Why is everything always America’s fault? What’s with the Blame America Firsters?
Americans are getting a bit fed up with criticism of their policies, and many are truly perplexed as to why they seem to come under such fire from critics. Do they not investigate almost every report of atrocity that makes it to US corporate press? Even western press? Have they not made a very public point of very publicly jailing the individuals who were found to be engaging in unauthorized photography in Abu Ghraib?
Why aren’t people as outraged over all those IEDs the Iraqi insurgents keep deploying against coalition forces? And what about all the renewed terrorist activity in Afghanistan?
How come so much of the world seems more alarmed by the idea of US airstrikes on Tehran – even using only conventional weapons – than they are about the prospect of a nuclear Iran, as they are by the prospect of a Second Islamic Bomb?
The disconnect between mainstream America and critics abroad is unarguably a wide one, and most likely an unbridgeable one, at least in practical and reality-based terms, but it may be possible for each, if they try, to get at least some sort of understanding of the other’s position, even though it is very unlikely that anyone will change their minds.
Let’s look at the American point of view first, since so many people around the world have trouble understanding it. The first step is accepting, whether you agree with the practice or not, that Americans are taught almost from birth that not only is the United States the greatest country in the world, but it is so much greater than any other country, in every possible way, that laws and rules that may govern the way the global community of nations behaves toward each other simply do not apply to the US because of its greatness and uniqueness. It is not that the US objects, for example, to international laws or the Geneva cnoventions. In fact, if any other nation even thought about going round to other countries and seizing people at will, and hauling them off to secret torture camps, you can bet that the US would be the first to condemn such an atrocity, and would aggressively pursue any and all strategies and methods to put a stop to the practice immediately, and bring that rogue nation to heel, quite very possibly including a very swift and most likely unceremonious regime change. Now there might be exceptions to that. Note that word exception, because you will be hearing it a lot. An exception might be, for instance, Israel. As most people are aware, the US and Israel have a very special and unique relationship. So special and unique in fact that situations, such as that international kidnapping and torture camp thing, might not be looked at in the same way as it would if say Malaysia did it. Or France. Or Iran. Like the US itself, Israel would be considered an Exception.
That word, exception, is so important because to Americans, it’s not just a word. It’s not just a policy. It’s a doctrine. A fundamental core value on which policy is based, and according to which policy is implemented.
Or let’s look at the matter of invading other countries. A few weeks ago, an Iranian official pointed out that Iran had not invaded any other countries in 250 years. It has become a pretty standard and accepted principle in most of the world that this is something that is ismply not done. You do not see Denmark, for instance, invading and occupying Luxembourg because they don’t like the government of Luxembourg, or because they think Luxembourg may be aquiring a weapon that Denmark doesn’t want them to have.
Frankly, the idea is so far-fetched, so out of bounds of the behavior of modern, civilized nations that it sounds absurd! Could Denmark do it? Well, quite possibly. It is certainly a larger nation, and might have superior firepower. But here is where it becomes impossible to give the American point of view an honest look outside the context of the way the rest of the world thinks. But people just do not think to much about what kind of weaponry Denmark has with which to invade Luxembourg, or whether Luxembourg has an air defense system that could pose a danger to Danish personnel. This is just not something that modern, civilized countries do! And where did this thing about Denmark and what weapons Luxembourg has or is shopping for or wants or whatever – what in the world would that have to do with Denmark? None of this makes the slightest bit of sense, it all sounds like some over the top bad comedy movie from the 1960s.
So here is where we must return to the American point of view – American exceptionalism. There is no doubt in anybody’s mind that if Denmark even suggested that it was thinking of invading Luxembourg or anywhere, the US would, as with the case of kidnapping and torture camps, be the first to express complete outrage at such a barbaric suggestion, and send some of its men over to Copenhagen to find out first hand just what this ridiculous talk is about.
The fact that the US is currently openly occupying two countries that it invaded, is preparing to invade a third, and has very forthrightly shared with the world a list of dozens of countries that it is considering invading is in no way relevant to this situation with Denmark. You just can’t compare apples and oranges.
And that is exactly what you are doing when you answer very simple and valid questions about this wacko talk coming out of Denmark with the yada yada yada of complaints about America, blaming America again. Why can’t you understand that what you are asking just does not make sense?
America is an Exception.
And America is also very powerful militarily, so Denmark and every other country on the globe had better mind their ps and qs and not do anything America has ordered them not to do, like obtain weapons. Any weapons the US wants them to have, the US will provide. (And sometimes that providing activity can be a source of some real surprise, even to Americans!) Anyway, any serious discussion of possible Danish aggression against Luxembourg of anybody else is not served at all by trying to make it about the United States. Always wanting to blame America. Well, this is about Denmark and once again, since it appears to be too complex for you to grasp, America’s foreign policy initiatives have absolutely nothing to do with the subject under discussion, which is this alarming talk coming from Copenhagen.
America is an Exception.
This is why the disconnect may be unbridgeable: No matter how off the wall, no matter how, well, wacko this may sound to you, to most people in the world, it is something that is very real to Americans, something so true that to them they view it much as they view the idea that water is wet.
Almost from birth they are inculcated with this doctrine, this value. It is so deeply ingrained in the mainstream American psyche, that they are very truly, very sincerely, like someone suffering clinical depression, unable to just “snap out of it.” Where would they snap to? They do not know any other way, they cannot simply abandon this principle. That would be abandoning their national identity! That principle IS their national identity!
It is also important to remember that Americans are not, by any means, stupid people.
While it may seem at times that they are just unable to understand certain concepts, the fact is that they have the same capacity we all do to understand the concepts, however they have been taught that whatever those concepts may be, that you were getting ready to lay out, all nice and neat –
America is an Exception.
Because that forms the core belief, upon which all other beliefs, all other attitudes and opinions, rest, it naturally follows that all thinking processes, all logic and reason and capability for argument, are rendered, for your purposes, essentially mute, because your logic and reason not only do not require the doctrine of American Exceptionalism in order to function, your logic and reason do not even accept it as either reasonable or logical.
To you, it is simply something that is not true. To most mainstream Americans it is very nearly the only thing that is.
So how can meaningful dialogue with Americans be achieved?
What is an effective way to conduct a discussion with someone who believes himself to be of a Exceptional Master Race?
Tragically for the world, there is not one. This is equally tragic for the Americans themselves – all of them, even those miraculously un-indoctrinated minority who believe their country to be the bestest in the traditional way that we all do – The non-weaponized way. The way that includes observance of world etiquette, like not invading and occupying other countries, and not kidnapping people and hauling them off to torture camps, I could go on, but just start with these. There are Americans whose world view is more like the view of well, the world.
They are the Exception.
They are also exceptionally courageous.
Some of them are so courageous that they have suggested that acts of violence against their own countrymen might not even be terrorism!
To appreciate just how courageous this is, consider that it is almost universally accepted among mainstream Americans that regardless of what Americans may do to the Iraqis and the Afghans, any retaliatory action on the part of Iraqi and Afghan survivors is a classic textbook example of terrorism.
To the rest of the world, they may be just people defending their homes from a hostile invading force, as anyone would do when well, invaded by a hostile invading force, but to most Americans, that is simply not the case with the Afghans and Iraqis, since they have been invaded by Americans, and it is for their own good, to effect regime change and impose America’s will, and –
America is an Exception.
It would therefore, constitute terrorism to shoot at or otherwise attempt to harm the people who blew up your house, if they happened to be Americans. Indeed, you should be grateful that Americans have made such a great sacrifice of their own money and put their own youth in harm’s way in order to help you obey America.
It may be commonly understood and appreciated across the globe that in any such situation, the aggressor, the party who commits the invasion, has irrevocably tipped the moral high ground scales in the other fellow’s favor, and while the invadee may, in an attempt to protect his own life and the lives of his loved ones, commit acts that are to say the least “assymetrical,” such as booby-trapping roads that the invaders might use in order to come to his town to kill him and his loved ones, to destroy his home, to haul his sons off to torture camp, and his daughters to who knows where, the moral burden here, acknowledges most of the world, is not on him, but on the guys in the tanks on their way to the town.
Those guys, assert the overwhelming majority of human beings who inhabit earth, have no business being there in the first place. No matter how much revenue may be generated to which corporations, there is right and there is wrong, and invading other countries is wrong. Kidapping people is wrong. Torture, murder, sexual assault, burning the flesh off children, all wrong. No exceptions. And the fellow putting the booby trap in the road is not only not doing wrong, he would be wrong not to do whatever he can to protect his home, his family. That is his duty.
In the typical American mind, however, as well as on the typical American newscast and certainly in the typical American comments on the subject by politicians of both “parties,” it is as if the US had never invaded either country, as if all the guys in tanks, all those hundreds of thousands armed with automatic rifles and bayonets and a substance that is NOT napalm because it is not even called that anymore so stop saying that, armed with pistols, too, with dogs, and dog leashes, and as we see from some of the unauthorized photos, harmful tobacco products, it is as if they all just happened to be innocent tourists vacationing in Iraq, or in Afghanistan, and suddenly for no reason whatsoever, both these countries simply exploded into hotbeds of anti-American sentiment, and now, mourn the Americans, our brave troops are under constant attack.
As everyone knows, well, as least as most mainstream Americans know, the only way to deal with anti-American sentiment is with tough love, a zero tolerance policy. Stamp it out. And the best way to do that is with bombing. That is the only way these people are going to learn to be grateful. And it is also important to make an example, because frankly that whole region is a hotbed of anti-American sentiment, and must be brought to heel.
And so the rest of the world listens. In disbelief, in bewilderment, and yes, fear.
America is without a doubt the most feared nation on earth. Feared certainly for its massive stores of weapons of mass destruction, but just as much if not more, it is feared because of its people, who present a greater danger even than its bombs.
Its people who would rather spend a dollar to kill the neighbor’s child than a dime to take care of their own.
Its people who are willing to sacrifice anything the corporations might ever have permitted them to have for the privilege of being part of imposing America’s will.
Its people who today, with the notable and precious exception of those notable and precious few Exceptions, speak with one voice: Iran must obey America!
Because America is an Exception.
The first time when I fully realized that I am not completely welcome within my own country, and maybe even in danger, if I decided, as if I have a choice, to put myself there, was a couple of years ago inside a courtroom. I was there for a traffic citation, and when the judge came in and we were told to rise and pay deference, he shared/subjected me/not us to his hopes and prayers for our troops and the success of our mission in Iraq. I became aware of the danger when he instructed us to turn and pledge allegiance to the flag on the wall and I decided not to do so. His eyes found mine, as did those of some others, though some of those others eyes conveyed nervousness to me. The judge’s eyes were full of hatred for me and my contempt for the flag and for America as I guess he saw it. Needless to say that some of my own countrymen and women weren’t too pleased with me either. It was an omen of things yet to come.
I will not pledge my allegiance to any flag, even though I fly it and carry it.
I want to love my country.
That’s fascinating. Good story. I’d like to hear more. What happened with the traffic ticket? Why were you going to court to contest it? Etc.
I payed the ticket, like just about everyone else. Here you stand in line and wait to meet the asst. DA and they ask if you plan to contest, which i didn’t, and that’s basically it. Usually you only go before the judge if you’ve done something more serious or been charged with something more serious. So there was no extra penalty because the judge didn’t like me, other than the look. His instruction to pledge allegiance wasn’t standard procedure. It was his personal quirk. I don’t appreciate being told to pledge allegiance to anything, or anybody.
When I mentioned that I saw an omen of things to come, I wasn’t talking about the judge abusing his power to inflict bigger penalties on me. Though I think he did abuse his power when he instructed everyone to make the pledge. It was intimidating. I don’t know if he thought it was a good way to throw around his weight, or if it even occured to him that someone might refuse. It must have been the latter judging by the way he looked at me.
The omen I’m talking about is what’a on the horizon for anyone who dissents to what our government is doing.
You are a man. People do not understand the power of Judges. Non-lawyers. Usually. They are among the only men that can pluck you off the street and put you in jail for a year or two without much process. It is called contempt. An easily abused power. But a Judge, even a mistaken one, can certainly put you there. And though not well understood, people get the sense of it. It is the fear you feel when they look at you wrong.
But to stand there. In defiance. That is manly. Fucking corageous. Just like you. Just had to say. Good to see you.
It’s not manly at all. First of all, I’ve been a contrary person all my life. I just couldn’t express it publically until I was physically big enough to ward off retaliation. Not that that would have helped me in this case. So maybe it was risky to do what I did. But there was, to be honest, a part of me that was thrilled to test the judge and go against the grain. I think that some of us (not us here) give authority too much power in our own minds. I find that even the most rabid of wingnuts often don’t know how to handle someone like me who doesn’t bow to their threats, real or implied. Most of them are all hot air and no action. They live through intimidation and when someone actually calls them on thier bullshit they are forced into a situation where they have to back up those threats. Most are cowards and therefore won’t back up their threats. Just scream more bullshit at you, as a way of healing their wounded little egos.
Here ya go:
Federal judge strikes down Florida Pledge of Allegiance recitation requirement.
We have three branches on our little tree. Two are rotten, but the third is still healthy and thriving.
Thanks
In my case there was no actual requirement to recite the pledge. But everyone in that courtroom, except for me, did recite it. Most I think did it because their school indoctrination kicked in and they felt required to. Others no doubt feel an allegiance to the flag. And that’s fine too. But I have to assume that there were some who did it because they felt intimidated by the judge’s power, or percieved power.
Brilliant.
I ask myself: when did I personally start questioning the notion that this country is the exception? For me, it was during the Reagan era and the atrocities in Central America, about 20 years ago.
During the Clinton era, I had hope. However, I must say that during those years I often sided with some of the right-wingers when it came to denouncing abuses of federal power, such as the use of asset forfeiture laws, the “war on drugs,” etc.
The W years have convinced me that only really tremendous destruction and suffering has any hope of snapping the American public out of its trance.
I guess I used to be a tranced-out “optimist” about politics for many years. Nowadays I’m a terrified pessimist, and I think I see more clearly.
This is not really responsive. You don’t need my first-person political evolution. You’re making a brilliant point about the problems of dealing with the masses of Americans who have exceptionalism in their bones. I understand the point. You have brilliantly expressed it.
By the way, wtf is the deal with those “Power of Pride” bumper stickers with the American flag. They’re all over the place in Maryland, even though this is a pretty Democratic state.
I have an interesting related issue these days. I just bought a second house just a few miles away from my residence, which I plan to use as an office. It’s in a very small town where almost everybody flies American flags. The house I bought came with a flagpole and an American flag–and it even has a floodlight with a timer device that lights up the flag at night. I’m not really an “anti-American,” but I’m also not at all proud of my country these days. I don’t want to be flying an American flag. But I also don’t want to scandalize the neighbors, some of whom are pretty unreconstructed. What to do? I guess I’ll just take it down for the moment.
you could get a thirteen star flag . . . you know, the “original” one. They are still 100% legal to fly. If anyone asks what it is you can look at them like they’re . . . as smart as George . . . and say “It’s an American Flag”. It’s also a good starting point for explaining that the government now in Washington is not the American government (the one described in the Constitution, that is).
That’s a very cool idea. Thanks.
There is no real difference between a tranced out optimist and a terrified pessimist.
You’ve exchanged one delusion for another. Both are false positions in different ways.
I don’t see it that way. If you’re going to accuse me of delusion and falsity, please spell it out in more detail.
I suspect you’re projecting your own sense of what “pessimism” is supposed to me. I’m curious to hear more.
I understand that you (rightly in my opinion)rejected your own tranced out optimism, but why did you choose to replace it with the opposite?
Why should I believe that your pessimism also is not just as “tranced out” as your former optimism?
Its the “trancing out” and the self labelling which I see as the problem.
Traps. Like “nostalgia” or a yearning for a “better world”.
in addition to the thirteen-star flag, which I think is a good one:
Get a “Don’t Tread On Me” flag
Get a red, white and blue windsock
Fly a pirate flag
Fly one of those seasonal banners I see sometimes around here — you know, like shamrocks on a green field for St. Patrick’s Day — but do it year round.
Fly your state flag
Have a purpose-built flag made up with a locally acceptable background color sporting the words THIS SPACE FOR RENT, REASONABLE RATES, INQUIRE WITHIN
Put up some totally absurd flag with . . . oh, I don’t know, a flamingo on it. Make sure there are plastic flamingos out in the yard to go with it. If anybody asks, tell them you just showed up one day and there they were, and there it was.
Display an empty flagpole, although that would probably work better if you were in a position to tell your neighbors that it was the emperor’s new flag
Fly a white flag with big red polka dots. If anybody asks tell them you’re a dot-com
OK, some of these suggestions are pretty much unworkable for a business that actually wants customers, if that’s the kind of office you have (e.g. law practice). But you see, I regularly brainstorm projects like this with my sister in law and her husband, who are on a campaign to make their neighbors think they’re nuts. Harmless, but nuts. (They actually have the flamingos in the yard, and dress them up for holidays. So far as I know, though, they haven’t yet implemented my suggestion to put out bowls of Purina Flamingo Chow.)
For some reason, this reminds me of visiting the Sorry Everybody website after the 2004 election. I just read and wept. Especially when those from around the world starting posting their acceptance of our apologies back to us. It was like the world all cried together.
There are north Americans, central Americans, and south Americans.
The use of the word “Americans” to label citizens of the United States, imo, feeds into the whole concept of exceptionalism.
Perhaps U.S.ers would be better. I was thinking it would be pronounced “You Ess ers,” however, seeing it written, “Users” is what I ended up saying in my mind. Change the words, change the thinking.
Imo, we (U.S.ers) have transitioned from a nation-state to a corporate-state. Cultural and religious beliefs are used to manipulate and control people. The disconnects between what we say we believe and how we organize ourselves and actually live are huge.
Those who have a problem with this disconnect are encouraged to consider it a personal problem. The real challenge, imo, is for those who feel they are strangers living in a strange world, to stay engaged. It is somewhat easier to go into an “observer” position, like a sociologist or anthropologist, just noting what all is happening – I live here, but I am not one of them.
The U.S. has become a planetary model for the corporate-state. Don’t like it? Me either. What are the options?
and it has the advantage of already having been created over 100 years ago.
Back around 1880 or so someone (I haven’t done the research to figure out who) got tired of the label “Americans” as applied to citizens of the United States, so he coined a new term. He started with the term “United States of America,” which he shortened to “usa.” That wasn’t euphonious, so he threw in a “North,” added the “o” in “of,” and created the term “Usona” — short for United States of North America.
Interestingly, at about the same time Ludovic Zamenhof was developing the Esperanto language, and needing a word for the United States that was less unwieldy than translating “United States of America” into Esperanto, he adopted the term “Usono” — same word as “Usona,” but ending in “o” which is required of all Esperanto nouns. To this day “Usono” is the Esperanot name for the USA, and an inhabitant thereof is an “usonano.”
Very good!
One of the things I have noticed is that I as I have reverted to reading as my primary source of information is that i don’t know how to pronounce things. For example, I was reading “wifi” as whiff-ee.
How is “usonano” pronounced? “You-so-nann-oh?” Is there a distinction for referring to a female? “Usanon*a*?”
Oh, the things one can learn here – thank you.
Esperanto has very regular pronounciation. Every letter has exactly one value, every word sounds just the way it’s spelled, and the accent always falls on the last syllable but one. So “usonano” is pronounced “oo-soo-NAH-no.”
As for the feminine, every word in Esperanto is built on roots, prefixes, and suffixes. “Usonano” is built on “uson-“, the country, “-an-“, resident, and “-o”, noun. The feminine form, if one would be needed, would be “usonanino,” literally “USA – resident – female – noun.” For the record, “usonana” would be an adjective refering to an usonano. It seems to me like you probably wouldn’t see this construction much, though, because I’m not sure it would be necessary to make it. I think you’d be more likely to see “Ŝi estas usonano” (shee EST-as oo-so-NAH-no), “she is an Ameican” than “Ŝi estas usonanino.” Where the “-in-” suffix comes in is usually where there is a necessary difference in gender. For instance the word “patrino,” mother, derived from “patro,” father.
And that is probably more than you expected to know about Esperanto on a Sunday morning. LOL
I’m so glad that you brought this up Tampopo. I’ve been catching myself lately trying not to refer to myself as “American.” It does get difficult sometimes because its so ingrained and there are often no good options. But I often wonder what our Canadian, Central American and South American friends think of our assumptions. I think it is certainly a manifestation of our exceptionalism. Some might say its just language, but I think it is a tell-tale sign.
change the corporations.
All nations of the world are corporate states to some degree, especially some of those viewed (incorrectly, of course) by the Left as more enlightened. France for instance, where the big firms are just as firmly entrenched at the seat of political power, maybe more so, than those here in the US.
Socialism is based upon state ownership of utilities, healthcare, etc. It is a defined mix of corporate and state on the political left.
We have had this discussion before and you have your finger on something: the disconnect betwen people’s beliefs and the actual reality. However, this is an historic problem of humanity, which predates capitalism, corporations and the state.
Your thinking at this stage tends to be more the coproration as a bogeyman. You might as well be saying that the fact of our knowledge of life and death is also a bogeyman.
What can be done? Nothing on so grand a sweeping scale of change. Incremental is the only real way. Change the corporation. Start your own. Buy stock. Go to work for one that needs changing. Corporations, with all their faults, are far more accessible by the public than is our own government, and much more open to change.
In fact, I am here to tell you that real change will never occur through the political process, because politics is by nature a rear view reflection of yesterday. Politics follows, never leads. When politics does lead, disaster almost always surely will follow. A major lesson learned from the 20th century.
Most corporations will change at the drop of a hat if they can be convinced that the change will lead to increased profits. How can you convince a government to change? You cant, except through bribery.
“Corporations, with all their faults, are far more accessible by the public than is our own government, and much more open to change.”
And you think you’ll change them by increasing their profits ?
Please.
We do not live under free market capitalism where corporations compete for business.
Well done. Excellent essay. Of course when someone says that to you the subtext is that they agree with what you say. Oh I do agree, Americans are so brainswashed and stupid that they cannot see the forest for the fuckin trees.
Ameican myopia is not a new phenomena. ,What has changed in this century is that the Chinese are in ascendency and America is in decline.
Walking dead, and we don’t even know it. The world has a bigger bully on the playground now. Just because he hasn’t pushed our faces in the dirt and made us grasp our position yet doen’t mean he won’t. This is what will happen as sure as water flows downhill. The Chinese are taking their sweet time, gently courting the Muslim world, biding their time until there will not even be a showdown. By the time they move, we will just do as we are told. Chinese might will be overwheminlgly compelling.
Pretty soon it’ll be time for the “Chinese exceptions.”
Yes, although the Chinese need the US in order to ascend. Without our financial system, technology, vast market for cheap goods, the Chinese stay in the ditch.
Without Japan and South Korea, both tied to the same capital market regime as US, they are still 3rd world.
There is a binding effect of globalism of which many people especially those on the left who have either ignored totally or misread global capitalism seem to be completely unaware. Its a binding that transcends politics, religion and all the other hooey that we tend to get worked up about in our shorsightedness.
Global capitalism is not a pie in the sky approach, for which, sigh, people still grasp at in futile and utter delusion. But capitalism is working out in its own way, with all the attendant troubles, economic dislocations, environmental destruction, etc.
All the problems of globalism are real.
But so far none of the alternative solutions are.
Suggested reading——-
AND
While on the surface, the following linked text appears to concern the 2005 European Constitution Treaty referendum, in fact it concers much, much more. It’s really all about how democracy is supposed to work on behalf of ordinary people everywhere and about how clever are the techniques which sap and undermine genuine democratic government.
Despite that, it is an envigorating, inspiring document, not one which is resigned and hopeless. In fact, the text linked below and written by a high-school economics and law professor from Marseilles, in France, is the most brilliant, most inspiring, and wisest political manifesto and call to political awakening that I have ever seen–anywhere, by anyone. I believe that you shall not be able to look at politics or society the same way again after you have read this document. Nor can you doubt the possibilities for change and the part in that which all of us can contribute. I urge you to read.
this reply posted as a diary under “Political Awakenings”
And I would assume, DF, that it is these people who demand daily that America be deemed exceptional, or at least that they are the ones who see that this status is sustained indefinitely. Because it surely isn’t the fault of the country’s completely honest leaders. No, absolutely not, they are completely beyond blame! It must originate with those damned ordinary citizens, those people of leisure, who have little more to do than work long hours for low wages every day and take care of their families as best they can when not occupied with work. (Just as it is solely the fault of those damned directionless 18 year olds for every atrocity perpetrated on America’s behalf, and not the fault of their clearly faultless leaders. No, their leaders are wholly without personal agenda. In fact, it is those easily influenced 18 year olds who are truly the root of all evil today.) Have I stated your position correctly?
I know that you and I don’t agree on the subject of individual moral responsibility, but that’s OK.
You have given me an opportunity to restate something I said in the original article, namely that Americans are not stupid.
Just like any other aggregate of human beings, with the notable exception of Lake Wobegonian children, some are very intelligent, some remind us that everybody can’t be the crispiest fry in the bag, but most are average. This is true whether we are speaking of Finns or Fijians, or viewing a microcosmic sample like the TV viewers in your piece.
People who consider Americans “stupid” are generally basing that view on American culture, attitudes, opinions, beliefs, thus demonstrating that they themselves do not suffer from a surfeit of crispiness.
Very creditable arguments could be made that every American who works in the advertising industry bears an equal, even a larger share of responsibility for the situation than the politicians and warlords, specifically because people in the advertising industry tend, on the whole, to be more intelligent than either politicians or warlords. Stupid people do not make good copywriters or TV commercial producers. Creating a successful advertising campaign, whether the goal is to persuade people that they need a particular personal grooming product, or to persuade them that atrocities are OK if committed by Americans requires a great deal of intelligence, as well as creativity.
Without a stellar team of propagandists, warlords and politicians would not be nearly so dangerous. On the contrary, they would be seen as the sad little gaggle of brutes and buffoons that they are.
A few weeks ago, a popular television show did a parody of a TV commercial for a special moisturizer to be used only on the coin slot area. It was very funny, because it is not unthinkable that some company might make one, and its ads would look a lot like the parody.
In fact, I can remember seeing another parody ad on that same TV show about thirty years ago – for a razor with three blades!
So it would not surprise me in the least if a few years from now I see real ads for coin slot cream.
I think maybe where you and I may disagree is on the question of whether someone with a low income who is so successfully persuaded by an advertising campaign that they purchase something that they cannot really afford is responsible for their action.
My opinion is that yes, they are – even if the advertising campaign is sheer genius, and even if the commericals win awards for everything from editing to copywriting to special effects.
And the credit card company will most assuredly hold them personally responsible for it.
I imagine there are many people, Americans included, who only wish they could send, in lieu of payment, a letter explaining that they saw that commercial and just had to have that product, so it is not really fair to keep sending them these bills that they cannot afford to pay.
It is a sad fact of life, however, that there are many people who will buy things that they don’t need and can’t afford. Some will even buy things that are harmful to them, and all because of a brilliantly crafted advertisement.
Who is to blame when the harm is done? The company that made the harmful product certainly has its share, as does the advertising agency that used its talents to make the harmful product seem so desirable, but most people, remember, Americans included, are not stupid, and it does not require above average intelligence to know that – just as examples – smoking cigarettes and eating junk food is bad for your health.
There was a time, of course, when people did not know that. Some old cigarette ads even featured doctors touting the benefits of this or that brand, and it was quite common practice for obstetricians to recommend to their pregnant patients that they start smoking to combat “nervous” mood swings and limit weight gain.
Mothers lovigly prepared what they considered a healthy breakfast for their children. In the movie “Pleasantville” there is a scene where the time traveller teen is horrified to have set before her large platters of bacon, sausage, pancakes. And especially in the southern US, it was common to fry foods in lard.
Today, cigarette ads on TV have been banned, and even smokers will concede that it is a terrible habit, and bad for health.
And while commercials for food now seek to persuade the consumer that their product is not only tasty but good for you, being low fat, half the calories, “lite,” etc., it is impossible to watch even a few minutes of any TV show aimed at young children without being bombarded for ads for cereals that are essentially sugar, with a bit of grain added, while colorful and friendly cartoon characters exhort the young viewers to eat “fast foods” that are low in nutrition and high in harmful fats and of course, sugar.
While we can agree that the five year old cannot be said to have personal responsibility for his clamoring for the junk, neither can we ignore the fact that it is not he who makes the decision whether to purchase it, but his parents. And while there are undeniably some mitigating factors; especially in the case of low income parents, who are likely to have limited access, both logistically and financially, to wholesome and healthy alternatives, we must also acknowledge that they are not stupid, they are also making the decision to accept their plight meekly. Because that is what they have been persuaded to do, in much the same way as their cousin has been persuaded to take out an usurious loan to purchase an automobile he cannot afford.
And so we arrive at the place such discussions always arrive: greed. It is a question of whether and to what extent a society chooses to limit the harmful effects of unchecked greed, to, well, check greed.
The product being sold may be the acceptability, even desirability, of crimes against humanity or SuperShuggaKrunch, but the motive is the same, and the dollars pocketed bear the portraits of the same dead presidents.
So to (finally) answer your question, in my opinion, every individual is responsible for the choices that he or she makes. I do not see Americans as stupid, just very dangerous.
I like this comment very much. It does not absolve corporations, governments, religions, or any large entity of its “corporate” responsibilities; it does not deny how HARD it is for individuals to see through and stand up to terrifying monolithic entities. It simply and clearly says the truth, which is that everything eventually comes back to–all those entities are made up of–me. Little ‘ol me. Me against the tank. Me at the lunch counter. Me deciding not to use charge cards any more. Me deciding to “glory war no more.” Me looking into my own psyche to see if it’s peaceful and wise and loving and brave down there. Me examining my own Shadow. I. You. Individuals. And none, none, none of the largest entities can change or fall, improve or be destroyed,without single, simple, complicated, innocent, guilty individuals like me, I, you, us. Pogo was only half right: we have met the enemy and he is us, but the part he left out, or didn’t know, is that we have also met the ally, the one who’s on our side, and he is us, too.
Oh Kansas – I have had the Pogo quote flitting around in my mind for most of the past year.
Pogo was only half right: we have met the enemy and he is us, but the part he left out, or didn’t know, is that we have also met the ally, the one who’s on our side, and he is us, too.
What a brilliant observation, I must repeat it:
we have also met the ally, the one who’s on our side, and he is us, too.
Thank you!
Hi, tampopo. I almost forgot to say, you’re welcome.
a “self-help” type book that was popular a few years back, called “You Are Your Own Best Friend” or something similar.
We hear it said sometimes that this or that person is “their own worst enemy,” which is the other side of the essential message of the self-help book:
We all have the capacity to be our own best friend, or our own worst enemy, and while other people can give us advice, and share their opinions, no one except our ownselves can decide which we will be, and be it.
I was also reminded of a point I forgot to make in my original article, that the world is not without responsibility for the situation with the US.
It is the world who made the decision to allow ANY entity to amass enough weapons to destroy the planet several times over.
It is the world who made the decision to allow ANY entity to control such a large percentage of its resources.
So while Americans certainly have their work cut out for them, if they wish for a future, the world also has some tough choices to make, and a whole lot of damage controllin’ to do!
Ahem, is that your final answer?
Well, you’re right, but I decided to make it into one of my brevity exercises.
“Americans are not stupid but they are dangerous.”
How about substituting the word “Muslims” for the word “Americans” in the sentence above and watch the howling begin.
First to vehemently oppose the statement would be the writer DTF.
I have quickly checked responses here and only one seems to protest.
I suggest DTF ‘be the change you want in the world’ as Ghandi suggested. That is begin to practice tolerance and justice if that is what you seek for your own people.
Here is something I value about DTF’s take on the world. Something that makes me feel pretty lucky he shares his thoughts here.
There is very little shortage of both subtle and overt hostility toward Muslims in the U.S. At least that is my perception. I’d say most here, at the BMT, are pretty far ahead of the curve of being tolerant people. But those of us raised in the U.S. have a lot to overcome in terms of systemic cultural racism. And the undeniable double standard that we hold for U.S. policy versus the policy of other countries. So I value a voice like DTF’s, for being able to make that case. To teach those of us who have been raised from within this culture, some of the things we might not be able to see. That, in my view, is a gift that he brings to the table. A valuable gift. One of the great things about diversity.
Now, I don’t necessarily agree that the thought experiment you propose is fair. But I’ll just assume that it is a fair test. So, do you think that DTF should be the spokesperson for this cause? That would be like asking a black writer to champion slavery, to some extent. Not a very fair test of someone’s value. There might be writers who are well suited to addressing the question you pose — who bring to the table a perspective that would allow them to write well about how American society is too frequently cast as a racist society. I just don’t think it is a fair proposition to insist that Ductape hold that view. Or make that point.
like
“Americans are not stupid but they are dangerous.”
as the basis for preaching tolerance. It’s not acceptable to me.
Of course racism and racist insults are intolerable but having Americans ‘rolling over’ when they themselves are insulted will gain nothing not even respect.
in the world. It is a religion, not an entity that claims nationhood.
There are about 300 million people eligible to purchase passports from Washington.
On the day that all Muslims become eligible to purchase passports from one office, live in one country which they claim to be both a sovereign nation and a democracy, amass more weapons of mass destruction than all other countries put together, set up secret torture camps in a host of other countries, go around kidnapping victims to put in these camps, and start invading other countries, occupying them, murdering and maiming the inhabitants, all the while pontificating about human rights from their seat in the UN, which has a little sign on the desk that says “MuslimLand,” on the day when all this is done with the tax dollars paid by the people of MuslimLand, with their consent, when these policies are supported by the vast majority of MuslimLand’s citizens, who consider themselves, who consider MuslimLand to be an Exception to the generally accepted principles of civilized behavior between nations, not to mentioon the Geneva convention and various other international laws and treaties, then you can be sure that I will make every effort to be the first to state that the sky is blue and Muslims are not stupid but dangerous.
At the present time, however, it is the United States that does all these things, and Muslims are merely people who follow a particular faith tradition. Some of them are in fact, not only Americans, but devotees of US policies, I am sure you have seen them on Fox News. There may not be many of them, in fact, I doubt there is a single American Muslim who supports US policies who has not been on Fox News, and they are all very dangerous Muslims.
On reflection, I realize that I replied very hastily and thoughtlessly to sybil’s very valid point.
My first reaction of “oh well Islam is a religion, so that’s different” was precipitous, and not easily excusable since I am posting in a thread that I started, on the subject of American Exceptionalism, which does enjoy, for all practical purposes, the status of a religion for many Americans.
Even among those who may not have a strong belief that God speaks through Bush, the doctrine of Manifest Destiny, in its current incarnation as Exceptionalism, is so deeply ingrained, and such a fundamental core belief, that even those who assert that their support US policies is purely secular will have the same reaction to criticism of that belief as a devout Catholic might have to criticism of their belief in the divinity of Jesus.
And there are also those who quite openly connect their religious faith with Exceptionalism. For some American Christians, this connection is actually part of their scriptures. I believe this is the case of the Latter Day Saints, or Mormons.
For others, it may be more a question of interpretation of Biblical scripture that is considered by adherents to be prophecy, or it may be simply a doctrine of faith.
Whatever the case, it was insensitive of me not to consider the religious stature of Exceptionalism, and of US policies, which are indeed viewed by many as sacred doctrines, forming not only the whole of their national identity, but also the basis of their faith tradition.
I do respect all faith traditions, and it was not my intention to denigrate the beliefs of anyone.
However, this brings me to an extremely sensitive topic, which is difficult to discuss without appearing to do exactly that, and is especially awkward in the context of an apology for already having been rather ham-handed in my treatment of what is a religious belief to many people.
The fact is that some religious faiths do include the “smiting” of individuals or groups. To use an example that has been in the news recently, there was a report on two men who are currently in prison for practicing their religion, which happened to include taking the lives of a young mother and her infant.
There is no easy answer to this situation for those who believe in the principle of freedom of religion, but who also believe that the responsibilities of a society include protecting people from harm, even to the extent of laws prohibiting citizens from taking the lives of others, without making exceptions for instances where taking those lives is based on the religious faith of the perpetrator.
In fact, there are those whose religious beliefs might be cited in their strong condemnation of the killings, thereby constituting a circumstance of two different faith traditions in direct conflict with each other!
In a secular society, even one where freedom of religion is a guiding principle, there are also laws, and many who believe that those laws should apply without regard to religion, and while there are cases where exceptions might be made, a couple of examples in the US that come to mind pertain to compulsory school attendance laws being “bent” for Amish people, and compulsory military service laws in the case of members of the Society of Friends, or Quakers, whose religious faith does not allow them to take up arms.
I think it would be difficult, however, to garner broad support, even in a conservative religious society, for making an exception to laws that prohibit homicide, if the homicide was committed as part of the practice of religion.
And such was the case with the two men in the news report. They were tried, found guilty, and are in prison today. One of them does not speak with the press, but the other still contends that in taking the life of the young woman and her baby, he was doing God’s will as it was revealed to him.
Extrapolating all that to a global society, I would have to acknowledge that while I do respect the religious beliefs of all people, at the same time, when those beliefs involve the killing of others, I am not able to condone that aspect of the practice of those beliefs, nor can I consider them any less dangerous than those who wish to kill others for secular reasons.
And with regard to accountability to any laws prohibiting the killing of others, even though those killings may be faith-based, I am not in favor of making an Exception.
Reminds me of that Sunday, when I was a small child, and had heard a particularly fiery minister speaking about the greatness of America as the fulfillment of God’s wishes. My religious group was in the throes of moving from being a historic peace church, to being one that more closely resembled preacher-centered “modern” groups that embrace American materialism.
self hath said it,
And it’s greatly to
The preacher’s words confused me. He sounded like my elementary school teacher, but like no minister I’d ever heard.
When we got home, after dinner, my granddad took me up in the attic, and showed me the thick blue history book he had studied from as a boy. It was old, dating from about 1880, and he read pieces to me, one about former slaves, and the other about Indians. The passages were terrible, as were the pictures. The writer had portrayed these persons as subhuman, deserving to be forced into the religion and service of the white man at best, or worst outcomes if not so willing.
My grandfather said calmly “These things are lies. Lies. One person is just as good as another person. Doesn’t matter if he’s from here, an American, or not. Being American doesn’t make what I do or what you do or what anybody else does right. Don’t let anyone ever make you think different.”
I’ve thought about my granddad’s lesson many times. As these times of rising American exceptionalism sweep over the country, I think about him quite often.
Today, Blake would likely be writing of America, and our “dark Satanic mills,” manufacturing death with the justification that America is God’s country. Fits pretty well.
Excellent post. I am raising my granddaughter, and every once in a while I tell her she can be anything she wants to be, and do anything she sets her mind to do, and don’t ever let me or Grandma or anybody else tell her different. I just hope she uses this secret knowledge in the service of good someday.
It’s interesting that you (apparently accidentally) pasted those two lines from HMS Pinafore into your post. William Gilbert was once asked by an American to come up with an American version of “He Is An Englishman.” Now you have to understand that Gilbert was probably none too crazy about Americans in general, since several American entrepreneurs had noticed the success of Pinafore and gone on to take advantage of the lax copyright laws then in effect to mount their own unauthorized versions in the US. One newspaper wryly reported that “At present there are forty-two companies playing Pinafore about the country. Companies formed after 6 PM yesterday are not included in this count.” (This undoubtedly influenced the subject of the followup, The Pirates of Penzance, and caused Gilbert to open Pirates with more-or-less simultaneous premiers in England and the US. But I digress.)
At any rate Gilbert, when confronted with this challenge, barely paused before penning this parody of his own work:
“For he is American!
For he himself has said it,
And it’s hardly to his credit
That he is American”
Unfortunately I have been completely unable to find the parody online to report the punchline, but trust me, it wasn’t flattering.
Anyway, that’s just a bit of a story for a Sunday morning before I have to go eat breakfast and get dressed and stuff.
Actually, I had done a longer post, including 2 pieces, the first G&S’s send-up of British self-puffery about English culture as the height of social evoluation – in addition to Blake’s piece.
Then I decided it was too long. However, in the middle of editting the thing down, one of my beasts ran across the keyboard, and poof, it was posted before I realized what had happened.
Oh well – you certainly got the drift! And thanks for the historical bit about G&S and an American version of Pinafore. As an aside, I saw a college group do a version of selected Pinafore scenes with the traditional wording, but with costumes, etc. from the modern era as a straight send-up of the U.S.
Great essay.
100 years ago it was British exceptionalism, the Empire etc.
I’ve been listening to the BBC radio series Sceptered Isle: Empire for the last few months.
I see so many parallels between then and now.
Can I make a suggestion, could you cross post this over at Eurotrib?
Hi Neutbob, nice to see you over here.
Hey Old Man In the Restroom, how ya doing?
Yeah, I lurk here from time to time, just doing my duty as a Blue Helmet.
I understand and agree completely with the sentiments that I imagine may have moved you to write this and to try and help others better understand what is happening to us–the American people of today.
At the same time, I don’t recognize myself in the America you’ve described. I was born –although outside the U.S. ( it was at a U.S. military base hospital, to two American-born parents, then stationed abroad with the U.S. Air Force)– in the mid-1950s and lived almost all of my life in the U.S. until after college graduation.
Again, the only absence during my youth was a few years when my family moved, upon being sent to an Air Force base in the far east.
For the rest of the time, I grew up in either the U.S. upper-midwest , or the southest, or the southwest in small or mid-sized towns.
I have an excellent memory of those years and of my schools. I can well remember that, like most kids, I was taught that the U.S. had many greatly admirable things in their history, and that, despite some disreputable episodes of the past, the nation was then and was supposed to continue to be, the freest and most admirable democracy in the world, a model for others–both by ambition and in fact.
But I can’t recall any school teacher of mine ever even suggesting that we Americans, or our nation, the United States, were exceptions to general rules of human decency and good conduct, nationally or internationally. On the contrary, I was impressed with the belief that we were just as obliged as any other land or people to repect the law and other people as our peers, that we were not _better than others –just because or even if our nation’s democracy– and, supposedly Britain’s included–was better than any other nation of the world.
It’s all the more peculiar, then, because my experience was, of all places, partly one of U.S.-run schools on American military installations, when the family was outside the U.S., or, when in the U.S., at the most typical middle-class (white) school districts you can imagine. I never lived on either coast nor imbibed their cosmopolitan atmosphere. So my youth had nothing of either New York nor Los Angeles to make it one exposed to things alien to the family of Ward, June, Wally and Theodore (Beaver) Cleaver.
Somehow, somewhere, I missed these lessons in which we were taught that the United States go by their own privileged rules and practically everyone else goes by other rules–sometimes dictated not so nicely by the U.S. government or mass-market consumer commerce.
I agree that the American people–many of them–do very much behave as though they believe they are an exception to general rules of good conduct which apply to others, and that this has been true for generations now. It’s just that I don’t remember it being taught overtly in school.
I think it is and it was everywhere in the culture and social climate, however. So ever-present that I suppose we drank it in with the same innocence that we breathed the air, not ever suspecting that our veiws were being shaped.
It may indeed be something that today and for some time since I left school has entered the lesson plans and the overt curricula. But it must also be ever-present in the mass-media culture, I suspect. So much so that addressing the matter in schools alone may not, probably shall not, be enough to change this view of ourselves.
I certainly agree that it’s a problem.
I think the point Les is making that the thinking ‘ we are all guilty” is an
obstacle to creating a movement against the ruling class’, and its
Republocrat party organs and state functionaries, that really organize the
crimes of the US imperialist state.
The idea that ‘we are a guilty” only leads to paralysis, and is an obstacle
to creating the strategy and movement to really kill the source of these
crimes—capitalism and the small minority of men and women that run that
system.
In fact, in my discussion with people from countries that are victims of US
state terrorism-a long list-they usually distinguish between the US state
and the mass of the population. I don’t think people in Venezuela,
Nicaragua, Iraq, Colombia, Serbia….and other countries that have been at
the receiving end of US aggression want working people to self-flagellate,
admitting, a la that asshole Daniel Goldenhagen “we are willing
executioners”.
Rather, They want us to, as you, Ward, have consistently and courageously
done, march and resist aggression carried out by the US imperialist state.
They want the troops, as they did in Vietnam, to rebel and not carry out
crimes against other working class people. They want us to develop a class
consciousness that we, the majority, have a set of interests and values
diametrically opposed to the criminals that run our political and economic
system.
Struggles carried out today at the st Bernard development, which show the
contradiction between billions spent on imperialist war, and not a dime for
housing, is part of creating that consciousness.
Not backing the parties of war and racism is also part of creating this
consciousness and new counter-movement to challenge the real mass murderers.
That’s a coherent point, but I disagree. Acknowledgement of a personal share in the collective guilt should lead to awareness and responsibility, not paralysis. Where is the evidence that that idea leads to paralysis? I think you just make that up as a talking point. Of course the leaders own most of the blame. But even the lowliest lumpen share in the blame.
Why isn’t there more grass roots organizing? A more vocal and visible anti-war movement? Why is Sheehan one of the few getting arrested?
That’s an interesting response to my question. My answer is that everyone, from lumpen to elites, are guilty; hence there is not much of a base for grass roots organizing. A big majority of the population wanted to go to war in Iraq, notwithstanding incredible evidence that such a policy was doomed and wrong. More is needed, but I’ll stop here.
Your statement “My answer is that everyone, from lumpen to elites, are guilty; hence there is not much of a base for grass roots organizing” screams paralysis.
There was a large part of the population that did not support the war, and the numbers are growing. The question is, why isn’t there more grass roots organizing against the war?
Guilt is useful to an extent, but if we focus exclusively on guilt, then it can result in paralysis. Naturally, the people most likely to feel guilty, are those that supported the war from the beginning, and are now seeing the fruits of destructiveness.
I’m afraid Ductape is encouraging people to focus on guilt, rather than on actions that we can take to bring about an end to this war, or whatever war is raging in our communities. I personally think Ductape is very angry…I’m not sure who with, but people participating here are certainly the cream of the American crop, and deserve and should be active in their communities, leading the way.
This blog tends to attract those who opposed the war from the beginning. I’d like to hear more about grass roots efforts, not about internalizing guilt.
War is just one piece of the exceptionalist mindset.
I think it’s natural for humans to feel entitled to the things they’re accustomed to receiving, and that it takes willingness and concerted effort to recognise and question whether we actually have a right to those advantages.
These invisible entitlements are seldom taught in a pedagogic sense; they are assumed from our earliest years as “the way things are”. I vehemently disagree with the R&H song “You Have To Be Carefully Taught”. No, you don’t; all you need is to be raised in an atmosphere of racism, classism, sexism and jingoism to inculcate those values right dowwn to the marrow of your bones. If I’m going to stop being a smug exceptionalist, I have to question EVERYTHING I believe all the time. If I realize that I’m not really entitled, just fortunate, I have go a step further and ask if my good fortune is at the expense of another. If that can be remedied, I’m honour bound to stop taking and make amends; if it can’t, I can do no less than admit to myself that there is no inherent superiority in me that deserves better treatment than anyone else.
Whether it’s letting someone else pick up my dirty sock for me or Condozeeza Rice declaring, “US nuclear weapons, good; anybody else’s nuclear weapons, bad”, I have to overcome my cultural programming to recognise the illogic.
How do you intend to kill capitalism?
Seeing that it is ascendant world wide and all, even among the RED Chinese.
Capitalism is killing itself, don’t you see that? Look at our environment, our lack of health care, our crumbling schools and infrastructure, our filled to the brim prisons? Not to mention homelessness and the crisis lack of affordable housing.
Certainly you’re not advocating capitalism as a success story?
I guess I am. Capitalism is ascendant world wide, in Asia, South America, even in the middle east. Even in Europe, where some countries self style themselves socialist, but really isnt.
Whether capitalism succeeds in curing all social ills is a different point. Do you have an economic system that can be realistically implemented which solves all these problems?
The problems you state are more problems created by our domestic politics and politicians, some of the right and some of the left, and have only a tangential connection with our choice of economic system.
As for environmental degradation as a result of economic growth, yes this is a problem caused by capitalism. In fact, it is a proof of capitalisms stunning success in places like India and China.
Will it lead to the end of the world as we know it? Who knows? Someone might come along and invent a way out of the destruction. And they will make billions in the process….
we have going on in this country is capitalism. The people at the top get laws passed so that they can stop having to continue to work for their slice of pie everyday! They do everything they can not excluding bribery and breaking common laws to make competition impossible.
Well, I am still using “barter and trade.” 🙂
She’ll barter and trade you right out of your shorts! She is the most amazing barterer…..I am very impressed with what can develop in a child who has a parent who teaches that money is only a concept. Then she went and made up a few of her own concepts to get things done for herself that wants done! She started doing it in the fourth grade! I hope someday when she has some free time that she teaches me how to do all this bartering and trading!
Any way I can.
Good to see you. Typed a comment, but it got long and stopped here.
whether it has my name in the title or not. 😉
What worries me, what frankly frightens me, is that not enough people in the world are aware of the existence of reform-minded Americans, who DO want advancement, who ARE in favor of modernization, and would like to see the US move toward legitimate statehood, and maybe one day, democracy!
That is a message that HAS to get out to the rest of the world, and it is just not happening. Obviously, US media is not going to do it, and because the numbers of the reform movement are so small, the world’s media does not really pay attention to it.
Because in my opinion, it may be a small number, but it is a small number of very intelligent and capable people, people whose moral fiber and character have been strong enough to “prevail” over the various American doctrines and whose “resolve” has been sorely tested every day of their adult lives, people who are brave enough, and who love what they want to think of their country enough, to risk everything from social opprobium to rendition to a “facility” to a tragic accident.
And for me, there is, I admit, a personal element, as I have been privileged to come to know so many of these courageous people, and I would like to see them get a chance to put their reforms into action, to form a real government, with real political parties, and get their constitution, which is a very good and sound document, out of that West Wing bathroom and make it not only a document, but something that actually has a bearing on what is done and not done with the taxes that people pay.
This comment also crossposted to here and probably some other places, in the interest of digital energy conservation, a cause I know you all support.
This is a very important point–that enlightened people in the US should be reaching out to others around the globe, reminding everybody that we still exist. I don’t remember seeing this idea anywhere else.
Among other things, this idea has the virtue of possibly reducing the risk of nuclear war.
Way back in the early 1960’s, as I first started to become poitically and socially and humanistically aware; (JFK had been murdered, I realized my own US government was likely culpable, and I realized that the “spin” about the emerging Vietnam catastrophe was all lies and revealed a deeply sinister side of US governmental behavior that I hadn’t been aware of in my previous 15 years of life), I had the realization, (virtually an epiphany), that characterizing groups of people by their identity when that identity was based on nationality, race, religion, ethnicity, was simply a sure fire way to develop and propagate inaccurate perception.
I’ve tried to remain true to my diligent efforts in that regard, by not thinking of, (for instance), Muslims or Christians or jews, or blacks or caucasians or asians, or Americans or Iranians or Chinese, as individually monolithic groups who inevitable demonstrate certain ubiquitous behavioral traits across
the spectrum of each particular group.
And I really wish more people would do the same. The identity/condemnation game is the foundation upon which racism, murderous religious psychosis, and violent nationalism are based.
I cannot identify a single behavioral trait shared by all members of any particular group as defined by these nationalistic/religious/ethnic frameworks. And as long as we fail as sentient human beings to do the deeper, more responsible work of defining who it is exactly that we seek to criticise or condemn specifically for transgressions against our/their fellow man; as long as we ourselves are content to take a shortcut when applying our judgment by simply characterizing, for instance, all Muslims as similarly guilty of the crimes of a few Muslims, or all blacks as guilty of the crimes of a few blacks or all “Americans” as inherently guilty of the crimes committed by some “Americans”, then we perpetuate the fatal divide that will prevent humanity from evolving.
I have battled against the transgresions and atrocities of the/my native US government since those early ’60s. I’m born and raised in the US and I cannot identify virtually any significant instances where I could say that my government either acted with my support or spoke for me or echoed my sentiments on the world stage.
I understand there are many tragic and destructive people in this country who do buy into the absurd idea of American exceptionalism and who use that arrogant and crackpot belief to legitimize all the selfishness and condescending arrogance that defines their behavior. But I am not one of those people, and, just as anyone who is, by the accident of geography or birth, part of any group within which there are some sick and violent members, I do not appreciate being tarred by the same wide brush that is the primary tool of racists and hatemongers everywhere.
sbj, I often really like your comments and 4 them. For what it’s worth, I didn’t like this one. I’m an immigration lawyer. For many years I’ve helped thousands of people from every continent on the globe. I couldn’t be as successful as I am if I did not recognize and intelligently react to certain national or ethic broad generalizations. Of course all people are different. But there are truthful ways that one can distinguish certain large groups, e.g. Russians as opposed to Filipinos.
My ex-wife and I used to argue all the time about what you’re saying here. I think you both have a point. But I think you make too much of it. There are many more important factors; this isn’t the central problem.
Arminius,
I wrote a long and detailed reply to you, but somehow in the posting of it it vanished completely, (I hate when that happens). In any case I am too beat to redo the whole thing again now but I’d like to give a brief reply to you now.
First I want to thank you for your kind words and to say that I too usually find your comments both thoughtful, intelligent, insightful and edifying.
Secondly, my intent in my comment above was not to claim that the sort of generalizations along the lines described above were the central problem; only that such generalizations were frequently a central problem, in that they often provide a foundation upon which the propagandists can more adroitly practise their dark art of “weaponizing ignorance”.
Certainly I’m not so naive, obtuse nor so rigidly doctrinaire as to disregard the obvious truth that there are plenty of broad generalizations about various groups of people that are both accurate and useful in a positive way. My criticism above was centered more around the idea that when broad generalizations are used to impugn the motives of, or otherwise invalidate the behavior of members of those groups across the board, that this sort of lazy judgmentalism does in fact contribute to the propagation of that aforementioned weaponized ignorance by demeaning all because of the behavior of some.
Also, lest you or anyone interpret my remarks as some sort of defense of “America”, let me disabuse you of that notion. I fully recognize that the US is the single most destructive and threatening nation on the planet and has been such for quite some time. And I know plenty of “Ugly Americans”, that’s for sure. but I’ve travelled quite a bit over the last several decades and I have to say I’ve known a lot of “Ugly Argentines”, and some Ugly Italians and Ugly Hindus and Christians, etc. But I’ve also know many beautiful human beings that are members of these groups, and for me I think it’s important to make these distinctions, especially so when we purport to be engaging in conversation that is supposed to be enlightening.
I’ll be happy to continue this conversation but right now I’m beat and must go to bed. In any case I will look forward to more of your commentary, whether on this topic or any other.
Well said. I agree with that.
All are thoughtful, most are thought-provoking, some are both poignant and moving.
As some of you have pointed out, ironically, this phenomenon is not unique to Americans, and yes, there should be a word in English to distinguish people of the US from people of the Americas, as it is extremely unfair to millions of people. In Spanish, there is a word, “Estadosunidenses,” which is much faster to say than it is to type. I apologize for my own use of the term “Americans” for the sake of convenience, and that is all it is, and it is not my intention to cast aspersions on people from other countries in the western hemisphere.”
It was quite common in the heyday of the old Soviet System, and today in North Korea, and was employed with considerable success in Germany not too long ago.
What factors can increase or decrease the capacity for a mass internalization of such a doctrine, and conversely, which factors would be obstacles to same would make an interesting discussion and perhaps this one will inspire one of you to undertake such a study, and share it with earth residents.
As events unfold, bringing many changes to the way ordinary Americans live their lives, there will be difficult days, especially for that small pro-reform minority.
Like all people of goodwill around the world, I regret that US did not make different choices, however, it is never too late to hope not just for a future, but for a better one.