NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm a brit with no love for America but I really want to get this out.

Ameica is a nation. It acts only in it's own self-interests when it comes to foreign policy. This might backfire and it's regularly unpleasant, underhanded and downright immoral. Britain's no better. Neither is Australia, Russia, Brazil or any other random nation. It's just the US has more money to do it with these days.

It has it's good sides too remember, even if it's only Hayseed Dixie ;)

The nation is evil, the people are OK really, same as anywhere.

The problem is that it seems to be very shortsighted when it comes to deciding what is in its best interest; much as a small child thinks it is in his best interest to get the ball back, those of us who see the oncoming traffic see a bigger picture.

But then you could predict the fuck-up that is the aftermath of the British Empire too. Makes no difference to the outcome.

The problem is that it seems to be very shortsighted when it comes to deciding what is in its best interest; much as a small child thinks it is in his best interest to get the ball back, those of us who see the oncoming traffic see a bigger picture.

Every country is shortsighted in its interests; no country looks down the road but instead look at the ways to get the most in the least amount of time, the future be damned. Even thinking about the future is shortsighted because there is always something beyond the period you are looking at.

Every country is shortsighted in its interests; no country looks down the road but instead look at the ways to get the most in the least amount of time, the future be damned. Even thinking about the future is shortsighted because there is always something beyond the period you are looking at.

He/She/It said it better.

The problem is that it seems to be very shortsighted when it comes to deciding what is in its best interest; much as a small child thinks it is in his best interest to get the ball back, those of us who see the oncoming traffic see a bigger picture.
Oh, excuuuuuuse us for not bowing to your superior wisdom and experience, Great One. How ignoble of us to not recognize how much more evolved you are ... how noble of purpose, how fair of countenance, how wise in word and deed. Forgive us oh Great One for not recognizing your omnisience and omnipresence. We are but worms and deserve nothng better than to be ground beneath the heel of your mighty boot!

Every country is shortsighted in its interests; no country looks down the road but instead look at the ways to get the most in the least amount of time, the future be damned. Even thinking about the future is shortsighted because there is always something beyond the period you are looking at.

No, every country is not shortsighted in its interests. There are some basic principles which will always be in the best interests of a person or a nation. Greed will always work against you in the long run, for example, while fairness will always work in your favour in the long run.

Wrong.

The United States of America is a nation. America can mean anywhere from Canada to Argentina.

Oh, excuuuuuuse us for not bowing to your superior wisdom and experience, Great One. How ignoble of us to not recognize how much more evolved you are ... how noble of purpose, how fair of countenance, how wise in word and deed. Forgive us oh Great One for not recognizing your omnisience and omnipresence. We are but worms and deserve nothng better than to be ground beneath the heel of your mighty boot!


You just put a bloody great dinge in my 'people are OK' theory. Nothing new there I guess... ;)

I don't think it's fair for you to judge America as a whole of "A dumb country with OK people." It's built on immigration.

Oh, excuuuuuuse us for not bowing to your superior wisdom and experience, Great One. How ignoble of us to not recognize how much more evolved you are ... how noble of purpose, how fair of countenance, how wise in word and deed. Forgive us oh Great One for not recognizing your omnisience and omnipresence. We are but worms and deserve nothng better than to be ground beneath the heel of your mighty boot!

Wow. Voices in your head, eh?

The nation is evil, the people are OK really, same as anywhere.

To deal with just this one sentence (nothing expressed about the rest of what you said)
Government is evil. Not the nation. To extend I say neither is the people nor the culture. As a whole they're not evil, but individuals (or parts of - culture) can be caused to commit acts of evil through propaganda and hatred.

Oh, excuuuuuuse us for not bowing to your superior wisdom and experience, Great One. How ignoble of us to not recognize how much more evolved you are ... how noble of purpose, how fair of countenance, how wise in word and deed. Forgive us oh Great One for not recognizing your omnisience and omnipresence. We are but worms and deserve nothng better than to be ground beneath the heel of your mighty boot!


Eutrusca, are you flaming or flame baiting ?

America's not short sighted the people who vote are

No, every country is not shortsighted in its interests. There are some basic principles which will always be in the best interests of a person or a nation. Greed will always work against you in the long run, for example, while fairness will always work in your favour in the long run.

Fairness today will probably be far different from fairness in the future. In the 1800's it was considered "fair" to allow the European powers to carve up Africa, or the US to annex the Philipines, or for countries to declare war on each other in the name of "balance of power".

Nobody can predict the future, so any action regardless of how farsighted it is may very well be a shortsighted move with disasterous consequences.

U said the nation is evil but the people are ok. I assume what u really meant by nation is our current government. I think the Bush administration is unbearably corrupt and self-serving, but evil may be too strong a word.

I appreciate your defining America's people as nice though. A lot of Europeans just think we're materialistic boobs.

Oh, excuuuuuuse us for not bowing to your superior wisdom and experience, Great One. How ignoble of us to not recognize how much more evolved you are ... how noble of purpose, how fair of countenance, how wise in word and deed. Forgive us oh Great One for not recognizing your omnisience and omnipresence. We are but worms and deserve nothng better than to be ground beneath the heel of your mighty boot!
Well...as long as you don't forget. :p

To deal with just this one sentence (nothing expressed about the rest of what you said)
Government is evil. Not the nation. To extend I say neither is the people nor the culture. As a whole they're not evil, but individuals (or parts of - culture) can be caused to commit acts of evil through propaganda and hatred.


But the Government changes every so often but national policy rarely shifts much. Nations really are very like bacteria if you push the metaphor a little.

But then you could predict the fuck-up that is the aftermath of the British Empire too. Makes no difference to the outcome.

Aftermath?! Well let's see now, the US declared independence in 1776, correct? And the British managed to maintain the rest of the Empire for another 150 or so years. Bringing massive growth in everything from communications (railways and roads) to food production to government to almost a quarter of the world. Most of Africa was at some point British, and it got an awful lot of help bringing it up with the rest of the world. The British left a legacy to the world, one unsupassed since the Romans, the greatest Empire ever. And it's mark has been left throughout the world. it has been estimated that more than 1.5 billion people in the world speak english in some form, place names (America especially; New YORK, New ENGLAND, Birmingham etc etc), foods and culture throughout the world. The British were the first to link the furthest flung areas of the world, to create huge trade routes, to create a united collection of countries that still bares some resembalance to the modern Commonwealth.

You just put a bloody great dinge in my 'people are OK' theory. Nothing new there I guess... ;)
My humble obiesance did that? Tsk! :D

I'm a brit with no love for America but I really want to get this out.

Ameica is a nation. It acts only in it's own self-interests when it comes to foreign policy. This might backfire and it's regularly unpleasant, underhanded and downright immoral. Britain's no better. Neither is Australia, Russia, Brazil or any other random nation. It's just the US has more money to do it with these days.

It has it's good sides too remember, even if it's only Hayseed Dixie ;)

The nation is evil, the people are OK really, same as anywhere.

Among the better analyses of the subject.

State institutions, like all other entities with concentrated power, tend to act to expand that power, whatever the costs to the powerless. That is why such institutions should be democratized as much as possible, to distribute power more equally and prevent such abuses.

The United States happens to be a superpower, which compounds the problem with concentrated power and also makes its abuses more harmful simply because it has greater means.

Fairness today will probably be far different from fairness in the future. In the 1800's it was considered "fair" to allow the European powers to carve up Africa, or the US to annex the Philipines, or for countries to declare war on each other in the name of "balance of power".

Very good point, but I think you can look at motive though to determine whether something was done with everyone's best interests at heart. For example, Britain and France (and others, to a lesser extent) carved up the Middle East with their own interests in mind (buffer between Russia and the oilfields, for example, or protection of a vital trade route to the East) and without any regard for the indigenous people's wishes, languages, religions, cultures, etc.. The people do not forget that, even after generations. It poisons the culture against whoever the power was who "did it to them" for a long time to come.

For example, in Canada the indigenous people were treated abominably for the first few hundred years. Children were removed from their families and placed in residential schools where they suffered horrendous abuses, were beaten for speaking their own languages, etc.. It was basically an attemopt to annihilate their culture. (They were even gifted with smallpox-infected blankets from the Hudson's Bay Company on purpose at one point, to try to wipe them out.) No matter what we now do, there is a built-in mistrust of "white Canada" now that is nearly impossible to erase.

Aftermath?! Well let's see now, the US declared independence in 1776, correct? And the British managed to maintain the rest of the Empire for another 150 or so years. Bringing massive growth in everything from communications (railways and roads) to food production to government to almost a quarter of the world. Most of Africa was at some point British, and it got an awful lot of help bringing it up with the rest of the world. The British left a legacy to the world, one unsupassed since the Romans, the greatest Empire ever. And it's mark has been left throughout the world. it has been estimated that more than 1.5 billion people in the world speak english in some form, place names (America especially; New YORK, New ENGLAND, Birmingham etc etc), foods and culture throughout the world. The British were the first to link the furthest flung areas of the world, to create huge trade routes, to create a united collection of countries that still bares some resembalance to the modern Commonwealth.

Yes, Iraq, the Congo (well, most of Africa really) Palestine, they are all nice, peaceful places with no ethnic struggles caused by our ham-handed policies at all.

America's not short sighted the people who vote are
Oh, how delightfully simple ! You lump all the Gore and Kerry voters in with the Bush voters too.. and I assume the dozen or so who voted for write in candidates? BTW, what's your post count?

U said the nation is evil but the people are ok. I assume what u really meant by nation is our current government. I think the Bush administration is unbearably corrupt and self-serving, but evil may be too strong a word.
I appreciate your defining America's people as nice though. A lot of Europeans just think we're materialistic boobs.

Well statistically only half of the population has boobs... but that's a different matter altogether. The US is more materialistic than most, not because they are greedy bastards (although I reserve judgement in some cases) but because they have grown used to the ease and convenience of life, the fact that everything is cheaper than a lot of other modern counties. However this has lead to a huge federal deficit of more than 90 billion dollars (although I am most likely grossly underestimating it).

America's not short sighted the people who vote are

Ain't that the truth.

But the Government changes every so often but national policy rarely shifts much. Nations really are very like bacteria if you push the metaphor a little.

So the policies of countries like Ukraine, Germany, Japan, Russia and the USA change about as much as the Vatican , for example?

Bacteria mutate much more often than you think.

Well statistically only half of the population has boobs... but that's a different matter altogether. The US is more materialistic than most, not because they are greedy bastards (although I reserve judgement in some cases) but because they have grown used to the ease and convenience of life, the fact that everything is cheaper than a lot of other modern counties. However this has lead to a huge federal deficit of more than 90 billion dollars (although I am most likely grossly underestimating it).

It's true! I know so many people that buy unnecessary expensive crap. But our government! I WISH THEY WOULD DROP DEAD!!!!

Oh, how delightfully simple ! You lump all the Gore and Kerry voters in with the Bush voters too.. and I assume the dozen or so who voted for write in candidates? BTW, what's your post count?

Absolutely. Again, what is considered farsighted today may very well be seen as incredibly shortsighted in the future. Had Gore or Kerry been elected, there could have been terrible consequences, just like there could be with Bush. We can't see the future, so any "farsight" is equally short sighted as any decision.

Yes, Iraq, the Congo (well, most of Africa really) Palestine, they are all nice, peaceful places with no ethnic struggles caused by our ham-handed policies at all.
Well you could just as easily argue that independance giving policy of the FCO (ie: partitioning a country, such as India, Pakistan, Cyprus and Ireland) leads to civil war (It certainly did in India, Cyprus, Pakistan and Ireland), but many other places did very well. The US is a case in point, one of the main motivators in the first 100 years or so was trying to show the British how much better the US was without them.

So the policies of countries like Ukraine, Germany, Japan, Russia and the USA change about as much as the Vatican , for example?

Bacteria mutate much more often than you think.

Policies do not tend to change fast no. They tend to change (as do all things) of course but the US has tended towards military action over the years.

It's true! I know so many people that buy unnecessary expensive crap. But our government! I WISH THEY WOULD DROP DEAD!!!!
I think more than half the world would support you in that sentiment.

Well you could just as easily argue that independance giving policy of the FCO (ie: partitioning a country, such as India, Pakistan, Cyprus and Ireland) leads to civil war (It certainly did in India, Cyprus, Pakistan and Ireland), but many other places did very well. The US is a case in point, one of the main motivators in the first 100 years or so was trying to show the British how much better the US was without them.

The US overthrew the Brits which was something of a baptism of fire for a nation but it provided a strong bond (not to mentionthe generally white-christian identity) whereas many other nations had no experience of large-scale government or had seriously divisive elements (Britain used minorities for important posts on the basis they were less likely to rebel).

you are all a bunch of idiots

America's not short sighted the people who vote are

It's not really that. (although I just love being indirectly insulted) It's that all of our candidates suck. I believe that most voters knew that no matter who got elected, they were going to screw us over. It was simply the lesser of two evils, though not by very much, mind you. Unfortunately, Bush has turned out to be almost as much as a liberal internationalist as Kerry would have been. (open boarders, CAFTA, etc...) I assure you, if there is ever a good candidate, we would vote for that person.

you are all a bunch of idiots

Ummmmm, Hi.

I don't think that people are the problem as much as politicians. We have a lot of idots in congress who only want to get elected and don't care about the people that they represent.

I don't think that people are the problem as much as politicians. We have a lot of idots in congress who only want to get elected and don't care about the people that they represent.

Lifer politicians make the US Congress an indirect oligarchy; there's a problem when 99% of the politicians in the House are reelected (they also vote themselves a raise every session).

you are all a bunch of idiots

Never has a person discredited one's own comment so fast, just by posting it. Mind deleting your own trash?

Lifer politicians make the US Congress an indirect oligarchy; there's a problem when 99% of the politicians in the House are reelected (they also vote themselves a raise every session).

While both statistics are in reality higher than I want them to be, let's not wash it all with hyperbole. It's not every session.

There are differences between Presidents and between the era they served in. Even with Reagan's reputation in leftist eyes, he did not have the freedom for militarism that W Bush has. We also know that Carter was one of the most pacifist and isolationist presidents since World War II. I think France had more tendency to militarism than Carter had. I still say that US policy changes more than you think, but less often than say a country which has experienced collapse of government.

Actually I think a lot of the blame does lie with our voters. I mean, all people seem to vote on abortion or gay rights( lord knows the 2004 elections was over that) Its just so stupid that all they focus on is that instead of things like health care etc.

I mean the country re-elected Bush man who a started this random war, playing off of people's fear, with a sovoreign nation when( at least according to one CIA agent) Osama bin Laden was hiding in the Torah Borah and we could have nabbed him! Not to mention his whole economic philosophy seems to be borrow and spend.

While both statistics are in reality higher than I want them to be, let's not wash it all with hyperbole. It's not every session.

There are differences between Presidents and between the era they served in. Even with Reagan's reputation in leftist eyes, he did not have the freedom for militarism that W Bush has. We also know that Carter was one of the most pacifist and isolationist presidents since World War II. I think France had more tendency to militarism than Carter had. I still say that US policy changes more than you think, but less often than say a country which has experienced collapse of government.

It is very close to yearly; the Congressional salary has risen from 98,400 to 150,000+ from 1990-2005, or $3,440 per year.

US policy changes, and so does its political leaning; the balance of power will shift from one wing to another, and Bush's conservatism will eventually be replaced by moderates, then by liberalism, and back again.

Wrong.

The United States of America is a nation. America can mean anywhere from Canada to Argentina.

Have you ever heard of anyone from Canada or Argentina saying that they are from America? Maybe they've said they're from North America or South America, but never America. Let's not even get in to 'American'. No Canadian has ever said that they are American and meant it.

I think more than half the world would support you in that sentiment.

Of course they would, it would further their interests.

Aftermath?! Well let's see now, the US declared independence in 1776, correct? And the British managed to maintain the rest of the Empire for another 150 or so years. Bringing massive growth in everything from communications (railways and roads) to food production to government to almost a quarter of the world. Most of Africa was at some point British, and it got an awful lot of help bringing it up with the rest of the world. The British left a legacy to the world, one unsupassed since the Romans, the greatest Empire ever. And it's mark has been left throughout the world. it has been estimated that more than 1.5 billion people in the world speak english in some form, place names (America especially; New YORK, New ENGLAND, Birmingham etc etc), foods and culture throughout the world. The British were the first to link the furthest flung areas of the world, to create huge trade routes, to create a united collection of countries that still bares some resembalance to the modern Commonwealth.

And right now the Third World is collectively saying "thanks for nothing". Honestly, what nations in Africa has the UK brought up to the rest of the world's standards? You picked one hell of an example to extol the 'merits' of British colinialism.

IMO colonialism isn't much more than leeching off of other people, and building the infrastructure that allows you to continuing doing so. There's nothing glorious about it. That's why the US made the commonwealth give up its holdings and earn GDP the honest way.

I'm a brit with no love for America but I really want to get this out.

Ameica is a nation. It acts only in it's own self-interests when it comes to foreign policy. This might backfire and it's regularly unpleasant, underhanded and downright immoral. Britain's no better. Neither is Australia, Russia, Brazil or any other random nation. It's just the US has more money to do it with these days.

It has it's good sides too remember, even if it's only Hayseed Dixie ;)

The nation is evil, the people are OK really, same as anywhere.

Now there's a backhanded compliment for ya. :rolleyes:

Ameica is a nation. It acts only in it's own self-interests when it comes to foreign policy. This might backfire and it's regularly unpleasant, underhanded and downright immoral. Britain's no better. Neither is Australia, Russia, Brazil or any other random nation. It's just the US has more money to do it with these days.

So what you are saying is that all Nations suck. However, I some Nations suck less than others. :D

That's why the US made the commonwealth give up its holdings and earn GDP the honest way.

Huh? By "its holdings" do you mean American holdings? Or whose? I'm not quite clear what you meant here.