What makes the USA great? Capitalism, Republicanism or Democracy?

What makes the USA great? Capitalism, Republicanism or Democracy?

If we knew what worked here, then maybe we would know what to replicate it somewhere else.

I would think that the vast majority of people think that what makes the US a great place is democracy. But what is democracy? Majority rule.

But why is majority rule so great. Is the majority always right? Is it usually right? Is the right to vote the essence of majority rule? If voting is so great, why do only 50% of us even try to do it. If only 50% of us do it, should we take a vote on whether we should fight a war to allow another country to have half their people vote?

I am getting a little facetious just to illustrate how under utilized our national discussion of issues truly are. The media and the american people do not often get to the heart of the issue mainly due to a lack of patience or focus.

To get back to my original question, republicanism does not mean the republican party, it is short hand for a representative form of government. Is that our greatest asset?

Last but not least is capitalism. I wonder how many of us think about it or understand it. Is this what sets us apart?

Anger is what has made America great.

Freedom of religion.

Money

Greed, for the lack of a better term, is what makes America great.

So you're voting for Capitalism?

capitalism all the way. a chance to improve your standing, money, greed! elvis and cadillacs come in a close 2nd and 3rd

Democratic institutions.

This is too simplistic. When the wishes (as opposed to the rights) of the majority trample on the rights (as opposed to the wishes) of the minority, then it's not true democracy. Democracy implies the continued participation in the political process, which cannot be taken away by simply majority fiat.

Let me illustrate this with a stupid example. Let's say that every white person voted to make black people into slaves. Although that would be majority rule, it would be at best a serious corruption of the ideals of democracy.

Singapore and Commie China have capitalism, and they suck. We liked 18th century British capitalism so much, we freaking threw them off the continent. (Except for Canada, but that doesn't count.)

As for "republic," well, it wasn't called the Union of Soviet Socialist REPUBLICS for nothing.

Oman is right, of course, and the reason he's right is because without the participation of the whole citizenry in the political process, we end up with disenfranchisement, corruption, tyranny, and DC United.

Baseball!!

Natural resources and a spirit of exploitation

The fact that I live here.

Define "great."

If great simply means "economically and militarily powerful," then I'd go with capitalism.

If great implies some other mixed components of "The Good," (ie, morality, kindness, justice, etc.) then the question is moot because America has its share of jerks, loons, and heros just like every other nation in the world. And in any case, within America, what's defined as "Good" for some segments of the population would be in contention by other parts.

_________________________

On the other hand, my Arab Muslim friend who just came to the states for the first time last month would say that what makes us "great" is some combination of:
a) ability to form lines, and organization in general
b) charming, kind waitresses
c) administrative people who actually help you when asked
d) cleanliness
e) salt trucks and plows being on the road BEFORE the snow even falls
f) that Ani Difranco can perform a spoken word poem like "Self Evident" and not be thrown in jail

and so on... (I get a kick out of how much he loves it here)

All of hte above, and much more.


Alex

Natural resources.

Didn't the USSR, UK, China and other European countries have natural resources?

Its potential.

What makes the USA despised?

Potential unfulfilled, mainly because its bogged down in "isms"...

Great means celebrated, exalted, important and distinguished in a moral and economic sense. I don't think that the question is moot because we have our share of jerks. If every country has its share of jerks does that make them all equal in a moral sense? I wouldn't think so.

Nations are differentiated by the freedoms that they are able to exercise.

And sure there are some segments of society in the US that don't have the same "freedoms" that others have. Yes, even though people are "constitutionally" protected, they are still subject to discrimination. But discrimination is part of the human condition. In order to resolve prejudice, (which is what most people mean by disrimination), people need to become more educated.

I think that people in the US are getting better educated. Look at the role of women in our society as an example of a downtrodden group that has been given freedom, rights and respect. Where else in the world are women as independent as they are in the US?

Wow, where did you come up with that definition? Why would moral and economic be linked? Why not "great" in the sense of "might." Or how bout in "beauty." Or "efficiency."

Apparently, only a few places.

http://www.undp.org/hdr2002/presskit/HDR PR_GEM.pdf

1 Norway
2 Sweden
3 Canada
4 Belgium
5 Australia
6 United States

Oh great! and I thought my Norwegian fiance was bossy NOW! Can't wait until we move THERE in May.

Seriously though: I'd have to go with representational government. The fact that it works most of the time is astonishing considering how large the country is and how much could go wrong if all levels of our gov't aren't clicking. Republicans like to yell at Democrats, and Democrats like to yell at Republicans, but it is the balance that these two parties provide through representational government that allows our country to survive and thrive.

Natural resources.

Natural resources

Actually, I think you misread that chart. It puts the U.S. at a Gender Empowerment rank of 11.

The 6th ranking refers to "Human Development," if I'm reading it correctly.

So the answer to NYfutbalfan's original question is, "10 places."

> Didn't the USSR, UK, China and other European
> countries have natural resources?

USSR - yes, which is how they went from nothing to a power capable of defeating Germany and challenge the US in such a short time. But they didn't have as much as we did, were not as efficient as we were, and were not able to access outside sources like we did.

China - no

Other european countries - England had coal and once they forced the Church to give up its land they developed the spirit of exploitation to use it and create the industrial revolution. The spread of that to other resource-rich european nations is how they used to be great.