The White Man's Burden

[Satansixsix]

http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/
watch this....
Although most won't. There are two, two hour long films but it make the whole thread and discution pointless.

Edit.

This is where the movies at-
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

 

[Ignignoct]

It's fair to say she still encountered some trace amounts of political angst due to her gender and ideas.

And we know that Obama has faced, and will face those as well. I mean, he chose to be considered black, despite the fact that he is biracial. And obviously there are the arguments that he is "not black enough" and the hanging of an Obama effigy.

OHHHH! You were just pullin' m'chain! (~_^)

You're fun.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

Can i ask why your proud to be an American? Its little more than an accident of birth it dosent endeer anything special upon us just which lump of rock we had the fortune to land upon. Its cool to be happy your an American but i never got all this patriotism stuff flags and anthems do nothing for me.

I would much rather be an American than a little African kid who's starving and dying with no drinkable water or the amazing things that we have in America. I am pretty damn proud that I live in one of the best countries on Earth and have freedoms that some people can't even imagine.

Also I agree 100% with the OP. People need to make up their minds and stop looking for things to whine and complain about.

 

[Good morning blues]

"Take up the White Man's burden--
And reap his old reward:
The blame of those ye better,
The hate of those ye guard--"

Before anyone accuses me of racism (a topic on my mind this evening, obviously), it's a quotation from the Kipling poem by the same name. Ignoring the racial implications, I'm beginning to feel like we're living through this.

In the interest of full disclosure, I'm an America, and proud to be one. It's not xenophobia, or jingoism, just pride in living in a country which has done some spectacular things. With that in mind, here we go:

America can't win, and it bothers me. We're never allowed to be right. If we interfere in a foreign country (Iraq), and free their citizens from an evil dictator, we're imperialist dogs. If we fail to interfere in a foreign country (Sudan), we're amoral bastards. Pick a gear and stay in it a while. Either we're the world's police officers, and supposed to go in and stop injustice, or we aren't, but don't ask us to do both.

We fail to respect the culture and religion of the Middle East, and we're insensitive and arrogant. We fail to trample on that culture and religion, and we're complicit in its crimes. C'mon, that's just not fair. Either we're supposed to leave the Middle East alone, or we're supposed to step in to stop the marriage of an eight-year-old to a forty-year-old.

We're told we're selfish for not writing blank checks to the developing world, and then upbraided for "cultural imperialism".

I'm not asking people to support America uncritically, unquestioningly, but a little fairness would be nice. If we're supposed to be isolationist, we can do that. We can pull our ships and soldiers out of basically everywhere, and only care for our own defense, but I don't think many people want that. If we're supposed to be the moral authority and arm of the lord, we can do that, we're the only superpower left, but people don't seem to want that either.

These are all very, very reductionist and highly inaccurate arguments.

The problem with Iraq is that America did not intervene to end suffering under Sadaam - if that were the case, the United States wouldn't have funneled money to him during the Iran/Iraq war. America intervened in Iraq because it was to their strategic advantage - they wanted to put a military base there. Despite the massive catastrophe that was (and still is) the genocide in Darfur, America has no strategic advantage in intervention, so they don't.

The problems that the Middle East has with the States go far beyond a lack of respect. Similarly, I've never heard anyone suggest that the United States is "complicit in the crimes of the middle east," whatever those are.

Cultural imperialism is the idea that the export of American media to other countries serves to undermine indigenous culture and ideology, making foreign markets more lucrative for Western businesses. Additionally, the United States has never once written a blank check to the developing world; that's why it's so fucked up, because the strings and conditions put on their aid packages by organizations like the IMF and the World Bank prevent them from pursuing economic policies that would be beneficial to their own populations. Furthermore, you make it sound like the US aid to the developing world is some sort of gift; in truth, those "blank cheques" are loans, and much more money comes back to the States in the form of interest than goes from the States to the developing world.

With a little education, I don't see how anybody could be okay with those policies.

 

[jboking]

oddly, there is something we can do to win. It's called diplomacy and working with our international organizations instead of being...well cowboys.

What we did was invade them so we could get closer to the oil in Iran.

I need a credible citation in order to believe this. A.K.A. pics or it didn't happen.

 

[Aries_Split]

oddly, there is something we can do to win. It's called diplomacy and working with our international organizations instead of being...well cowboys.

What we did was invade them so we could get closer to the oil in Iran.

I need a credible citation in order to believe this. A.K.A. pics or it didn't happen.

It's mainly conjecture. Logical, but definitely not the sole reason.

 

[Jakkal]

.....We fail to respect the culture and religion of the Middle East, and we're insensitive and arrogant. We fail to trample on that culture and religion, and we're complicit in its crimes. C'mon, that's just not fair. Either we're supposed to leave the Middle East alone, or we're supposed to step in to stop the marriage of an eight-year-old to a forty-year-old.

We're told we're selfish for not writing blank checks to the developing world, and then upbraided for "cultural imperialism".....

This is all because of how we were involved in the Cold War. We tried to pack the developing world full of capitalistic democratic bribery to compete with the Soviet Union, and now we are cleaning up our mess as we realize that some countries don't work well with Western ideology.

 

[jboking]

oddly, there is something we can do to win. It's called diplomacy and working with our international organizations instead of being...well cowboys.

What we did was invade them so we could get closer to the oil in Iran.

I need a credible citation in order to believe this. A.K.A. pics or it didn't happen.

It's mainly conjecture. Logical, but definitely not the sole reason.

So it's logical conjecture? So it's a guess and should not be touted as truth. Remember, Truth is stranger than fiction(Because fiction has to be believable), There never has to be a logical answer.

 

[sneakypenguin]

oddly, there is something we can do to win. It's called diplomacy and working with our international organizations instead of being...well cowboys.

Thing with diplomacy is you have to have the will to act for it to be effective. Look at the UN, its generally useless in it's attempts at diplomacy because they issue a non binding resolution that iran should be building nukes or NK shouldn't be working on a missile program then do nadda to back it up. I would love to be dictator of a country and walk all over the west, holding them hostage to foreign aid and continuing weapons programs unabated.

Not to say diplomacy is useless, but you have to negotiate from a position of strength.

 

[iggyus]

Im glad I'm Canadian

 

[jboking]

oddly, there is something we can do to win. It's called diplomacy and working with our international organizations instead of being...well cowboys.

Thing with diplomacy is you have to have the will to act for it to be effective. Look at the UN, its generally useless in it's attempts at diplomacy because they issue a non binding resolution that iran should be building nukes or NK shouldn't be working on a missile program then do nadda to back it up. I would love to be dictator of a country and walk all over the west, holding them hostage to foreign aid and continuing weapons programs unabated.

Not to say diplomacy is useless, but you have to negotiate from a position of strength.

Yes, you negotiate from a position of strength, but you do not use force to get your way. That's all I was really getting at there. Also, bilateral agreements between countries have always seemed to work better than world organizations like the UN(concerning the UN itself has basically no power, its all based on what countries promised they would do...of course promises can be broken).

 

[Infiniteloop]

First of all, get your information correct.


We did not "free iraq from an evil dictator".

What we did was invade them so we could get closer to the oil in Iran. We did not overthrow a dictator, we absolutely demolished any iota of social and government stability for no good reason.

Sudan actually needed our help, and we chose to ignore them.

There should not be pride or shame involved in your nationality. Simply be proud to be a good person. "We" are not the nations police officers, we are a sizeable power and are expected to act responsibly.


Any more questions?

EDIT:what do you mean we can't "win"?

If winning means not being universally hated, of course we can win, it just takes some effort to dispel most of the rumors about us that tend to be true.

Really, people need to shut the fuck up about us invading for oil. If that were the case, maybe we'd have started, you know, buying the oil? And drilling for oil? And any of that shit you need to do with oil before it goes in your car? Ever thought about that?

And yes, we did *liberate* an *opressed nation* from a *batshit crazy dictator.* There is now far more stability and democracy in Iraq than there has been in any Middle Eastern country in the history of Earth, save Israel. There may have been more order under Sadaam to an extent, but there were hundreds of people being assasinated by secret police every month to make it happen.

Now, last year, as a result of the Surge, there were Shiite and Sunni women voting in an open election more than one candidate. You were saying about having his facts straight?

Why would the US buy the oil when they can take it over when they go in under false pretenses? Why would the US start drilling for oil when the Iraqis already where?

Seriously, Iraq was a stupid idea, you went in to get rid of Saddam because Bush didn't like him, now you can't leave or everything goes back to the way it was or gets worse.

Brilliant

If we did invade for oil why have we not nationalized their oil industry and enjoyed 50 cent/gallon gas?

Please think before you speak. That goes for everyone who thinks Iraq was invaded for oil.

 

[AhumbleKnight]

Very well said Good Morning Blues.

I was going to go into this in my post but ran out of time before work.

The actions and policies of the US when dealing with other nations have always only ever been taken if they will benifit themselves more than anybody else. This is a specific form of rationalisation and it is evident in all current and past policies.

As an Australian I have (to some degree) what is known as Tall Poppy Sindrome. This is very common for Australians. What it basicaly means is, we dislike people who bignote themselves. The US, as a nation, carry on about how great the US is and how free they are and how they are the best Country in the world. Individualy, Americans are wonderful people who I have no trouble getting along with at all. As a nation however, you rub me the wrong way. Humility is a wonderful thing.

One reason people love Obama is becuase, despite all his sucesses, he openly admits to his flaws and generaly (but unfortunatly not always) remains humble. The trip Obama made recently around Europe was claimed by some US media organisations as being a failure and a waste. I wouldn't call the raising of the opinion people have towards the US a waste or a failure. Because that is what has happened since Obama has been elected, people hate the USA a less than when Bush was in power.

P.S.
Sorry about jumping all over the place with my point/s.

 

[the_dancy_vagrant]

Very well said Good Morning Blues.

I was going to go into this in my post but ran out of time before work.

The actions and policies of the US when dealing with other nations have always only ever been taken if they will benifit themselves more than anybody else. This is a specific form of rationalisation and it is evident in all current and past policies.

As an Australian I have (to some degree) what is known as Tall Poppy Sindrome. This is very common for Australians. What it basicaly means is, we dislike people who bignote themselves. The US, as a nation, carry on about how great the US is and how free they are and how they are the best Country in the world. Individualy, Americans are wonderful people who I have no trouble getting along with at all. As a nation however, you rub me the wrong way. Humility is a wonderful thing.

One reason people love Obama is becuase, despite all his sucesses, he openly admits to his flaws and generaly (but unfortunatly not always) remains humble. The trip Obama made recently around Europe was claimed by some US media organisations as being a failure and a waste. I wouldn't call the raising of the opinion people have towards the US a waste or a failure. Because that is what has happened since Obama has been elected, people hate the USA a less than when Bush was in power.

P.S.
Sorry about jumping all over the place with my point/s.

I like the tall poppy syndrome as a concept. Actually, I've got a bad case of it myself. I'm American and I like my country quite a lot. However, it isn't a pleasant thing to deal with people that are so stuck up that they can't conceive of a world in which the crap they say is easily contradictable. People that say the USA is the best country in the world don't have very much imagination - they're so wrapped up in the "fact" that the US is the best country in the world that they don't see the areas in which we're not doing so well compared to many other "crappy" countries.

It's basically like a national case of 'don't write checks that your ass can't cash' - the folks who brag the most are either certain that they have the strength to back up their claims, which is rare, or they've never been challenged and assume they are awesome by default, which is common.

So yeah, I'm kind of rambling here, but follow me on this one - individual Americans are fine, but if we were to combine the Ur-mind of the USA into one person, he'd be that one old guy, who apparently used to be really cool, that shows up to the party uninvited and then tries to impress all the ladies there that are young enough to be his daughter. And fails at it. Badly. And yet somehow doesn't get that everyone is laughing at him rather than with him.

 

[GloatingSwine]

America can't win, and it bothers me. We're never allowed to be right. If we interfere in a foreign country (Iraq), and free their citizens from an evil dictator, we're imperialist dogs. If we fail to interfere in a foreign country (Sudan), we're amoral bastards. Pick a gear and stay in it a while. Either we're the world's police officers, and supposed to go in and stop injustice, or we aren't, but don't ask us to do both.

It would, of course have helped the case if, when invading Afghanistan and Iraq, there was any evidence of a post invasion reconstruction plan. As it is, the situation of neither country has improved greatly as a result of the intervention of the US and her allies. Afghanistan is beset by warlordism, with no coherent infrastructure, the drug trade as strong or stronger than ever, and still an active state of war in many places, and Iraq has been delivered from the tyranny of the Shia minority into the tyranny of the Sunni majority, with it being evident that the real power in the nation was held by the Madhi Army (something like 80% of the new Coalition organised Iraqi police force was estimated to be in their pocket), which America eventually resorted to bribery to actually stop from blowing people up.

 

[almaster88]

hahaha, good points. Especially about Japan, only they could turn a tiny island from fallout3ish to now.

 

[Flying Dagger]

i'm not opposed to sorting out the world, i'm opposed to the americans doing it. or more specifically the way they fail at it.

to quote a line from the hives
"but if you do it, do it good"

We did pretty good with Japan and South Korea.

is that an acceptable success rate?

 

[Flying Dagger]

if america had any interest in being the world's police force, they would have sorted zimbabwe out by now.
for $400bn p/a that america spends on defence, i would say that with offered funding with strings attached such as an active democracy and human rights would work. america only wants to be seen as the worlds policemen, they don't want the job.

oh and if you want an interesting fact:
the Iraqi constitution had a section outlining women's rights. they also had a section saying Iraqi oil was solely for the use of the Iraqi people. through negotiation, both of these sections were removed. and the aid given to Iraq to help them recover had strings attached. they could only spend it in america.

clearing out a dictator was definitely the right thing to do. but it wasn't the reason america went in, given or otherwise.

for those who think america did a good job, you probably think that disbanding the iraqi army was a good idea. which sort of epitomises the american view on "sorting out countries"

 

[Bat Vader]

"Take up the White Man's burden--
And reap his old reward:
The blame of those ye better,
The hate of those ye guard--"

Before anyone accuses me of racism (a topic on my mind this evening, obviously), it's a quotation from the Kipling poem by the same name. Ignoring the racial implications, I'm beginning to feel like we're living through this.

In the interest of full disclosure, I'm an America, and proud to be one. It's not xenophobia, or jingoism, just pride in living in a country which has done some spectacular things. With that in mind, here we go:

America can't win, and it bothers me. We're never allowed to be right. If we interfere in a foreign country (Iraq), and free their citizens from an evil dictator, we're imperialist dogs. If we fail to interfere in a foreign country (Sudan), we're amoral bastards. Pick a gear and stay in it a while. Either we're the world's police officers, and supposed to go in and stop injustice, or we aren't, but don't ask us to do both.

We fail to respect the culture and religion of the Middle East, and we're insensitive and arrogant. We fail to trample on that culture and religion, and we're complicit in its crimes. C'mon, that's just not fair. Either we're supposed to leave the Middle East alone, or we're supposed to step in to stop the marriage of an eight-year-old to a forty-year-old.

We're told we're selfish for not writing blank checks to the developing world, and then upbraided for "cultural imperialism".

I'm not asking people to support America uncritically, unquestioningly, but a little fairness would be nice. If we're supposed to be isolationist, we can do that. We can pull our ships and soldiers out of basically everywhere, and only care for our own defense, but I don't think many people want that. If we're supposed to be the moral authority and arm of the lord, we can do that, we're the only superpower left, but people don't seem to want that either.

We are not the only superpower left. There is China and Russia. I feel that we should not involve ourselves in other nations affairs. Iraq was just a bad idea.