more clearly)

Samtemdo8:
-snip-

Why haven't we all turned on each other and turned our nation to ash?

Hell if I know. Personally I think it's because we don't have a strong enough catalyst event.

CM156:

Samtemdo8:
-snip-

Personally I think it's because we don't have a strong enough catalyst event.

INB4 Someone here mentions You-Know-Who.

No one really cares. We're united by our indifference to each other more than anything else (for better or worse). Hardly any one in New Jersey actually gives a shit about living conditions in Alabama and vice versa. People just have more pressing things in their immediate surroundings to worry about. The result is unity, but also no one giving a shit about serious issues like poverty, crime, etc.. Americans have a very "fuck you, I got mine" attitude.

Why do you think there is so much attention on immigration? If people are worried about what's across the border, they stop worrying about what politicians are up to.

Well you know what they say.

Worgen:
Well you know what they say.

I like this one better:

Silentpony:

Worgen:
Well you know what they say.

I like this one better:

I am officially annoyed at how well that works, almost as well as this.

The difference between city and rural area are far more stark than between state. Someone from austin is more similar to someone from los angeles than someone from some a small town in texas.

Meiam:
The difference between city and rural area are far more stark than between state. Someone from austin is more similar to someone from los angeles than someone from some a small town in texas.

Are rural areas in different states similar to each other, though?

We're as united as Europe.

Kind of why, despite how critical I am of my country, I still get peeved when Americans are generalized, cause each state may was well be its own country.

Meiam:
The difference between city and rural area are far more stark than between state. Someone from austin is more similar to someone from los angeles than someone from some a small town in texas.

I live in New York, and really, once you leave Long Island and NYC, you may as well be in the south. NY State is very big, and most of that is rural mountains.

Saelune:

Meiam:
The difference between city and rural area are far more stark than between state. Someone from austin is more similar to someone from los angeles than someone from some a small town in texas.

I live in New York, and really, once you leave Long Island and NYC, you may as well be in the south. NY State is very big, and most of that is rural mountains.

That's the same across the nation. Cities and surrounding country are solid blue Democrat, and everything else in between is red.
Bill Maher said it best:


Missouri there is one major highway between St. Louis, Dem stronghold, and Kansas City clear on the other side of the state, again stronghold, with only Columbia, home to several state Universities and a few women only art colleges, super Dem stronghold. Go ten minutes off the highway in any direction and its trump country. Small, forgotten towns like Paris Mo, or Troy and Pacific, that have next to no-one, like Pop. 200, with families with roots that go back 150+ years.
Its the same all over.

Thaluikhain:

Meiam:
The difference between city and rural area are far more stark than between state. Someone from austin is more similar to someone from los angeles than someone from some a small town in texas.

Are rural areas in different states similar to each other, though?

The exact same thing happens in Australia.

trunkage:

Thaluikhain:

Meiam:
The difference between city and rural area are far more stark than between state. Someone from austin is more similar to someone from los angeles than someone from some a small town in texas.

Are rural areas in different states similar to each other, though?

The exact same thing happens in Australia.

So the whole idea of the humble, farmland/countryside people looks down upon City/Urban folk as arrogant, sheltered, and their heads up their ass is true?

CM156:
Why haven't we all turned on each other and turned our nation to ash?

Hell if I know. Personally I think it's because we don't have a strong enough catalyst event.

Fundamentally, Americans believe in the USA as a country and identify with that country, and it works as a geopolitical unit. Americans may have a lot of differences about the nature of the USA, but that's not the same order of complaint as doubting the existence of the country itself. Also, let's bear in mind some of it is the "narcissism of small differences". Sure, the US left and right might be furious with each other, but only fringe groups are postulating a country that different from the status quo. Nothing remotely of the scale of overturning slavery, which was a major bedrock of the Southern way of life and perception of the world in the mid-1800s.

Of course, continued differentiation and polarisation of the US left and right might ultimately change that, but there's a long way to go yet.

The other possibility apart from traumatic schism is geopolitical pressure. In the latter case, imagine a USA where the East Coast depended on Europe and the West on the Pacific rim and that much distance inbetween - eventually, the different directions beneficial to each could make it preferable to go their own way. Much like there was no point Australia, Canada etc. sticking with the UK when they had such different positions and concerns, making amicable divorce preferable. In the age of modern communications and globalisation, however, such geopolitical differences make much less sense because the USA is so interconnected.

Samtemdo8:

trunkage:

Thaluikhain:

Are rural areas in different states similar to each other, though?

The exact same thing happens in Australia.

So the whole idea of the humble, farmland/countryside people looks down upon City/Urban folk as arrogant, sheltered, and their heads up their ass is true?

Half and half, nowhere is monolithic it's just trend (say 70/30) and you have to factor in the suburb, which is more like 50/50. Also I don't think you can really say they're humble or farmer. Farming as a job as radically diminished in numbers, today there's barely any farmer left. Also countryside are dealing with new problems that aren't associated with there traditional image at all, like the opioid epidemic.

Samtemdo8:
I am being serious here. Like was the last Civil War really the be all, end all civil conflict and internal power struggle to settle the fate of the entire country annd was this truly a permenant thing?

When I look at the majority of the 50 states, they are all more or less different countries unto themselves with different culture. New York is a different Culture compared to Texas.

All I am saying is what were the reasons the USA has not suffered rampant internal conflicts as Rome did? Or even post French Revolution Europe? What's your secret America?

(I have been constantly adding new sentences in this OP in Edit because I am still trying to get my ideas across more clearly)

Yes, the US did suffer almost as Rome did , people are not taught it anymore. Long before the Civil war Benjamin Franklin created the Articles of Confederation.In 1777 -1781 the States were not a union at all, they were self-governing and had their own laws , culture, Tax /trade as well as militaries.

*States were independent, but were under hold by to come to the aid of fellow states.
*States had their own money, tax laws and trade systems which were not controlled by the central government.(Fed)
*States could go to war with each other.(New York/Boston came very close, Carolina, as well.)
*States could have any size military .
*States could not be taxed by the central government at all.
*States could print their own money. (28 different currencies at the time)
*Because of this many states residents followed this mantra God, family,State,town,country.

Benjamin Franklin's Articles of Confederacy would come into crises as states argued for more power. The US Confederacy (not Civil War) would collapse not once but twice. In that time, states around the US argued for independence as countries themselves. Our nation almost had several wars between states as the Confederacy collapsed once, than four years latter it collapsed again. Our Federal government was threatened and hogged tied between the laws of the confederacy. Meaning our central government had no power at all, with not taxation we had no centralized military. So the states really had the manpower to actually invade and destroy our young country. It didn't happen because they all distrusted each other to the point of being feared attacked by the other. Eventually luckily all hell didn't break loose, and we somehow created the US articles that keep the country unified. (A States could still leave the Union legally,up to 1861 during the war). The Civil War would change that when the Union past a bill which made it illegal to leave the union.Only passed a Republican controlled Government easily past the bill because no democrats were there to block it.

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1776-1783/articles

Yes, since that time we are more united then what we were then. The fed and States have power struggles but that is expected.Though all the arguments and disagreements are settled in court rather than breaking the union apart.In essence the US was both lucky and able to learn from Rome and Europe of what not to do. America may not have our Bastille but we almost did fall apart like Rome, Greece or the Holy Roman Empire.

Samtemdo8:

trunkage:

Thaluikhain:

Are rural areas in different states similar to each other, though?

The exact same thing happens in Australia.

So the whole idea of the humble, farmland/countryside people looks down upon City/Urban folk as arrogant, sheltered, and their heads up their ass is true?

We have 4 major parties in Australia. Liberals (actual conservatives), Nationals (farming conservatives), Labour (liberals) and Greens (very liberal and environmentally conscious). We have a whole party devoted to urban people being arrogant, untrustworthy and thieves. They think all the taxes go to cities and nothing is spent on them. (Somewhat true. There's just not many people who live in the country. So not much money should be spent. But, per capita, money is shifted to the country, not to the city. It's not theft, its economics)
All this is especially galling when there's a drought on, like right now. Those same farmers are pleading with the cityfolk for money and we're giving in droves. Will this help farmers believe that cityfolk aren't arrogant or untrustworthy? Nope. This drought relief charity has happened quite of few times since I was born. And country folk attitudes are getting worse.

Samtemdo8:
I am being serious here. Like was the last Civil War really the be all, end all civil conflict and internal power struggle to settle the fate of the entire country annd was this truly a permenant thing?

When I look at the majority of the 50 states, they are all more or less different countries unto themselves with different culture. New York is a different Culture compared to Texas.

All I am saying is what were the reasons the USA has not suffered rampant internal conflicts as Rome did? Or even post French Revolution Europe? What's your secret America?

(I have been constantly adding new sentences in this OP in Edit because I am still trying to get my ideas across more clearly)

Don't ignore some of the similarities. Most of you still speak the same language. You watch similar sports. You know what the rest of the country is up to, whilst knowing far less about the rest of the world. I think it's fair to say that the average American would know more about Wyoming than about Germany. You share a certain legalism, a certain notion of freedom, a certain lack of care for physical space. (Try to find a European street that takes up space in the way American streets do)

Secondly the US government is one of the strongest institutions there is, both in terms of raw power as in terms of shared identity. Sure, many people say they hate the government but the idea that it could or should be gotten rid of is almost unthinkable. Most of you share the basic idea that you are american to the point where your news treats the american death toll of a disaster as more important than the human death toll. 'The constitution' is a phrase that carries the weight that 'the bible' does among Christians. Being mean about 'the troops', the flag or the national anthem is a no-go. There is essentially no part of your country that considers itself unamerican in the way that a sizable amount of Catalans think about Spain. There is no force agitating to have the states be separate that is anywhere near comparable to the amount of people that would like to get rid of the EU.

There is a clear danger with the amount of polarization going on

United during times of catastrophe, mostly. Otherwise during business as usual it's about what you'd expect when taking a bunch of different cultures and value systems, mixing them all together and expecting them to live in harmony.

Let's just put it like this: how high is the security in the borders between one State with the others? What kind of people those borders are meant to keep away? In which conditions crossing the State border would be a illegal?

Samtemdo8:
What's your secret America?

We're united in a certain set of principles. At least, I like to think we are. We're the world's bad guy and that's just how most of us like it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you guys fight a war once to emphasize just how united you are?

Leg End:

Samtemdo8:
What's your secret America?

We're united in a certain set of principles. At least, I like to think we are. We're the world's bad guy and that's just how most of us like it.

You're not the world's bad guys. You just like meddling in everyone else business. Like... a hundred times more than any other country (except China and mainly becuase I dont think we know all of what they're up to.) You like telling everyone how to behave and wonder why everyone doesn't follow you

trunkage:

Leg End:

Samtemdo8:
What's your secret America?

We're united in a certain set of principles. At least, I like to think we are. We're the world's bad guy and that's just how most of us like it.

You're not the world's bad guys. You just like meddling in everyone else business. Like... a hundred times more than any other country (except China and mainly becuase I dont think we know all of what they're up to.) You like telling everyone how to behave and wonder why everyone doesn't follow you

Literally how I sum up how everyone treats America.

It cuts both ways. If there's something wrong and the US isn't involved? I've heard tons of people saying "if you guys got involved, you could have solved it."

If we're tangentially involved, we should have done more to prevent it and is our fault since we didn't.

We're supposed to be leaders, but we need to shut the hell up because we don't need to be involved in everything.

We're not the center of the world, but everyone focuses on us for everything and can point out any misstep.

We're dammed if we do, dammed if we don't.

ObsidianJones:

trunkage:

Leg End:
We're united in a certain set of principles. At least, I like to think we are. We're the world's bad guy and that's just how most of us like it.

You're not the world's bad guys. You just like meddling in everyone else business. Like... a hundred times more than any other country (except China and mainly becuase I dont think we know all of what they're up to.) You like telling everyone how to behave and wonder why everyone doesn't follow you

Literally how I sum up how everyone treats America.

It cuts both ways. If there's something wrong and the US isn't involved? I've heard tons of people saying "if you guys got involved, you could have solved it."

If we're tangentially involved, we should have done more to prevent it and is our fault since we didn't.

We're supposed to be leaders, but we need to shut the hell up because we don't need to be involved in everything.

We're not the center of the world, but everyone focuses on us for everything and can point out any misstep.

We're dammed if we do, dammed if we don't.

Pretty much sums up the United States as it is now as a global superpower.

ObsidianJones:
We're not the center of the world, but everyone focuses on us for everything and can point out any misstep.

The US is the financial, cultural and military centre of the world. And it's run by (in large part) appalling people who go out of their way to be appalling. The US rightly gets condemned for this.

Now, of course, lots of places have rubbish leaders, but they are causing much more localised problems. If Italy, say, was the greatest power on the planet, people would take less interest in the US's failings and worry about them instead.

Oh, we're not united at all. We're constantly belittling each other because of some stupid meaningless "Conservative or Liberal scum" attitude, not to mention all the hundreds of little divisions in each of those categories that divide us further. I don't think it's since before I was born that we've had a president who we didn't choose by anything but the slimmest margins, which all but a select few come to despise yet we reelect anyway. When, and an honest question here, was the last time we had a leader that most of us actually liked and more importantly actually on the whole made the country better as a direct result of being there? My guess is not for half a century at the least.

If you are talking about states themselves, states have never really been all that united in purpose or culture throughout American history. The fact that the states are interconnected enough to need to rely on each other and too distrustful of each other to work together is the only reason that the Union hasn't fractured into hundreds of constantly warring city-states a long time ago.

immortalfrieza:
Oh, we're not united at all. We're constantly belittling each other because of some stupid meaningless "Conservative or Liberal scum" attitude, not to mention all the hundreds of little divisions in each of those categories that divide us further. I don't think it's since before I was born that we've had a president who we didn't choose by anything but the slimmest margins, which all but a select few come to despise yet we reelect anyway. When, and an honest question here, was the last time we had a leader that most of us actually liked and more importantly actually on the whole made the country better as a direct result of being there? My guess is not for half a century at the least.

If you are talking about states themselves, states have never really been all that united in purpose or culture throughout American history. The fact that the states are interconnected enough to need to rely on each other and too distrustful of each other to work together is the only reason that the Union hasn't fractured into hundreds of constantly warring city-states a long time ago.

Divide and conquer. Create enough obfuscation and eventually people will largely just stop concerning themselves with the greater issues because nothing makes sense. What's the point of voting when most of the populace doesn't know what they're voting for, and ultimately who could blame them. Political elite are guaranteed to benefit from the willful ignorance. True, what goes around comes around, but we've gotten too big and diluted to identify a root cause.

America is also essentially being financially strip-mined and our culture has been designed to facilitate that over most of the past century. We're also big on promoting multiculturalism instead of multiethnicity, yet wonder why there are still so many problems with racism. The two are not interchangeable, and I'm not talking about having Mexican or Thai for dinner. There's nothing wrong with celebrating unique heritages but our common ground isn't nearly as solid as it should be to flourish. It starts with education and guess what...our public education is in the shitter. Family values aren't trailing too far behind anymore either for an increasing percentage of the populace.

Sadly things will probably continue to get worse before they get better if history can still be considered a reliable indicator.

Ps, that is a beautiful cat in your avatar.

hanselthecaretaker:

Divide and conquer. Create enough obfuscation and eventually people will largely just stop concerning themselves with the greater issues because nothing makes sense. What?s the point of voting when most of the populace doesn?t know what they?re voting for, and ultimately who could blame them. Political elite are guaranteed to benefit from the willful ignorance. True, what goes around comes around, but we?ve gotten too big and diluted to identify a root cause.

America is also essentially being financially strip-mined and our culture has been designed to facilitate that over most of the past century. We?re also big on promoting multiculturalism instead of multiethnicity, yet wonder why there are still so many problems with racism. The two are not interchangeable, and I?m not talking about having Mexican or Thai for dinner. There?s nothing wrong with celebrating unique heritages but our common ground isn?t nearly as solid as it should be to flourish. It starts with education and guess what...our public education is in the shitter. Family values aren?t trailing too far behind anymore either for an increasing percentage of the populace.

Sadly things will probably continue to get worse before they get better if history can still be considered a reliable indicator.

Honestly? I don't think anyone is actually attempting to Divide and Conquer us, we're just really naturally divisive as a species. We're just constantly trying to divide ourselves up in more and more stupid ways so we can act superior to everyone else, especially in this day and age where we need to actively try to work together less and less.

Ps, that is a beautiful cat in your avatar.

Thanks, sadly it's not mine, just a random black cat pic on the internet. I WISH I had a black cat, especially one that beautiful.

ObsidianJones:
Literally how I sum up how everyone treats America.

It cuts both ways. If there's something wrong and the US isn't involved? I've heard tons of people saying "if you guys got involved, you could have solved it."

If we're tangentially involved, we should have done more to prevent it and is our fault since we didn't.

This ignores the historical reality that much of the current global system is a result of US interference in the first place. Global free market capitalism as we know it today is a direct result of the U.S. using its enormous economic power to cow developing economies into giving up their natural resources in return for pittance (no U.S. company would abide having to pay foreigners as much as U.S. citizens nor would they allow U.S. companies to be treated like the U.S. treated foreign companies. Also known as the "free market British Empire approach".), as well as using the Marshal plan to essentially strong arm economies devastated by war into again cowing to U.S. demands. The U.S. used reconstruction money as a whip to force countries to have a trade policy friendly to the U.S. (and thus by default unfriendly to themselves) and to this day the WTO is wielded as a beating stick heavily in favour of the U.S.

The U.S. built the system, it designed the casino. What's the easy way to tell whose system it is? The U.S. has around 5% of the world's population and about 25% of the world's GDP, which doesn't count the astronomical amounts of wealth held as assets within its borders. To call it "the world's richest country" doesn't do it justice. Were all the wealth of the U.S. evenly distributed, every single citizen would have more wealth than the top 20% of most countries, the top 5% of some at least. To put that into perspective, the U.S. total wealth was between $64,584 and 93,560 billion in 2017 (depending on the data source), while the second country on the list is China with between $24,803 and 29,000 billion. The U.S. alone has more wealth in its borders than either Europe ($79,639 billion) or Asia ($80,548 billion).

We're supposed to be leaders, but we need to shut the hell up because we don't need to be involved in everything.

We're not the center of the world, but everyone focuses on us for everything and can point out any misstep.

We're dammed if we do, dammed if we don't.

This sounds like someone who is particularly bitter over their obligation to a global system set up to benefit themselves the most. Its the equivalent of a man complaining how unfair society is. "Why won't everyone leave us alone while we siphon off the world's resources into the most wasteful country on Earth?" Yes. It might have something to do with all the bombing civilians in order to project global strength.

ineptelephant:
*snips*

It sounds like a man who sees the conflicting roles that people want America to have. No one will ever argue the debts and crises that America has caused. Me, chief among them.

What I am speaking about is how everyone has a conflicting idea of what America is supposed to be.

We're supposed to be the leader, but we're not supposed to always want to lead. We're supposed to be the police, but we're not supposed to over police. We're not supposed to speak out of turn (like you're demonstrating), but be ok that everyone has a go at us.

It creates a situation when we act on one of those things, half will think we're presumptuous for doing anything, and the other half will think we're not doing enough and we're being lazy.

Without Malice, your entire conversation speaks of a certain opinion of America. It's one I share. It's one of the driving forces of why I'm going to move out of the country in the coming years. I do understand how crappy America is.

But that doesn't mean I don't understand how crappy other people's comments and perceptions who just wish to unload on America because it's an easy target are. America is shit. Straight out. If you paid attention to my various comments about how this country is run in many threads, you would know that's actually how I feel about it. Bombing civilians is monstrous, and I think those who 'make the mistake' should be tried. Just like I think police officers who shoot unarmed civilians can't just call it a mistake. Everyone should be tried and be forced upon law.

My singular point is that the world can not decide on what they want from America. So whatever action it takes, everyone else will go "Oh, there goes America again."

And separated from the part I was originally talking about, yes, I can see how one would say I'm speaking like a person with a chip on my shoulder.

Lastly, this point arose from presenting the another side of a situation brought up .

trunkage:
You're not the world's bad guys. You just like meddling in everyone else business. Like... a hundred times more than any other country (except China and mainly becuase I dont think we know all of what they're up to.) You like telling everyone how to behave and wonder why everyone doesn't follow you

We literally have everyone condemning us for X,Y,and Z and wondering why we don't follow their lead. Yet people outside of the US don't see it that way. I know actual people who shun the rest of the world based on the perceptions the rest of the world heaped on them. The pendulum swings both ways.

ObsidianJones:

It sounds like a man who sees the conflicting roles that people want America to have. No one will ever argue the debts and crises that America has caused. Me, chief among them.

I suppose that is true. I just want to also take this opportunity to apologise if my comments came across as rather terse.

What I am speaking about is how everyone has a conflicting idea of what America is supposed to be.

Simularly as you or another person from the U.S. might complain that people abroad treat the U.S. as a homogenous mass, I feel as though the problem here is arising because people with diverse beliefs and circumstances are being lumped together.

A lot of people in Iraq are probably very unhappy about the interventionist nature of the U.S., likewise for Serbia, Nicaragua etc. However there are undoubtably people around the world who are very happy to have U.S. intervention, often when the alternative was Chinese or Soviet aggression. For example, the government installed in South Vietnam was a brutal dictatorship but still one that enjoyed some support in the South. The entire economy of cities were set up to work around the "rich" (relatively speaking) U.S. military personel on leave. When the U.S. started to withdraw, the driving factor of the economy was ripped away, leading to mounting poverty. In that sense people were very unhappy to see the U.S. leave, even though the economic bubble was clearly a result of their occupation. South Vietnamese buddhists who were persecuted by the ruling Christian minority likely still harbour resentment to this day, while largely Christian city dwellers in the south are often nostalgic for a time before the rule of the communist junta.

Saying "The world isn't consistent" is basically a truism. Of course it isn't, people in the same country want different things, let alone the entire international community.

We're supposed to be the leader, but we're not supposed to always want to lead. We're supposed to be the police, but we're not supposed to over police. We're not supposed to speak out of turn (like you're demonstrating), but be ok that everyone has a go at us.

What? "Speak out of turn" ? That's a joke, right? You mean "place yourselves as the victims of international indecisiveness while you play both the role of "global leader" and "global plunderer" at the same time" ? How about this: The U.S. intervenes internationally without enriching its already decadent economy. Is that on the cards while the U.S. is playing "global leader" ?

Countries around the world acknowledge the need for U.S. military strength in opposition to say China or Russia, but criticise its neo-colonialism. That is not inconsitency, that is common sense. The world is not black and white, its not "you're with us or against us", its a endless sea of grey where nations often do the right thing for the wrong reasons, or at least will attempt to make a profit off of doing the right thing regardless of the people hurt in the process.

It creates a situation when we act on one of those things, half will think we're presumptuous for doing anything, and the other half will think we're not doing enough and we're being lazy.

It is demonstrable that the U.S. has pretended to act as the "leader" while enriching its own pockets, including both occupations carried out in the 21st century. The inconsistency of the entire world in its expectation is nothing compared to the inconsitency of the U.S. in what it preaches and what it practices.

But that doesn't mean I don't understand how crappy other people's comments and perceptions who just wish to unload on America because it's an easy target are. America is shit. Straight out. If you paid attention to my various comments about how this country is run in many threads, you would know that's actually how I feel about it. Bombing civilians is monstrous, and I think those who 'make the mistake' should be tried. Just like I think police officers who shoot unarmed civilians can't just call it a mistake. Everyone should be tried and be forced upon law.

My singular point is that the world can not decide on what they want from America. So whatever action it takes, everyone else will go "Oh, there goes America again."

The whole world decide unanimously? The U.S. can't even decide what it wants to be itself, how is the rest of the world supposed to make up its mind on something that has no consistency?

And separated from the part I was originally talking about, yes, I can see how one would say I'm speaking like a person with a chip on my shoulder.

Lastly, this point arose from presenting the another side of a situation brought up.

To quote the post you were referencing then:

trunkage:
You're not the world's bad guys. You just like meddling in everyone else business. Like... a hundred times more than any other country (except China and mainly becuase I dont think we know all of what they're up to.) You like telling everyone how to behave and wonder why everyone doesn't follow you

Yes, that's pretty accurate. The U.S. criticises the Russian Fed. for Bashar Al Assad in Syria while acitively shooting down any criticism of Israel and supporting Saudi Arabia's devastating air campaign in Yemen. People aren't saying "don't criticise Russia", they are saying "criticising Russia while doing the same thing is hypocritical." The world doesn't have to disavow everything done by the U.S. to acknowledge its hypocrisy and this "all or nothing" style thinking is pointless.

Its a false dichotomy, where on one side you have placed "support all intervention in both intention and method" against the other "criticise U.S. occupation in every intention and method". Why can't there be a middle ground?

ineptelephant:
I suppose that is true. I just want to also take this opportunity to apologise if my comments came across as rather terse.

Violate times. You have passion, and that's to be lauded. No offense taken, and hopefully no offense given to you.

Simularly as you or another person from the U.S. might complain that people abroad treat the U.S. as a homogenous mass, I feel as though the problem here is arising because people with diverse beliefs and circumstances are being lumped together.

A lot of people in Iraq are probably very unhappy about the interventionist nature of the U.S., likewise for Serbia, Nicaragua etc. However there are undoubtably people around the world who are very happy to have U.S. intervention, often when the alternative was Chinese or Soviet aggression. For example, the government installed in South Vietnam was a brutal dictatorship but still one that enjoyed some support in the South. The entire economy of cities were set up to work around the "rich" (relatively speaking) U.S. military personel on leave. When the U.S. started to withdraw, the driving factor of the economy was ripped away, leading to mounting poverty. In that sense people were very unhappy to see the U.S. leave, even though the economic bubble was clearly a result of their occupation. South Vietnamese buddhists who were persecuted by the ruling Christian minority likely still harbour resentment to this day, while largely Christian city dwellers in the south are often nostalgic for a time before the rule of the communist junta.

Saying "The world isn't consistent" is basically a truism. Of course it isn't, people in the same country want different things, let alone the entire international community.

The sheer weight of the Commerce that America can throw about is staggering. Ideally, I'd like it to be spread among the people of the world, but I get that such altruism is seen as leftist claptrap by so many. The puppet Governments that the US put up has lead to some nations truly profiting from it, but it comes at price that a foreign power must consider you favorable to keep that cash flowing.

with our Buffoon in Chief at the reigns, we see how that fares for even our commonwealths. This is all to say that I agree that the interactions with the world in a purely capitalistic manner (mostly disgused as police actions) have led to more harm than good.

Perfect Case In Point: take one Act of terrorism, get one President who has an axe to grind, sprinkle in Al-Queda and a weird move to Iraq, and you have the recipe for Isis.

What? "Speak out of turn" ? That's a joke, right? You mean "place yourselves as the victims of international indecisiveness while you play both the role of "global leader" and "global plunderer" at the same time" ? How about this: The U.S. intervenes internationally without enriching its already decadent economy. Is that on the cards while the U.S. is playing "global leader" ?

Countries around the world acknowledge the need for U.S. military strength in opposition to say China or Russia, but criticise its neo-colonialism. That is not inconsitency, that is common sense. The world is not black and white, its not "you're with us or against us", its a endless sea of grey where nations often do the right thing for the wrong reasons, or at least will attempt to make a profit off of doing the right thing regardless of the people hurt in the process.

No. I mean speak out of turn.

I mean actually having an opinion about foreign matters. I mean talking about Brexit and getting shouted down because I elected Trump (I didn't. I vote for Bernie then Hillary).

I mean wanting to discuss Boris Johnson and being told that I shouldn't even have an opinion about what type of a man he is because of the mess of my Government.

I talk about being concerned with Pegida and being met with Charlottesville, wanting to talk about Greece's debts and having the Subprime Mortgage Crisis shoved back into my face... and I dare not talk about pollution ever if I want my head not bitten off.

... and then later, having to hear that America is so full of themselves that they don't know what's happening in other parts of the globe. Sometimes, yes, by the same people.

It's like being told I can't be a citizen of the world or have an opinion about it because where I was born, forget my sensitivities.

It is demonstrable that the U.S. has pretended to act as the "leader" while enriching its own pockets, including both occupations carried out in the 21st century. The inconsistency of the entire world in its expectation is nothing compared to the inconsitency of the U.S. in what it preaches and what it practices.

No argument in America's false intentions as leader. But to judge America for being 'more successful' for lining their pockets with dubious dealings is to ignore the reality of the Globe. Do we have more chances to do it? Absolutely. Via Companies and the sheer concretion of wealth in the borders. Do we get caught more? Absolutely, once again. But, in reality, I do not believe for a second countries like Russia and China are getting buddy-buddy because they realized it was in the world's best interest.

Every Ally is an Ally because both sides have something to gain. Almost every action is the same (save for natural disaster relief). I do not give fault to the United States for having more chances, because it would be the same for any other country if they had similar chances as well.

Does that mean I like them or absolve them? Hell no. I'm hopefully going to be an Ex-pat in two years. This country doesn't give a shit about me or people who look like me, but expect me to fall in line so it doesn't have to think too hard about it's own deplorable habits. I have no love loss.

The whole world decide unanimously? The U.S. can't even decide what it wants to be itself, how is the rest of the world supposed to make up its mind on something that has no consistency?

I actually consider that a point I'm making, really. It speaks that the United States isn't a Monolith, but people want to treat it as such in a disparaging way.

Not even a person is consistent all the time. A nation full of varying ideas, beliefs, creeds, and backgrounds can be even less so. But no one says "The Republican Backed American Government went against the Democratic wishes once again and decided to go along with Tariffs backed by contentious President, Donald Trump".

They just say "America decided on more Tariffs". We're inconsistent and flighty so no one can make up their mind on what we are... save for bad things. Then we're all one unit.

To quote the post you were referencing then:

trunkage:
You're not the world's bad guys. You just like meddling in everyone else business. Like... a hundred times more than any other country (except China and mainly becuase I dont think we know all of what they're up to.) You like telling everyone how to behave and wonder why everyone doesn't follow you

Yes, its pretty accurate. The U.S. criticises the Russian Fed. for Bashar Al Assad in Syria while acitively shooting down any criticism of Israel and supporting Saudi Arabia's devastating air compaign in Yemen. People aren't saying "don't criticise Russia", they are saying "criticising Russia while doing the same thing is hypocritical." The world doesn't have to disavow everything done by the U.S. to acknowledge its hypocrisy and this "all or nothing" style thinking is pointless.

Its a false dichotomy, where on one side you have placed "support all intervention in both intention and method" against the other "criticise U.S. occupation in every intention and method". Why can't there be a middle ground?

It's a good question. Why can't there be a middle ground in all things? It's an accurate Truth that most people are not altruistic. And there is no nation that comes anywhere close. Countries will get involved with other countries if they can benefit. To act like one nation does it more than others is false. Saying one nation is seen as doing it more is accurate along with perception, but with the hundreds of thousands of plights that befall this globe every day, it's not like every other nation is flocking to these places to offer all of their support and America is just sitting back and going "Lol, nah son".

To your point... and to my over all point, it's nothing new under the sun. And furthermore, as weak sauce as it is, Mattis has told Saudi Arabia to reign it in a bit, calling their support 'Non-unconditional'.

Sidebar, we all have problems with this government we currently have. The Party in Power does a lot of hypocritical things. From complaining that Obama is hurting the deficit to not blinking one eye when Trump increased the deficit to 1 trillion dollars. From hating Despots to loving Putin, it is what this government does. All to bow down to the Orange One. It sickens me, if I'm honest.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here