boo boo

Yes, I consider myself a misanthropist too.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

TheBig3

I have to say that this is horrifyingly scary. You seem to suggest that the U.S. is nothing more than a crumbling empire fronted by corrupted neo-facists while the rest of the "developed nations" are all roses, peaches, and cream.

Respond to what you want but please answer me this one yes or no question: If the U.S. vanished tomorrow, I mean everything including the land mass itself, do you think the world would change for the better?

__________________
I've moved to a new address

DontRunMeOver

I think that part of your silly post was correct. I don't think true equality is really achievable because there will always be so many people who want to put themselves (or their families/friends in the case of the more self-righteous) at positions of advantage compared to other people. If society got too close to something like equality I would fully expect these people to react against it and find ways to generate inequality to try to favour themselves again. Having said that, to anybody who isn't an ******* equality seems like a very nice goal to work towards so even if it isn't achievable it should be a target because it makes the awesome people feel a bit more comfortable with the world and pisses off the selfish twatfaces.

The US is the main powerful bullyboy nation in the world at the moment, but if it wasn't you lot it would be somebody else. As different superpowers like to identify different enemies and friends the geographies of war and trade would change but in terms of the overall behaviour it would be pretty much the same.

__________________

fool on the hill

The insularity of most Americans certainly does work to the advantage of those who wish to advance "American interests" for corporations like Halliburton, the health insurance industry, etc. And all this at the expense of Americans (who are quite willing to go along or are at least apathetic) and in the case of wars or proxy wars, we can turn a blind eye to others lives being uprooted or destroyed. I could go on...

There are no "saintly" nations but when the US is isolated from other developed nations in terms of environmental concerns (thankfully the Aussies are finally signing onto the Kyoto Protocol), the death penalty, universal health care, extremely low educational standards, a bogus two-party system, giving more free rides than usual for corporations, and where corporate lobbyists have more of a voice than voters, and its media which glosses all this over (funny reading CNN and then reading a lot of overseas papers, the differences in what they report) the US sticks out like a sore thumb. Most people in the US don't actually see that of course, they have no idea. Add on top of that a war which neither party cares ENOUGH to put to an end (the Dims are more guilty in this regard that Repugs as far as I'm concerned), blatant torture policies and "black sites," propping up tyrants in other countries because a "capitalist tyrant" is somehow better than a "communist" one (we helped prop up Musharrif, the Taliban and Saddam and Pinochet for example), both also parties are gung ho about "kicking ass" in Iran now too? And I don't want to even get started on other cultural factors like guns, religion, the "evil" of *** marriage and how half of Americans actually think evolution is hogwash and can't even locate many major countries on a world map.

I don't want the US to vanish-- I would just like it to catch up with the rest of the world in terms of the world political dialogue. Until then, we're screwing ourselves and we're screwing the world. The US has a lot of great potential and for decades, thanks to people being active, lucid and informed of their civic responsibilities, but now...?

The bottom line is the whole entire political spectrum is shifted so far to the right in comparison to all other developed nations (many conservatives in Europe are more to the left than Clinton and Obama). I think that's bad thing. If you want to perceive that as being "anti-American" or "unamerican" or whatever, well, I'm sorry you feel you have to see it that way.

~ josh

__________________

TheBig3

Yeah, the U.S. have been instrumental in propping up governments and it does result in Blowback which Ron Paul tries to let people know about on a constant basis, but the old political spectrum we stole from the French Revolution no longer works.

The Right isn't any more "right" or less "left" than the Left, it just depends on the State we're in. Nixon was highly instrumental in the food stamps program, and created the EPA (if I remember right) but those things are outlawed in the party today.

Pat Buchanan, who i probably considered by casual observers a strict conservatives has written a book called "A Republic, not an Empire"



I'd like to think that those that stand a large enough chance of winning the American presidency know more than I do and that largely what we're hearing with the "take no options off the table" talk is just war time propaganda. Iran's mullahs would love nothing more than an invasion and I think both sides are going to be unhappy when the international bodies for Nuclear power goes into Iran, says their running a peaceful operation and takes the bite out of their "scare potential."

But I read books on both sides of the aisle because I think its important but one of the arguments that conservatives make is that right now, for better or worse, America keeps stability as much as possible with "corruption existing on the back burner."

I think folks know that our presence around the world does prevent the massive outbreaks of violence that might otherwise occur, even if they think (as we saw above) that we shouldn't be there.

But lets take a few examples from "America Alone" which is slightly illogical but legitimately hysterical.

If America's military intervention was such a train wreck, or unneeded don't you think that the problems would only exist where America went? Furthermore, would you oppose or support American intervention in the Sudan? I certainly would and I think the most embarrassing thing about it is that The West in general has used justification as to why we haven't gone in. Handfuls of other Euro nations could swing in their and improve the situation ten fold, but refuse to openly, and I think History will paint this a black spot at a time when Iraq should be the only thing "ugly" about this time period.

As far as Clinton and Obama being too conservative because America is slanted heavily to the right, do you not think that means The "developed world" is slanted heavily to the left? And as one final pot shot, maybe your view of Americans is faulty because you live in the Bible Belt.

__________________
I've moved to a new address

fool on the hill

There will always be problems worldwide, but when your the biggest bully on the block (now that the Soviet Union is defunct) that means all the more that one's power should be held in check. "Hubris" is not a word in the American lexicon unfortunately.

I am not for isolationism (I am a strong supporter for a better, stronger UN). If the US is going to be a model for "promoting democracy," hey, I'm all for that. But utilising "soft power" or "hard power" for unilateral support for the vague abstraction of "American interests" is not the way to do it.

As it is, I think the US bullying of other countries in the name of unilateralism has fostered more distrust and unrest. Most Americans (not just in the south) may be oblivious to this fact, but its not lost on the rest of the world.

And believe me, I've been highly critical of the policies of other nations as well... To quote from Spiderman: "With great power comes great responsibility." Being the most powerful country in the world means we should be hold ourselves to a very high standard. That requires some vigilance on our part as citizens of the world and to our neighbours (literally and figuratively). What the US does isn't just about *us* but affects the lives of people worldwide.

~ josh

__________________

right-track

Do I still get to keep my Sopranos DVD collection?

fool on the hill

Well, I've never said any such thing, although its not surprising you would perceive my personal outlook in such a manichean way.

And that's certainly not the reason I'm moving to New Zealand (NZ has its own set of problems, as all countries do, as I have said before *sigh*). I have many positive reasons for moving there (not the silly negative one you seem to be implying).

Anyway, I came to this forum to discuss music, not bloody politics-- I should know when to stay quiet!

~ josh

__________________

TheBig3

I would. I mean you dodged everything you were countered with by yo, and you said the least amount allowable to claw your way out of that one.

You said you feel like an alien in your own country, and you don't want to stay and try to shift it left. Fine, but you're leaving because the country won't hand you the political spectrum affiliation you want.

America isn't where I want it either, but you can join the political process and change it.

__________________
I've moved to a new address

boo boo

Anyone remember when Rush Limbaugh said Democrats only want us to go into Darfur to get the black vote?

Well anyway. If you do support going into Darfur Big3, you should know that under Paul we wont. His non-interventionism goes a long f*cking way, including even staying out of huminatarian crisises in other countries.

I agree with Paul that we should spend more time focusing on whats going on here. But being a powerful nation who has profited so much from other countries, we have a responsability to help other countries when we need to. Paul wants to alienate us from the whole world outside of free trade and I don't think thats right.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs