Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: USA: hegemon or empire? On the one hand we have perception...and the other, we have reality. On the one hand we have perception...and the other, we have reality. Rinse and repeat...
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: USA: hegemon or empire? One reason might be the trivial fact that Hitler declared war on the US.
That's a terrible analogy. So long as the oil keeps flowing and Israel survives, we have no interest in the middle east. We do not micro manage, or even macro manage, with the exception to Iraq, and most of this country can't wait to get out of that hellhole. Hegemon does not fit.
wouldn't you say foriegn aid to countries like egypt, israel, and saudi arabia allow us influence in the region we otherwise wouldn't have?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: USA: hegemon or empire? No, but they are jealous of our wealth. Besides, when you've been indoctrinated with as much Ameican television as most of the world has, I bet you they don't realize that we don't all live like the kids from the O.C. China? Hello? Or are they not industrialized? Sorry, I don't buy this. We're no more "barbarous" than the next guy. And whine all you want, our intentions in foreign policy are generally good. (Not ALL.) For all we can complain about Iraq, and the almost certainly selfish motives we had for going in, its not like we did it to spite Iraqis. With all this self-hating vitriol I've feel like I've taken a dose of Conservatrin. Just how much experience do you have with other nations, and how they view us? Are we feared? Perhaps. Are we disliked - sure. Envied? Absolutely. Respected? In many corners of the world, you bet. The US has often been proactive in leading human rights issues, for all the problems we still have at home. As a direct beneficiary of such US programs, I have a hard time being quite so dismissive of all our foreign policy efforts because we're "barbarous".
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: USA: hegemon or empire? I just find it funny how people talk about out both sides of their mouth (and sometimes even their ass), usually emphasizing the negative, rather than look at many of the good things we have done throughout history, and all the countries we have helped. I do. Fine. It is funny how the excuse of the hour is the "bush administration." Funny how decades of foreign policy can suddenly wiped away by one man? Is is REALLY that bad? Is the rest of the world REALLY so compromised in their day-to-day life by teh decision making of one man? I didnt think so...
I'm not sure if Ben meant that America's rulers are already morally inferior to them or that he just hopes they won't become so. I'll have to let him explain what he meant and why. So, we're not also freeing the people of Myanmar or various places in Africa because...? We're not working to combat virtual slavery in sweatshops because...? Also, have you read any newspapers since the conquest. The Bushies thought the Iraqi people would welcome us with roses but that didn't happen. I'd say most of them want us out of there and some have let their guns and bombs speak for them. I guess I can ask you this: given that widespread Iraqi resistance continues to function perfectly well without Saddam, his sons and most of their henchmen and that some Iraqi groups completely unconnected with Saddam or the Baathist Party have openly stated that they want us to leave, on what factual basis do you argue that they want us there? The fascists were actively conquering much of the important parts of the globe and WERE a direct threat to us. Saddam was a toothless tinpot dictator safely bottled up in Iraq and who had committed his worst crimes WHILE OUR LEADERS ACTIVELY SUPPORTED HIM EVEN THOUGH THEY KNEW DAMN WELL WHAT HE WAS DOING. Even you can see the difference there. The first Gulf War was, of course, justified, even if Kuwaitis is stil not exactly a bastion of Jeffersonian democracy. Bush's war was about anything but "the poor Iraqi people". In fact, the Bushies made no attempt to justifiy their war on the basis of saving "the poor Iraqi people" until all their other attmpets to justify their war collapsed like a house of cards. And if you want to justify Bush's war on those grounds alone, you still haven't answered my question about why Bush hasn't acted against other, equally reprehensible regimes. If you're arguing that we've assumed repsonsibility for ridding the world of oppressive regimes, then you have to take Bush to task for sleeping on the job given the number of other baddies out there.
Don't believe the hype. Especially your own hype. By far the more common case, in the US at least, is the reverse. We love to pat ourselves on the back and assume the mantle of "unadultered Good Guy" while conveniently ignoring our... er... "less than glorious" actions. It's one thing to try to BS the rest of the world into thinking we can do no wrong, but when you start believing your own press releases... Well, the results are usually extremely suboptimal. Because they're the ones in power right now, maybe? People who are informed about world events know that American leaders have a long history of committing evil actions overseas. There are good, well-documented resources out there to help you balance your views on America's record in the rest of the world. It's tough to take a serious look at the faults of something or someone you believe to be heroic. You just have to summon the balls to pay them serious attention even though you, like many people, don't want to acknowledge America's dark side.
Being a hegemon requires considerably more than giving some aid to countries, or having some influence. We gave tons of aid to Europe thanks to the Marshall plan, and thanks to our corporations and international bodies (NATO, for instance) we continue to have a lot of influence there. That doesn't mean were/are Europe's hegemon.
Re: Don't believe the hype. Especially your own hype. Yes, but whether or not you support the actions Bush has taken (I know, i know, you dont), many are using this to take pot shots at the US, ignoring the decades progress of other administrations.. Basically saying Bush=bad=US is bad. If people are THAT simple minded, and THAT dim witted, THAT bitter, without looking at the larger picture, their opinions are of little concern to me... Their minds are already set in stone.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: USA: hegemon or empire? What's the point of standing around looking in a mirror saying "we are the greatest country in the world. And we have great hair!" Self-aggrandizement is a total waste of time. Self-improvement, OTOH, is not.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: USA: hegemon or empire? So is self-loathing. I agree. I never said we should rest on our laurels. Only that some of the criticism was unjust..
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: USA: hegemon or empire? Too bad nobody here is doing that. It's kinda pointless and silly to give a laundry list of "great things the US has done" every time someone wants to point out an area of deficiency. It's wasted time and effort. If your marriage is less-than-perfect (and who's isn't), you don't ignore today's problems to revel in yesteryear's good times. You only talk about what's going right to boost the ego. You talk about what's going wrong because that's what needs to be fixed.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: USA: hegemon or empire? China? Not really. They're still a mostly impoverished, uneducated country. I'm speaking about western Europe, Japan, Canada, Australia, and so forth. Envied by whom? Again, I'm speaking about the advanced countries, which includes several dozen countries, ALL more civilized and morally superior to the USA in various crucial ways. My argument is that until we reach the level of western Europe, Canada, Australia, and serveral other countries, we have no right to claim leadership of the free world. In fact, we're not worthy of being a superpower. Call it "self-hating vitriol" if you like, but America is a disgrace is so many ways.
Re: Re: Don't believe the hype. Especially your own hype. The people likely to "take potshots" at the US probalby have a long and well-documented list of our leaders' misdeeds going back to the 19th century. For them, Bush is just a particularly extreme example of American arrogance and belligerance. What is different about Dubya's war is the extreme bellicose arrogance of the Bush administration and the lengths they would go to in order to do what they please. Where previous administrations at least tried to engage in some positive diplomacy before acting or tried to hide their misdeeds, the Bushies were foolishly openly rude, obnoxious and dishonest to our own allies in their pursuit of war at any cost. Compare the build up to Gulf War I with the build up to the current conquest. GHW Bush may have been an evil MF-er, but you gotta give him this: he was a smooth and competent evil MF-er who realized the value of having the rest of the world on board with you before you go off fighting wars and getting entangled in occupations. Too bad he didn't teach this to his kid.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: USA: hegemon or empire? Then you should have said so. I'll take that as improper phrasing on your part. Where does that leave Russia, btw? Morally superior? The same countries that appeased Hitler in the 30's, or were ruled by Hitler and his pal Benny? Look, just because our economic model is less socialist than that of other countries does NOT mean we are somehow morally inferior! Do we have problems with race and poverty? Yeah. Does France? Yeah. What about Australia and their treatment of aborigenes? Is Spain really that much more socially conscious than we are, considering they've been a democracy for oh, I don't know, about 25 years? Or how about France with their recent wave of anti-semitism? (On which there was an excellent article in the most recent NY Times magazine.) Oooh, positively oozing moral superiority there. Especially with the EU's farm subsidies, which hurt the 3rd world just as badly as ours do. Nonsense. One of the reasons we're not at that level is because we've been busy helping defeat communism and policing the world. Wow, I feel like some sort of a right winger milita wingnut being all "conservative" here. Weird. If we didn't have to spend any money on the military like Germany does, we'd have better social programs too. That's the same thing as saying "a tree isn't worth being called a tree". We are one; deal with it. You sort of remind me of Tacitus, whose Germania was less a description of its peoples and more of a complaint against the evils of Rome's society. Only he was smart enough to realize that for all his allegory, Rome was still much better. Give me a freaking break. Are there things I'd change about the US? Sure. Many? Perhaps. Would I prefer a more European style system? Partially, not entirely. Its a good thing, in my opinion, that there is a difference between Europe and the US. We must be doing something OK if Western Europe eats our food, can't get enough of our popular entertainment, drinks our beer (Budweiser is the most popular beer in Ireland these days), and emulates us in other respects. We must be awful. I guess I'm just more thankful for this place than you are. Far too thankful to say "its a disgrace in so many ways".
Re: Re: Re: Don't believe the hype. Especially your own hype. Ditto ditto. Bush's foreign policy has been characterized by abrasiveness and outright rudeness. He just doesn't seem to care as to how he's viewed. Look at Kyoto, for example. It was always a bad treaty, and Clinton knew he had no chance to ratify it. He placated Europe, played along. Bush, despite being in exactly the same position, pretended it wasn't even worthy of being his toilet paper. In the end, the policy difference is nil - but Europe sure didn't like that too much.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: USA: hegemon or empire? I think I was pretty clear. "The developed world is envious that 1/5 of American children are in poverty. That 50+ million Americans have no access to health care. About our massive prison population. About our murder rate, and all the gun violence. I don't think so. " As much as we spend on the military, it's a tiny fraction of GDP. We could easily provide health care for everyone and vastly reduce poverty if we had the values of the civilized world. Unfortuantely, we don't have those values. If you want to go back to the 1930s to argue for American values, fine, but don't expect others to be persuaded. I'm ok with it, but at the same time I appreciate how others in morally superior countries are uncomfortable with us.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: USA: hegemon or empire? Is Russia not developed? No, actually its not. Also, its a HUGE part of the budget. Again, if we had your values and did things exactly the way you want. Are you saying France has no poverty? Again, give me a break. Our values aren't perfect, but I don't have a terribly huge problem with them either. If you think Europe is better in all respects, I fail to see what's stopping you from expatriating. We are a monumental disgrace, after all. How you must curse your birth into this wretched hellhole. You just said "we aren't worthy of being a superpower". So clearly you aren't OK with it. And you're changing your argument completely. Nice try.
Re: Re: Re: Don't believe the hype. Especially your own hype. No joke. I happened to visit El Salvador and Honduras a few years ago after the negotiated end to the Salvadoran civil war. Ronald Reagan and his dictatorship by proxy down there were none too popular. Some people still have this notion that when Americans travel abroad beautiful French women lean over the balcony thanking us fof the liberation. My experience has been quite different. Internationally the US is looked upon by many as dangerous, by many as oafish, by most as driven by self interest... These days you have to look around to find the country that says we have been a good friend. Probably your best bet would be Saudi Arabia.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: USA: hegemon or empire? If the best you can come up with is that we're better than Russia, I'm not encouraged. If you need, I'll amend my comments to "countries with GDP per capita above $15000," though that's a bit more clunky to fit into a sentence than "developed." I said it's a tiny fraction of GDP, which it is (3-4%, depending on how many countries we want to invade). It's a large part of our FEDERAL budget because our values and economics are out of whack. Just look at the health care crisis. We're spending an insane amount of money privately while 50 million people have no access. We have the resources. Compared to us, no. And they don't have tens of millions without access to health care. And they have a much higher life expectancy. I'm not changing my argument one bit. We aren't worthy, but at the same time I personally don't have a problem with US foreign policy. I'm just not delusional enough to think Europeans or Canadians, etc. will be thilled that we're the self-proclaimed "leaders of the free world."
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: USA: hegemon or empire? First, if you're going to traffic in vague generalities, be prepared for them to bite you in the ass. Second, you didn't really answer my points about how Western Europe seems to crave what it is that we have in terms of education, entertainment and even beer. Most Americans are not down at their local pub watching soccer and Eurovision while drinking Stella and eating baguettes. Most Europeans ARE watching the Superbowl and Friends, having a Bud and eating in McDonalds. If the Europeans aren't at all envious, they sure have a funny way of showing it - by taking huge parts of our culture. Hey, I think there are benefits to public healthcare. However, our decision not to go that route does not make us morally inferior to the French. Much higher life expectancy? I'm not so sure about that. And their poverty rates aren't too low, either. Especially when you look at their immigrant problem. Being a superpower has nothing to do with worth - you are assigning value terms to inappliccable targets. We are a superpower whatever you think of it. In the end, it boils down to this. You prefer the European more socialist model, where the different ends of society are not as disproportionate. Fine. That hardly makes us morally inferior to Europe.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't believe the hype. Especially your own hype. Funny - when I was in Israel, Italy, Germany, France, Spain, Belgium, Holland and Britain recently no one seemed to have much of a problem with me, except for the cab that had a "will not serve Americans" on it. I could truly feel the depth of their hatred. No one is saying we're beloved, but methinks "hated or feared" is too strong.