If you are going to define yourself politically what are you?

Cohen,

I think our prosperity gives those who have the inclination more freedom to explore those areas of their lives, or to ignore them as they see fit. We are so much more than just a market economy. We have the freedom to do very nearly anything we like. Our laws are very limited and some can even be broken with minor consequences (if you want to smoke pot for instance, mind-altering substances being used by many peoples for spiritual purposes, see the Yanamamo <- sp?). I think the meaning of life is a very broad question, much to broad for me to even attempt to answer beyond this, the meaning of life is living.

 

I like the US.

But in this case, I have to say that not only the moniker is stupid.

 

Libertarian communist. You should be free to do whatever you wanted as long as it doesn't hurt the collective good.

 

I'm pro-military spending. Canada needs more boats on patrol at home and abroad.



The fact that I have a Navy application in process might have something to do with my viewpoint.

 

Wow, how witty, no one has EVER come up with that one before.

 

OK, OK. I was hoping this thread would just be a chance for people to say what they were, politically, and not get slammed for it. Well, that lasted about a page. Hydra/StupidMoniker's views may not be popular in this day and age, or on this forum, but he can certainly express them. They may not match your views on the subject, and they don't exactly match mine either, but it's nice when someone has the guts to stand up and say something that's "not politically correct", if it's the way they feel.

(but, then again, I'm just a sensitive girl who hates to get in arguments, and wishes it was truly possible for people to just agree to disagree... yes, I know it's impractical sometimes.)

 

There are sooooo many things wrong with your statements I don't know where to begin....

I'll try, though...

1) The British Empire was based on imperialist consumption, whereby they cam into someone's land, annexed it, made it's native people at best second class citizens in their own land ( there are still signs in parts of India..." No Dogs or Indians Allowed Beyond This Point." ), took the existing wealth, and set up systems ( East India Company, Hudson's Bay Co. etc) that ensured their ability to keep on taking whatever wealth the nation possessed back to Jolly Old...In return, the natives got 'civilization', a ridiculous concept even mocked by Brits themselves these days...By equating the fact that the British were the ones to begin the process of 'modernization' or 'industrialization' with benefiting them imeasurably, you have to make 2 assumptions. A) That they benefited from it, and B) That that benefit makes up for or surpasses the detriment of the cost. With regards to A) Virtually every land the British 'civilized' would tell you it roughly equates, in their experience, with saying that Hitler helped the Jews because he brought them world wide sympathy...

Most places which you say would be nowhere without the British are now 'somewhere' because they are populated with immigrants, lead by the British, and whose people would much prefer being 'nowhere' in charge of their own land as opposed to 'somewhere' in someone else's...The Native Americans, the Indians, the Aboriginies of Australia, the Zulu and other African tribes were all made subject peoples in their own country...when they weren't almost destroyed...


2) Which would you prefer...to be 'backward', or to be virtually destroyed? Check out the numbers sometime on Native American residents, or Aboriginies, in terms of resident population when the British came vs. after...And if you're saying that the existence of the United States justifies what we did to make that happen, and somehow equate that with benefiting North America, that's just ridiculous...Who did we benefit but ourselves? Certainly not the people who lived here...It would be like going into Iraq, wiping the people out, moving a bunch of Americans there, and then saying " See how much we've helped you!" Who are you talking to, the expatriate Americans, or the land that the Iraqis used to own?

3) Backward, as others have pointed out, assumes that everyone else has the same priorities as us...If you travel to other countries, you might be surprised to find out how happy they are...Sure, there are some in each culture who might worship the All Mighty Dollar above all else, and those are the ones who are going to want to move to the United States, or emulate America within their own country, but there are many, many more who have differing ways of looking at the world. Your assumption that, for example, Canadians are dillusional in thinking they are happier in Canada than they would be in the United States is not only stereotypically arrogant, it is ignorant...Canadians point to their superior race relations, much lower crime rate, free health care, and other factors as being indicative of their own worth and as a reflection of their differing values...Oh, and those annual surveys about the best cities/countries to live in ALWAYS rank Canada higher, and Canadian cities outrank the American ones with remarkable regularity...I am a dual citizen, and have lived in and enjoyed both, and have things I prefer about each, but that staement that other countries are just "wrong, sorry" if they think that they are as good is a living breathing joke...There is a common phrase in Europe about Americans... " Americans think that there are two types of people in the world..Americans and those who want to be Americans." It is meant, I have always supposed, to be an extreme example of American arrogance...I have met very few Americans who actually think that way...Thank you, SM, for bringing it to life, although I doubt you get the joke...

4) Leaving people to theri own devices allowed America to become America...or have you forgotten about things like slavery, wiping out the Natives, etc...Should France have stepped in and made us 'better'? Where would the United States of America be then, SM? He asked with a certain relish... Or are we the only ones allowed to grow up on our own?

 

As Plato wrote..." A man cannot have two masters or two loves...If money is your priority, then the Truth will never be."

The point is, I think, that cultures set up systems based on their cultural priorities...America's priority is money, and the system reflects that...Other cultures with differing priorities have differing systems...America's might be the most cost-effetive system right now, but that only makes it the best if money is your priority..Supposes that domestic peace is your priority...America has the highest crime and incarceration rate of any non-3rd world nation...Suppose it is racial equality...or education...or political freedom...or whatever...

 

I just realized that while I have felt free to criticize others on their views, I have yet to state my own...my apologies...Part of the problem is that I haven't ever been able to define myself...Like most everyone else, I suspect that I am so unique as to defy labels...I can give my views on certain 'keystone' issues, and would welcome any political question others might present to help come up with a categorization that fits, but I am unable to find one myself...

Death Penalty...Am firmly against, for several reasons, most notably social priorization of human life as being representative of our progress, the falibilty of the judicial system, resulting in the tragic and ironic occurence of society being guilty of many a murder of innocent people, and my own personal aversion to emotion-based reactionism in the form of law...

Abortion...Against, mainly for the same reasons as above, and the position that we are talking about a human life, and that that human's right to live supercedes another's right to not be uncomfortable/guilty/socially ostracized etc. for 9 months.

Drugs...MJ should be legalized, and taxed. If alchohol and tobacco are legal and left up to the consumer's judgment, than other substances which are less addicitive/harmful/ should be also...

Prostitution...Should be legalized and taxed...Unlike above I would never partake of this particular legal right, but if it's between 2 consenting adults, why is the government even involved, other than to tax the proceeds? SPend your time and manpower cracking down on underage related prostitution..This last point goes for drugs.

Economy...Pretty much Keynsian, although I do recognize the detrimental effect of deficit based interest on Nat. debt, I feel that economic movement outweighs it as a concern...My greatest economic concern is the growing breach between the 'haves' and 'have nots', and the resulting economic slowdown caused by an increasing concentration of wealth in a decreasing percentage of the population whose primary usage of said wealth is accumulation.

My stands on America's role in the world, the War, terrorism, etc. are all well covered in this forum...I would appreciate/try to answer any other key issues which might help define me, and would like to hear any conclusions anyone else might have on what tag fits me best...

 

MacBeth,

re: #1 The natives are not the ones who benefitted most by being under British rule, it is those who live there now. I do not see America waging a war of genocide against another country though, so I suggest that it is possible that America can come from a similar idea of being superior and even expanding to procure resources and not have the same results of extermination of natives and leaving all benefit to new immigrants/settlers.

re: #2 see above

re: #3 The French and the English sure sang a different tune about Americans in the early forties. Sure the b**** and moan now, when everything is honkey-dorey it is easy to take potshots at those on top. As for Canada being better than America in any way, well let's just say that that is one country who lucked out in who they are bordering.

re: #4 We didn't grow up on our own. That is the point. The British, and to a lesser extent the French, Irish, Portuguese, Chinese, Spanish, and various African peoples all had a hand in making the America that we know today. This country was dramatically influenced by the countries around the world that were superior at the time. Now America is superior. I feel that other countries would be better off living under our rule, if only to force them to become superior to us and in doing so to gain their independence.

Ironically we agree, if not on the reasons at least on the basic stance of most/all of your keystone issues (I would not limit legalization to MJ, nor would I partake in it).

 

1) Are you intenionally being blind, or do you really not know that the Americans took up the battle cry of extermination of the Natives and surpassed the Brits in their accomplishment?

2) In terms of 'those living there now', you are forgetting where they came from, intially...See example about Iraq...If you really believe that it is America's responsibility to propogate it's culture, even if that means eliminating/subjegating native populations, for that country's own good...I just don't know what to say to you. Have you looked up 'jingoism' yet?

3) What 40's thing are you talking about? The war, or the Marshall Plan? I have different responses for each...I also agree that Canada has benefited from neighbouring America in terms of it's peace-time military budget...but you don't know much history if you are implying a free ride. For example...did you know that Canada was in WWII for years befire the U.S.? Or that despite having less than 10 percent of America's population at the time, Canada more than 35 percent of America's WWII service numbers? Or that, despite said population disparity, Canada had one of the 5 beaches on D-Day, as opposed to 2 for the US and GB each? The examples go on and on...

4) No, the Brits, etc. DID NOT INTERVENE after America was a nation, as say Iraq is now, let alone invade...

 

Macbeth is suffering from too much leftist delusional revisionist history.

Man has always killed and enslaved his fellow man (American Indians and African tribesman included). Western culture (especially Great Britain and the United States), while guilty of horrible atrocities, has done more to spread freedom, promote peace, eradicate slavery, educate the masses, end hunger, develop life enhancing technology, and promote the general welfare than any other culture that has ever existed.

We should dismiss those people who demand that we feel guilty for the sins of our forefathers, especially when the great achievements of our culture are conveniently left out of the equation.

 

I was considering attempting to define myself politically, but I think I'll pass. It's almost impossible not to comment on some of the views here and that wasn't the thread's purpose. Some of it is interesting reading... maddening, but interesting.

 

Jesus said that too...I'm not talking about serving two masters. But understand that even the disciples were fishers...even they had to work and earn money...even Paul was a tent maker...industry isn't seperate and apart from spirituality necessarily. I've encounter God in my job quite frequently...but I'm looking for Him.

That's not my point...yes, we live in a culture where money is priority 1...it's encouraged. But that doesn't mean you have to be that way! And it doesn't mean you can't have a significantly spiritual life here.

I'm an attorney...my time is literally my money...I spend some of that time each morning in prayer and Bible study with God...yes, market economics push me to spend that time billing my clients...but I'm not forced to. In some ways, that makes that time more significant...it's like an offering before God each day.

As for your crime statistics...save them. There are three kinds of lies...you know the rest.

 

I think the difference is that what he said amounts to an attack on other peoples and their way of life. I’m not really upset by what he said because we’re just chatting on a BBS, BBS BS so to speak, but I’ll just clarify my position. If he had said, “I think the US is the greatest country in the world,” I would have had no problem with it. He is entitled to his opinion and I am entitled to mine. But when he says, “I think the vast majority of foreign people would be better off if America just annexed the rest of the world.” he is obviously not respecting my opinion or my culture. Perhaps unconsciously he is also playing into a stereotype that many in the rest of the world have about the US, and that is, ironically, the US’s moral relativism. The US likes to speak of freedom and human rights, yet in many instances has supported ruthless totalitarian leaders (i.e. Saudi Arabia) and pushes to have other countries and people adopt it’s ways. Here we have SM saying he thinks the US is great because of it’s freedom, but that it would be good for it to annex other countries. And he adds that he’s against moral relativism.

We do have democracies here, and elect members that are much more representative of our people, and hold elections where 70% of our voters actually vote. By most measures of standard of living we consistently rate higher than the US. Should this give us the moral authority to inflict our way on you (assuming that we could)? No, but some Americans seem to feel that because you have the power to force your culture on others that that makes it morally right. There are no morals in that perspective at all.

As a general rule, one should beware of anybody who claims to be superior. Such delusions of self-importance are typically associated with the likes of Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, and our current wave of terrorists. Humility is a sign of wisdom. Pride goes before the fall.

We should dismiss those people who demand that we feel guilty for the sins of our forefathers, especially when the great achievements of our culture are conveniently left out of the equation.
I don’t think the point is that you should feel exclusively guilty. I think the point is that you shouldn’t set yourselves up as omnipotent. That’s a doomed position.

 

Grizzled,

I said that the US is the best country right now. It is by no means perfect, but I would take it over any other major military or economic power. I'm so happy for you that you think your country is fantastic. You point to some ways in which your contry is better than the US, and that is fine. On the other hand despite its low voter turnout (whatever that has to do with the quality of a country) I think the US does more good for the world than any other country and its net contributions are the most on the plus side. I do not think that whatever the US does is right, that would be the very same moral relitivism that I have stated that I do not believe in. Every country has made mistakes, that does not mean that no one country can be the best. I also posted that I expected that another country could become greater than the US and then they could gain independence. You have every right to your opinion of your culture, as does Saddam Hussein, as does anyone else. To not look objectively at what that culture does for the world, that is relitivism in all its glory. I can't find where I posted that the US is great only, or even mostly due to its freedom.

 

Agree with most of this list except for two things. I do not support tariffs/subsidies on steel and agriculture in any way, shape, or form. Also, with foreign policy issues, I generally want whatever will piss off our allies the least. (i.e. I don't have a problem with attacking Iraq, but only if we have full support from other countries.) I guess that would make me an anti-
unilateralist . . .

 

I didn't know you frostbacks had a culture.

 

All this is well and good, but I don’t see the justification for annexing other countries there. The US has done some very good things but is not perfect and has done some quite bad things too. On this we agree. I’m not here to bash the US on this point, and I’ll also add that the US has been put in some very difficult situations, often quite unfairly, because you are the one current superpower. BUT, nothing in this makes me think you should be annexing anybody. We’re your friends. Friends don’t like to hear their friends say that they think they should take over your house and yard because they know how you should run your life and they want to do it for you. Can you see how that might irritate somebody?

And this.
While you might think your countries are just as good, I hate to break it to you, but they are not.
This isn’t opinion. This is a judgement, and one I suggest you’re not qualified to make. Perhaps you meant it as an opinion, but that’s not how it comes across.

A quick note on some of your other points. If you value democracy then you know that for it to function properly the people have to believe in it and exercise their right/duty to vote. If half your voters aren’t voting then I’d say that suggests that a lot of your citizens don’t believe in your system and don’t really feel that they have any real political power, and that can lead to some significant problems.

On freedom, you said this, perhaps I misunderstood your point.
I think our prosperity gives those who have the inclination more freedom to explore those areas of their lives, or to ignore them as they see fit. We are so much more than just a market economy. We have the freedom to do very nearly anything we like. Our laws are very limited and some can even be broken with minor consequences
Just for curiosity sake, in what ways do you think the US is superior to Canada? Do you know enough about us to know what the differences are?

BT: Frost is a good thing.
This is what Louise looked like 2 days ago.