![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Happy birthday ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
shusu and wayfairer!!!
And a very happy Guy Fawkes Day! Somebody light something on fire for me.:-)
This is probably going to be another rambly post as I try to work things out. I don't usually think about America as a mythical entity, but I sort of have been since Tuesday. This isn't a criticism of anything on lj, really, just a general something I've noticed since 9/11. Maybe it's mostly due to my personal perspective and projections, but
Right after 9/11--the day of, actually, I remember watching BBC news and they had a correspondent in NYC and asked him, "What's it like there? Presumably there's quite an atmosphere of fear and dread." At home I thought, "Huh? No, not really." And the correspondent paused and said, "No...no, actually there is no overwhelming atmosphere of fear. People are out, walking around, talking, eating at restaurants. If anything this seems to have convinced them even more that they live in the best city in the world." Heh. It was kind of true. But anyway yes, there really was no panic. It was sad and disturbing, but I guess Rudy Guilliani was the perfect face for it in the way he got to work and consistently appealed to people's common sense. When someone asked a hysterical leading question he called them on it. He kept saying things like, "NY is stronger than this. This is not the end of the world. We are not the first city to be attacked." That was very reassuring.
Unfortunately, I felt like immediately afterwards, as soon as the Federal Government snapped out of its deer-in-the-headlights shock, it set to work destroying just that kind of feeling. I kept thinking myself how 9/11 probably would have been a great mobilizing force to get people to, for instance, cut down on their fuel consumption, but no, the opposite was encouraged. I think people really wanted to do something constructive, but the government and the media, it seemed to me, kept telling people no, don't do that. If you do that the terrorists win. Here's what you do: Buy stuff. Worry about you and yours. Quietly panic. Pray to the Christian God to smite non-believers. Worry some more. Drive around in a gas guzzling car. Practice being a victim.
And people did.
In a way, those days were probably the time I got my first inkling of being "the liberal elite." I remember talking on a mailing list and saying something about how one good thing that might come of this was maybe it would inspire more Americans to see themselves as part of the world where there were other countries that affected us and that we affected. I thought this was a pretty non-radical thing to say, and was surprised to find that this statement seemed to be considered offensive by a lot of people. For two reasons: one, it was taken to mean that I was saying people were hicks for not having made The Grand Tour of Europe or something. They didn't have the money to go to Europe! How dare I suggest they go to France when they had bills to pay! I was completely confused--I didn't mean you had to tour Europe, I just suggested a sort of change in perspective. Second it was bad because thinking about other countries seemed to be the same as putting other countries ahead of America: Why should I go to Versailles? Have you ever been to Carlsbad Caverns? Ha! You hate America! So I learned: don't even suggest that other countries are countries the way America is.
Unfortunately it began to seem that for a lot of people (not all, of course), the main way they began to relate to other countries was to consider whether they felt sorry enough for America after 9/11. Genuine sympathy was sadly often taken as owed rather than really appreciated. I've just felt like the media/gov't whatever continues to appeal to just that side of the American character and it's really embarrassing! So I think it kind of is probably hard for me to not ever come across as sounding sort of...contemptuous at times, and hopefully not just along something like red/blue state lines, because I don't think it's that. It's not that I have any sort of blanket hatred for people who voted for Bush or live in a red state; I honestly don't. It's just it worries me that there seems to be such a big movement right now in this country towards both seeing yourself as a victim and easily writing off anything like the real thing. Sometimes it feels like the strong part of the country (by which I don't mean "me" or "my part of the country" but just individuals or groups that don't see things this way) is constantly having to adapt to the needs of the weak and demanding.
And I really feel--getting back to the attitude after 9/11--that this is something that can be changed, because I thought the original response to that day was healthy and strong. I think I was just really disappointed that the heroic image we immediately had seemed to get taken over by tackiness and schmaltz. I really believe that if the government had stepped up and given people positive things to do and laid out a reasonable change in attitude we would be much stronger today no matter who was president. Instead I feel like we're just encouraged to throw a blanket over our heads all the time, to be resentful and defensive for no reason. When that kind of attitude takes control I find it hard to believe we'll be able to do anything successfully. I just feel like we spend so much time convincing ourselves we've done nothing wrong we can't fix anything we have, and so much time accusing other people of being mean to us we can't benefit from any good advice we might have for us.
I mean, I realize that when somebody calls you stupid it gets your back up, but you know? Maybe I'm weird, but no matter how angry I am at somebody calling me stupid, I'll pretty much always consider the possibility before I completely dismiss it. Likewise, I do actually read posts by people who voted for Bush and wonder if they are correct in the way they see things. Honestly, there have been few that I have come across of any substance, unfortunately. But not all of them. So really, while I currently still believe I made the right choice in my vote for President, I hope that if somebody proved to me I was wrong I'd have the guts to just admit it-and be happy, really, because I would love to have the best man for the job in office. As I've said before, I'd rather be right than just win a stupid argument. I just feel like somewhere along the line somehow this country lost the desire to be that way and settled for something worse. We don't seem to strive to be anything I would consider, for lack of a better word, cool. Our national character just seems kind of petty, and that's not something I'd want my own name attached to, let alone God's.
shusu and wayfairer!!! And a very happy Guy Fawkes Day! Somebody light something on fire for me.:-)
This is probably going to be another rambly post as I try to work things out. I don't usually think about America as a mythical entity, but I sort of have been since Tuesday. This isn't a criticism of anything on lj, really, just a general something I've noticed since 9/11. Maybe it's mostly due to my personal perspective and projections, but
Right after 9/11--the day of, actually, I remember watching BBC news and they had a correspondent in NYC and asked him, "What's it like there? Presumably there's quite an atmosphere of fear and dread." At home I thought, "Huh? No, not really." And the correspondent paused and said, "No...no, actually there is no overwhelming atmosphere of fear. People are out, walking around, talking, eating at restaurants. If anything this seems to have convinced them even more that they live in the best city in the world." Heh. It was kind of true. But anyway yes, there really was no panic. It was sad and disturbing, but I guess Rudy Guilliani was the perfect face for it in the way he got to work and consistently appealed to people's common sense. When someone asked a hysterical leading question he called them on it. He kept saying things like, "NY is stronger than this. This is not the end of the world. We are not the first city to be attacked." That was very reassuring.
Unfortunately, I felt like immediately afterwards, as soon as the Federal Government snapped out of its deer-in-the-headlights shock, it set to work destroying just that kind of feeling. I kept thinking myself how 9/11 probably would have been a great mobilizing force to get people to, for instance, cut down on their fuel consumption, but no, the opposite was encouraged. I think people really wanted to do something constructive, but the government and the media, it seemed to me, kept telling people no, don't do that. If you do that the terrorists win. Here's what you do: Buy stuff. Worry about you and yours. Quietly panic. Pray to the Christian God to smite non-believers. Worry some more. Drive around in a gas guzzling car. Practice being a victim.
And people did.
In a way, those days were probably the time I got my first inkling of being "the liberal elite." I remember talking on a mailing list and saying something about how one good thing that might come of this was maybe it would inspire more Americans to see themselves as part of the world where there were other countries that affected us and that we affected. I thought this was a pretty non-radical thing to say, and was surprised to find that this statement seemed to be considered offensive by a lot of people. For two reasons: one, it was taken to mean that I was saying people were hicks for not having made The Grand Tour of Europe or something. They didn't have the money to go to Europe! How dare I suggest they go to France when they had bills to pay! I was completely confused--I didn't mean you had to tour Europe, I just suggested a sort of change in perspective. Second it was bad because thinking about other countries seemed to be the same as putting other countries ahead of America: Why should I go to Versailles? Have you ever been to Carlsbad Caverns? Ha! You hate America! So I learned: don't even suggest that other countries are countries the way America is.
Unfortunately it began to seem that for a lot of people (not all, of course), the main way they began to relate to other countries was to consider whether they felt sorry enough for America after 9/11. Genuine sympathy was sadly often taken as owed rather than really appreciated. I've just felt like the media/gov't whatever continues to appeal to just that side of the American character and it's really embarrassing! So I think it kind of is probably hard for me to not ever come across as sounding sort of...contemptuous at times, and hopefully not just along something like red/blue state lines, because I don't think it's that. It's not that I have any sort of blanket hatred for people who voted for Bush or live in a red state; I honestly don't. It's just it worries me that there seems to be such a big movement right now in this country towards both seeing yourself as a victim and easily writing off anything like the real thing. Sometimes it feels like the strong part of the country (by which I don't mean "me" or "my part of the country" but just individuals or groups that don't see things this way) is constantly having to adapt to the needs of the weak and demanding.
And I really feel--getting back to the attitude after 9/11--that this is something that can be changed, because I thought the original response to that day was healthy and strong. I think I was just really disappointed that the heroic image we immediately had seemed to get taken over by tackiness and schmaltz. I really believe that if the government had stepped up and given people positive things to do and laid out a reasonable change in attitude we would be much stronger today no matter who was president. Instead I feel like we're just encouraged to throw a blanket over our heads all the time, to be resentful and defensive for no reason. When that kind of attitude takes control I find it hard to believe we'll be able to do anything successfully. I just feel like we spend so much time convincing ourselves we've done nothing wrong we can't fix anything we have, and so much time accusing other people of being mean to us we can't benefit from any good advice we might have for us.
I mean, I realize that when somebody calls you stupid it gets your back up, but you know? Maybe I'm weird, but no matter how angry I am at somebody calling me stupid, I'll pretty much always consider the possibility before I completely dismiss it. Likewise, I do actually read posts by people who voted for Bush and wonder if they are correct in the way they see things. Honestly, there have been few that I have come across of any substance, unfortunately. But not all of them. So really, while I currently still believe I made the right choice in my vote for President, I hope that if somebody proved to me I was wrong I'd have the guts to just admit it-and be happy, really, because I would love to have the best man for the job in office. As I've said before, I'd rather be right than just win a stupid argument. I just feel like somewhere along the line somehow this country lost the desire to be that way and settled for something worse. We don't seem to strive to be anything I would consider, for lack of a better word, cool. Our national character just seems kind of petty, and that's not something I'd want my own name attached to, let alone God's.
Tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
This is a huge deal for more than just US citizens. And while I wish that it weren't, wishing doesn't change the fact that it is. And anyone who has the potential to be hurt by an election certainly has the right to speak out about it. Otherwise, we really are becoming a petty, fascist, doomed country.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
I`ve seen this attitude and it`s just sad. Some Americans just assume that all other countries are inferior to the USA by nature, without even knowing anything about those countries`s history or even their geographical location, and *has if* we could judge countries as being "better" or "worse" than others - it`s like saying that westerners are superior to easterners, for example. So are these people saying that Americans are superior human beings? It seems so, because a country isn`t just a country, it`s defined by the people who inhabit it.
And this all "we are the greatest nation in the world" propaganda, I`m sorry if I offend anyone but there were other "greatest nations in the world" before the US, and guess what most of them are now? Dust. So just drop this high and mighty atittude because, believe me, most people who dislike Americans (and I`m not one of them, just to make things clear) have their "arrogance and belief that they are best than others" as their main reason. -> of course, I`m talking to those Americans that think like this, not you Sister M, nor any of my friends on lj
From:
no subject
History shows empires have a nasty habit of falling apart once one coutry decides it likes it's own culture better than yours. The Roman Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Birtish Empire...I mean, I'm just saying, is all.
From:
no subject
History can teaches that what is the rule and the most important thing in the universe one day, the other is merely a footnote in a book (will Bush be just a footnote one day? *ponders*). Power is a fragile thing, and it`s better to exercise it wisely than spend all your existence greedily wanting more and more till everything ends up falling apart. Take an advice from former "Super Powers", US.
From:
no subject
It makes you think about all the people who at the time of the Roman, Ottoman and British Empire were saying, "You know we are so going to wind up dust."
From:
no subject
Not to mention, that when one country builds up its empire, it is usually very much at the expense of those countries being imperialised. I guess the local population would also have had a thing or two to say about it...
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
I was about to have a seizure while reading some self-proclaimed patriot sprout what basically sounded a more civilized (well, not really) version of "fuck the world, this is my country" which somehow lead him to declare that other countries had not a right to try to "manipulate" (express interest in) the US elections. He was debating on
I am more proud to be European than I am to be Italian. Or a citizen of the world. I am self-admitted unpatriotic scum, which maybe is what's preventing me from understanding how governing with an eye to international balances is a good thing. No, wait. That's just common sense. The unpatriotic part helps wishing global safety rather than internal safety at the expanse of supposed evil countries. (Disclaimer: my country is guilty of this too, given how much my Prime Minister likes to suck Bush's cock. And then they are against gay marriage. Go figure.)
From:
no subject
It's nice that all those non-Americans have such clear instructions, though. I mean, we help you out by telling you what you're supposed to say in almost any situation. No, you can't have an opinion who our president is. Yes, you're supposed to agree with that president on everything, especially if it affects you!
Disclaimer: my country is guilty of this too, given how much my Prime Minister likes to suck Bush's cock. And then they are against gay marriage. Go figure.)
LOL!
One of the funniest things about this election is in the US you can see how attached people are to their *region,* which isn't really surprising. It's just weird that only certain regions seem to see themselves as being the "real America." Of course I've known for a long time that my own area isn't the real America since it's not "the heartland" or the south, but it's just weird that those regions have for some reason decided to define themselves that way and people buy it. Not that everyone in those regions thinks that way, of course. It's just that myth seems to be attached to certain areas more than others, not just in a half-joking way or a "pride in my region" way, but literally.
From:
no subject
And sometimes I think well, maybe we might be a better country after that, you know?
From:
no subject
"Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." And that attitude is by no means productive. Rather, it causes resentment in other countries. I know that my first, admittedly stupid, reaction to it is that I'd rather be with the terrorists. And some people wonder why America is so hated.
From:
no subject
I just don't understand it because surely these people must know that if somebody was acting like this to them on a personal level they'd find them repulsive. That's why I don't get why some people seem to think it's their civic duty to act like this when representing their country.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
As a foreign example of the same kind of arrongance: I was talking to Japanese school principal who had recently been overseas to observe foreign education systems. I asked him what ideas he saw that he would like to implement in Japan. He said, "Nothing." I was appalled. Even tho I consider the Japanese education system inferior (but not lousy), I still can name several things from the Japanese sytem that could be beneficially implemented outside Japan.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
One of the fascinating movies that came out about 9-11 and such was called "Hijacking Diaster". It had most of the general information that these type of things do, stuff we all know. Their main message was that the Bush administration hijacked 9-11 as purely as the airplanes were hijacked.
One of the best things said in this was brought up by an Indian woman, talking about Gandhi. She said that the only good politics were the politics of fearlessness. Bush encourages a politics of fear. She said that those firemen and other people who helped get people out of the buildings on 9-11 were fearless. They were fearless because they had something to do, they had a concrete way of helping, and they did it.
Our country was swept together right after 9-11 largely because what we saw was how brave people can be in a crisis. Those firemen and others were the heroes. But then quickly that image became supplanted by Bush's face--he became the hero. He stood proud with his megaphone and said we'd bring them to justice, and then everyone breathed a sigh of relief and said, "good, we don't have to do anything anymore, our leader is here to make it all better." And I think that's what most people wanted to hear.
It doesn't feel good to be a victim. It feels good to be the fireman, the person with the concrete things they can do and know that they're helping. Yet people desire against their better interests and desire to have someone else do all the work. Then they don't have to change anything, or give anything up. Or do anything. People always think they'd rather have a life of not having to do anything. But that's not true. They just don't want to do stupid pointless things, which is what most of us do in our jobs. They want to do meaningful things.
But we were given no option of that. Specifically, intentionally. Even the left gave us no options. Giving things up is not really action in that way that makes you feel like you're helping. It's probably good and necessary, but just giving up your toys doesn't make you feel strong. What can anybody do that would be helpful? That film I mentioned said get involved, go protest, be an activist. That's partly good... but I never saw much real good in protesting. It was one of those things where people told you that you were doing something but you just stood around, knowing that you weren't really. I think that's why it's so easy for mobs to break out into violence in a protest--people long to be actually doing something, and waving a sign and yelling doesn't really cut it.
Hmm I'm rambling off topic. I also liked what you said about how you'd rather be right than win an argument. Nobody is like that anymore in politics and media. It's kind of chilling. Everyone is just trying to win. It's not about being right or doing right. It's about winning.
From:
no subject
Our country was swept together right after 9-11 largely because what we saw was how brave people can be in a crisis. Those firemen and others were the heroes. But then quickly that image became supplanted by Bush's face--he became the hero
Wow...that's just such a perfect way of putting it.
Man, September 11th has been used so much as a playing piece in politics lately, it makes me ashamed sometimes to even bring it up. (Not that I'm saying it shouldn't ever be brought up...just that it saddens me. These were people and they died, they don't deserve to end up some kind of bargaining chip. Or an excuse...)
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
It's just such a shame because there were these pockets that showed you exactly what you should aspire to, with the firemen or perhaps even more the people on that last flight who went down. There was nothing they could do to save themselves, so they spent their last few minutes saving others and doing something good. I mean, think about that. They had more reason to be terrified than anyone--they didn't even have the training or experience of firemen, yet they could keep their cool by doing something worthwhile.
I just think of people during WW2 for instance, where they could get behind doing little things like Victory gardens or rationed food because people were able to show that it made them part of the fight. This government has done everything it can to keep people out of the fight: just let us make the decisions. You can't do anything without us protecting you. Feh.
From: (Anonymous)
no subject
Instead, we got a VP who says conservation is only a "personal value" (i.e., totally inapplicable to national policy) and a massive push for buying flags, which is nice, I guess, but is that the best (or maybe I mean) place that money could have gone?
Your point about fundamentalism was interesting to me, because I come from a denomination and a congregation that makes a pretty big deal out of pastors being able to read at least one Biblical language. For me, that's the biggest stumbling block with fundamentalists, especially because as far as I can see, it's completely proven there have been errors in transmission of Scripture. For a chunk of the middle ages, Moses had horns, and up into the twentieth century, the passage in Corinthians about "homosexual offenders" was translated as "masturbators." At some point, if you have two pretty different versions, doesn't that have to suggest that someone got something wrong? I tend to stick with the idea that I take the Bible too seriously to take it literally (or, as a seminarian friend of mine puts it, the Bible contains the word of God--but also a lot of static). I know I may be a hoity-toity ivory tower former English major, but dammit, words mean things! And deep down, I feel like there's a definite anti-intellectual, anti-elitist trend that devalues language and that scares me, because without language, what alternative is there to war?
From: (Anonymous)
no subject
From:
no subject
The attitude towards war nowadays does seem very damaging in so many ways. In fact I think that's maybe why the Vietnam records of the candidate seem somehow significant. I mean, I don't think being a good soldier makes you a good president--the two are completely different things. But it just seemed disturbing how really disrespectful the GOP was about Kerry's war record, wearing purple heart Band-Aids and sneering at his wounds for not being serious enough while playing up Bush as a "war president" and acting as if his photo ops were actual battles or something. That we would choose the fake soldier over the real one seemed to reflect a more general trend towards the superficial: buy a flag but put it on your gas guzzling car that you drive alone and don't carpool in, demand more war and say you support troops but also demand tax cuts. I don't want to sound like I'm so much better than anybody who would do that, but the way it's presented as something to aspire to is upsetting.
From:
no subject
It's just that the government encourages it because that helps it to stay in power. I guess to the people in far away states it's like this weird nebulous thing that creates, well, terror. It's not really as if terrorists are going to attack Appleoak, Montana, are they?
I have some strong opinions on terrorism that would take a while to write out, but basically. Terrorists are weak people who are up against a vastly superior enemy. They strike small but they strike vicious. They can't wage actual war so they have to think up the thing that does the most damage with the least amount of effort.
It's just like killing one in every ten men in your army makes them more obediant - you don't know who's next, so you get in line. The purpose of terrorism is to create terror. And the fact that America just seized up into a terrified ball of fear makes me so sad. It's exactly what they wanted.
A lot of it is also to with nationalism. I extremely dislike nationalism. Probably because I was raised in a lot of different countries. But I'm so much so that the concept of a country that 'feels like home' is just...well, foreign to me. I can understand loving a country but I can't understand being part of one. But nevertheless. I think that, well, nationalism, along with religion and, ethnicism? (I mean, extreme ethnic loyalty), are the three main causes of much of the world's conflicts. We need to get to a state where nations don't matter, and look out for ourselves as a planet, not in the interests of our countries. That's...quite possibly stupidly utopian, but there you go.
To be fair, though, it's probably not as if America is the only country that has this problem, it's just more obvious. I guess no one really knows whether or not disagreeing with the people of Tajikistan gets you labelled anti-Tajikistani unfairly.
Also I should really stop going on now as I'm probably incoherent from lack of sleep. Apologies *wanders around in dazed state*.
From:
no subject
Maybe there was more of a panic elsewhere for all I know. It would prove my point, really, because the thing about being here is you could see the reality and react to that instead of just letting your imagination run wild: there's the smoke over there, so let's all walk this way. Here are hundreds of flyers of actual people who went missing. I am not on them and for that I should just feel lucky. I can smell the burning of the remains: that was close. Phew.
It's probably the only time in my life I've felt the kind of fear I did feel, with the military planes overhead. You did feel like you were waiting for something to drop on you from the sky. But then you got over that, as people do. People have lived under far worse conditions, and you weren't alone. But maybe you're right and in other places it was just something in their imagination that they could fit to conform to their own fears.
This kind of nationalism does seem ridiculous to me too, maybe especially because I have gotten used to the lj community which is so international. You don't really bond with people because they're from the same country with the same background. Sometimes the people who seem more like you are from across the world, so the idea of breaking things down along country lines seems a strange idea.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
For generations now Americans have developed this very annoying attitude of 'God's own country/God's own nation, we're the best and superior and yaddayaddayadda'. Welllll... Sorry to break it to you, America, but not everyone shares that opinion. France thinks it's 'La Grande Nation' and Japan still considers all Westerners Barbarian. And you know what? From their POV they have at least as much reason to think so than you do. A good piece of humble-pie would serve the US well, imo.
Unfortunately it began to seem that for a lot of people (not all, of course), the main way they began to relate to other countries was to consider whether they felt sorry enough for America after 9/11.
I have to admit that while I felt terribly sorry for the singular people who were killed in that event (I remember crying out loud when that poor woman jumped out of a window somewhere on the 40th floor or something), I felt that the USA as such had reaped what they had sowed. You just don't slap people around and look down your nose at them while you steal their resources. Especially not when they have pride and guns.
I just feel like we spend so much time convincing ourselves we've done nothing wrong we can't fix anything we have, and so much time accusing other people of being mean to us we can't benefit from any good advice we might have for us.
How could the USA do something wrong, ever? Remember, they're the world police! Surely they're right at all times. Sounds Gryffindorish somehow? Well, I think it's the same attitude.
Perhaps it really has something to do with age? As nations go, America still is a pimply teenager. So perhaps this is just a phase?
From:
no subject
And it really so amazes me that people don't get that. I mean, you'd think it'd be obvious that the reason you think your country is the best is that it's yours, but many people honestly seem to think that people in other countries really should just logically see that America's better. Um, yeah. Perhaps it was the same thing for the Romans secretly thinking of course everybody really wanted to be Roman.
How could the USA do something wrong, ever? Remember, they're the world police! Surely they're right at all times. Sounds Gryffindorish somehow? Well, I think it's the same attitude.
Perhaps it really has something to do with age? As nations go, America still is a pimply teenager. So perhaps this is just a phase?
Sadly, I have thought both of these things far too often. We really do seem to be the teenager of the world at the moment, down to the idealized view of own childhoods being "purer" than the rotten world of today!
From:
no subject
I tell you, there is little more disturbing than the attitude you describe, and which I have also experienced, of intentional and prideful ignorance as regards the rest of the world.
As the single remaining Superpower, I have always felt, it is our responsibility to set the tone for the rest of the world --a tone of collaboration and respect. And here we are, swaggering around like a macho dipshit in gangland. Even worse, I have heard people gloat over the discomfort of the Europeans --proud that we just showed 'em who's boss! It's as though there is some mass fantasy that George Bush acting unilaterally is akin to John Wayne being a hero.
HEL-LOOO-OOOO!
After years of training in cross-cultural communication, international business, and political science, not to mention a 2 year stint working at the American Embassy in Moscow, I am embarrassed and ashamed by this attitude. I can see how people can be called "stupid" over it, because it DOES look like: "Shit, howdy, Joe-Bob! Lookee here! We sure done showed them for'ners, ain't we?"
We've had reason to be proud of who we are. And perhaps we can be excused some ignorance, just by virtue of our distance from much of the world --although that geographical distance means less and less as time goes on. But, people, we cannot bully our way through the 21st century and have any good come of it. Surely, that is obvious?
(Or am I just being stupid? Is the whole agenda to bring on Armageddon as soon as possible? In that case I guess runaway spending and insulting your friends doesn't matter much--we won't be here to live with the debt, eh? *shudder* Only, we will. And more than one kind of debt, I'm thinking.)
From:
no subject
As I`ve said before, America should be the world`s fair and sensible arbiter. Instead she`s acting like a narrow minded bully. It`s not good for Americans and it`s not good for us, the rest of the world.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
LOL! Yeah, that's pretty much what it sounds like.
And here we are, swaggering around like a macho dipshit in gangland. Even worse, I have heard people gloat over the discomfort of the Europeans --proud that we just showed 'em who's boss! It's as though there is some mass fantasy that George Bush acting unilaterally is akin to John Wayne being a hero.
Ugh, yes. Anybody who has questions about what we do gets cast in the role of cowardly townsperson or something and of course John Wayne is right-he's John Wayne! Only in the movies John Wayne is usually the one on the "good" side, he's fighting against the guy bullying the town. And anyway, it's amazing that this President could ever make anybody imagine him "swaggering" anyway. Everything about him seems to show exactly what he is--not heroic or impressive.
(Or am I just being stupid? Is the whole agenda to bring on Armageddon as soon as possible? In that case I guess runaway spending and insulting your friends doesn't matter much--we won't be here to live with the debt, eh? *shudder* Only, we will. And more than one kind of debt, I'm thinking.)
It's the ultimate excuse and scary how possible it seems to be. The world will be in shambles and they can just say, "So what? We meant for that to happen!" Really, I think if you believe in the Armageddon why run for office anyway? Why not let those of us who'll be left behind after the Rapture take care of the world?
From:
maybe this will help
How Conservatives Won the Heart of America
by Thomas Frank
http://www.henryholt.com/holt/whatsthematter.htm
From:
Re: maybe this will help
From:
yes, indeed!!
I remember seeing those commercials and crying with absolute joy. It meant that we weren't going to just sit there and cry in our soup. Then, suddenly, those commercials disappeared. I thought to myself, WTF? Where did they go? Soon after, Bush's face began taking their place, and I quickly saw the writing on the wall, as it were. I didn't want to acknowledge what I was seeing, because I thought I was over thinking things. I hate the fact that I was right, though. It makes me sick. :-(
From:
Re: yes, indeed!!
From:
no subject
thank you! <33333
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
I remember really liking the way that the country did seem to unite in the immediate aftermath, but I also remember feeling like it was really shallow. Our college paper printed a full-spread American flag that people posted in their windows -- a nice sentiment, but nothing that helped anyone. More disturbing to me was the attitude that went with the genuine outpourings, especially to the Red Cross. That organization is *always* in need, frequently rather desperately. After September 11, people were suddenly lining up to donate both money and blood. By about September 13 or so, they didn't need much blood for the events in NYC, and they had gotten far more than they could use for that. Logically, they wanted to put people's generosity to good use in the rest of the country, finally having the level of blood (more, actually), they always need. Yet people were horrified that their donations weren't going to help the relief efforts. Never mind that they were saving lives, they wanted to help with the terror relief, even if that wasn't what was needed. And donations died down quickly, even though the Red Cross was asking people who wanted to help to make appointments to give in a month, when the current supply would no longer be any good.
This afternoon I was discussing our international reputation and the rest of the world's horror at our election outcome, along with the idea that they do have reason to care and maybe we should wonder why they hate Bush (and us by extension) so much. Someone responded that this was probably one reason some people voted *for* Bush; we have to be "independent" from what other countries think, which apparently means deliberately doing whatever they'll like least.
I have this horrible sinking feeling that one set of internationals who are happy with this result are the leaders of terrorist movements in charge of recruiting. Getting more people to join your violent anti-American group must be much easier when the Americans keep the man who, in your view, is most hurting you and keeping you down. Of course, if you say something like this, then clearly you're allowing the terrorists to decide who should be in office. Not that they don't already, based on the amount of Bush-voters for whom terrorism was a top issue.
From:
no subject
The thing is, I realize it's more complicated than just, "you pissed them off so they're just getting back at you," because part of what drives me crazy when I force myself to read articles where people talk to people who support terrorists is that they have the same useless victim mentality that I don't like in the US. But people sort of act like you can't have it one way or the other: either the terrorists are attacking us unfairly and we're completely blameless, or we did something that completely justifies running two plains into the World Trade Center. Either way you don't look at what's really going on in a way where you can make things better.
But when you actually get off on showing the world you don't care about them, how are you not exacerbating the problem? Or when you take the UN not backing the war in Iraq and twist it into the UN trying to stop the US from defending itself? How is anybody supposed to compromise with that sort of attitude?