ANTI-AMERICAN BIAS --- THE ZEITGEIST OF THE WORLD

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Usually in every issue there is a dizzying array of facts, often contradictory in nature.

But watch as everyone gains in on a fact and missing another countervailing fact, and how they emphasize one fact to the exclusion of another fact.

Justice seems to be adversarial, and those who can marshall a set of facts to support their opinion have most assuredly convinced themselves most of all the rightness of their own position.

Most of the anti-American bias has quite a lot of facts to support their bias.

But there is only one achilles heel to this zeitgeist of anger towards the excited states of america.

Watch how little motivated they are, how little driving force of anger there is towards the hyprocisy of their own nations and other nations.

They'll deny this.

But the last person we see accurately is ourselves.

Why Saddam and Milosovec does not cause the extreme anger Bush does is an irony they will easily, smoothly overlook and explain earnestly to you that there is no irony to this.

They have excellent rationales.

And I understand and agree with their reasons.

I watched all the peace protesters in Europe and in America and their anger was stoked. Meanwhile corporations in their own countries hid behind the scenes selling Italians mines, German nuclear power, Russian weapons, and the French joining in with the Russians to get their own Saudi Arabia. Yes I saw Rumsfeld shake hands with Saddam when America played Bismarck geopolitics against Iran and who we create our own enemy.

Do any of you see the guilt and complicity in your own country?

Does it drive you as intensely?

I wonder what another 10 years of Saddam would have brought to this world.

But all of you are accountants of Moral Superiority.

Are you so sure?
 

Jo Canadian

Council Member
Mar 15, 2005
2,488
1
38
PEI...for now
I don't find myself anti american, but I'm not fond of the current admin. I just find the contemporary attitude from Bushco to be a little astray from the Ideals of the origional America. Hopefully like the new Coke, it'll fade away.




Washington, Franklin & Madison were quite the Prophets eh?

 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Love the cartoons.

Good quotes. Each one had irony in it.

Because each President, starting with Washington had to do exactly the opposite of their well-known quotes.

They believed what they said but had to do what they thought necessary.

We're all just movie critics of the political stage. It's a whole other matter to actually DO something.
 

Jo Canadian

Council Member
Mar 15, 2005
2,488
1
38
PEI...for now
the last one was more for fun, Afghanistan war had a reason, and the Iraq and Afghan votes weren't as much as interfearing as they were just the outcome of a post-war situation, help or no help.
 

Jo Canadian

Council Member
Mar 15, 2005
2,488
1
38
PEI...for now
Because each President, starting with Washington had to do exactly the opposite of their well-known quotes.

Yes, they did have to do the opposite of what they said, and in the end they came to conclusions through the expierience they went through and foresight to say what they had to say so nobody would go through the same thing they did.

Nobody's really learning the lessons they did. They did many wonderful, brave, and innovative things to bring the US to where it is, but if the lessons of their life are not heeded then things will get worse before they get better.

Their world is much different than todays situation, but each warning has a rudimentary suggestion to help overcome complicated issues...if they are listened to.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
"Nobody's really learning the lessons they did."

You have a romance for the ideal and that is good, but it is not so complete a picture for those Presidents who uttered those quote as well as for those of us who follow.

What I mean is best understood by the movie, "Ground Hog" day, where Bill Murray wakes up to the same day and gets another mulligan to do over and over.

You may come to a conclusion, even the right conclusion and still stumble of course.

But all these quidelines for morality and all our talk of moral superiority and indignation which is the core of this thread and other threads is best informed by suspicion of our own rightness.

Every argument is an argument because both sides have a piece of the truth and both sides diminish the truth the opposite contains.
 

no1important

Time Out
Jan 9, 2003
4,125
0
36
56
Vancouver
members.shaw.ca
RE: ANTI-AMERICAN BIAS --

I think the US wants to control the supply and price of oil. Basically the US Government wants control of the world and each country. They control smaller countries by bribing them with money and food and attach a "catch" to their "help", when clearly they have ulterior motives. America does not like it when other countries say no and don't want to follow the American Government doctrine.
 

Jo Canadian

Council Member
Mar 15, 2005
2,488
1
38
PEI...for now
Posted: April 15th, 2005 7:26 pm Post subject: RE: ANTI-AMERICAN BIAS --- THE ZEITGEIST OF THE WORLD

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Nobody's really learning the lessons they did."

You have a romance for the ideal and that is good, but it is not so complete a picture for those Presidents who uttered those quote as well as for those of us who follow.

:| I wouldn't call it romance. It's pretty much having faith that people can make the right decisions with retrospect. The results: The people making decisions are acting like dicks right now.

What I mean is best understood by the movie, "Ground Hog" day, where Bill Murray wakes up to the same day and gets another mulligan to do over and over.

You may come to a conclusion, even the right conclusion and still stumble of course.

:roll: In comparison to the 12 monkeys motif, You can't change the past by going there knowing what you know because it'll happen anyways, but you can take what you know from the past and change the present...Besides the real world has issues that need to be handled carefully, because they can only be done once.

But all these quidelines for morality and all our talk of moral superiority and indignation which is the core of this thread and other threads is best informed by suspicion of our own rightness.

:scratch: EH? I don't think I may be right, but I have a need to express when something feels wrong.

Every argument is an argument because both sides have a piece of the truth and both sides diminish the truth the opposite contains.
8O Alllrighty then, in that case, I guess talking about important issues isn't necessary if the argument has been won and lost, I'll just bury my head in the sand feeling glad that everything is all in good hands.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: ANTI-AMERICAN BIAS --

I think your premise is disingenuous, Jim. The US gets criticized more because there's more to criticize. I also think that the US, especially since 9-11, has been overly sensitive to criticism and brutally opposed to anything that suggest they partake in a little introspection and self-criticism.

I've never had anybody go after me because I went after France or Italy or England or Germany. Nobody called me anti-Canadian when I suggested that Brian Mulroney had a secret torture chamber/orgy room under the Peace Tower. When I called Tony Blair "Maggie Thatcher's Bastard Son", and I started that long before Iraq...or even George Bush...nobody sent me threatening e-mails.

I have gone after several countries and their leaders over the years, including Canada. I'm not shy about it.

Something to keep in mind though. I've tried writing about injustices in this world and not including the US. Sometimes I've just left stuff out because even I get tired of writing some variation on, "Then US president <insert name here> stood behind the big, pink sow and unzipped his pants."

Now a lot of that is just a function of the size and influence of the United States. A lot of it is no more than pure greed though...using your military as thugs to shake down foreign governments in acts of semi-official gangsterism. That, my friend, is the sign of a national dream gone horribly wrong.

I have never met the kind of protestations and illegitimate defences I've gotten since I started criticizing George Bush though. That started even before 9-11, before he was president. If I said something about him, I'd get some freakish response telling me I was just anti-American.

When he became president, the responses became a little uglier. They were still freakish though...radical Christians and Americans with no sign that either of their feet had ever been planted in reality.

When those jets hit the WTC, the results became regular though. I could no longer consider them to be freakish, they were headed for the mainstream. I still chalked them up to partisan and dimwitted Republicans or Democrats who were still hurting because they had been attacked. That was wearing thin by the time Iraq started and had gaping holes by the time your last election campaign got into high gear.

I don't buy any of that anymore. Even the most mild criticism of US policy will get you called anti-American. You live in an outlaw nation and over half of the American people who bothered voting last time around seem to like it that way.

Meanwhile your country is still torturing, still rattling sabres, still using banned weapons. You have a war criminal in the White House appointing other war criminals to positions of importance. Present your coutervailing facts but the real fact is that your country was there, front and centre, when the international community wrote those laws.

Am I going to continue to criticize the US? You bet I am. Just like I'm going to continue to criticize Canada and England and France and any other country that screws up.

So far I've only gotten hate mail from Americans though.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Well Reverend Blair, I respect your sincerity and even the tone of your words.

I tire as you do going bat for bat on each point made.

Regarding the international laws, there is plenty there to have legitimate and wise disagreement, n'est pas?

And I'm glad of it, because I fear an insulated mind-think in the rest of the world just as much as your fear the insulated thinking of American hubris.

You say it's different? You probably sincerely say so.


Regarding how a lot of Americans are recoiling from the world condemnation is understandable, even when, not if, Americans are proven wrong, the reaction is understandable.

Human nature is universal and put under the same test any citizen of any nation has that tendency.

But where I'm seeing the Moral Superiority of the world is that they never gave anymore a tinker's damn about Iraq before or after Saddam.

Proof?

You've seen it.

The world is letting that country hang on its own.

It actually has a chance, despite American bungling of the highest order, but let the world sit in its smug seat of judgement wailing about the poor people of Iraq and then watch all the valid reasons why they do nothing.

Smug superiority knows no borders, my friend.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Very true Vanni.

And you're not anti-semitic even if you are anti-Bush America.

But I'm glad this last Pope took things a little further with the jews, because after all two things the Christians did to condemn and create the stereotype of the jew, by calling them the killer of Christ and allowing them to join no guilds or jobs other than the clothing industry and the money lending industry.

But you Vanni and the others have mentioned the ill treatment you get for bashing BushAmerica and is it any different from the feeling you have for the idiots that defend BushAmerica?

I see a little of the same operating on both sides of the coin.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
But where I'm seeing the Moral Superiority of the world is that they never gave anymore a tinker's damn about Iraq before or after Saddam.

I've been bitching US support of Saddam and people like him since Reagan was in the White House. I've been bitching about Afghanistan for just as long. And South America. And Africa. And Asia.

In Iraq it was the US that shut down world condemnation of the gassing of the Kurds. That was under Droolin' Ronnie Rayguns. They said it was Iran who did the gassing then. They were protecting their good friend, Saddam. A lot of people screamed, and I was one of the voices.

I was yelling about South and Central American as Droolin' Ronnie worked to destroy democracy there too.

It wasn't just the US though. I talk back to anybody who starts eyeing those sows. I was part of the campaign to get Canada's Talisman Oil out of Sudan, if you need an example. We won that battle...Talisman pulled out.

When I hear people say things like, "Where you when...." I have an answer. I was right f**king there.

Regarding the international laws, there is plenty there to have legitimate and wise disagreement, n'est pas?

The law is clear. A country that attacks another country without provocation is breaking the law. A country that defies the will of the international community is breaking the law. There is no room for disagreement.

And I'm glad of it, because I fear an insulated mind-think in the rest of the world just as much as your fear the insulated thinking of American hubris.

There is no insulated mind-think once you get out of the boardrooms. Once you get away from the insane idea that we can acheive infinite growth (for an ever-shrinking few) with finite resources, there are arguments and arm wrestling and people who want to think for themselves.

What you call the American hubris is just plain old greed. It's like a cancer that's eating away at us. Nobody thinks that it's restricted to just the US...that's why the protests come from around the planet. The US does have the most of it though, it's official policy there, and gets called on it more often as a result.

I know what you mean, Rev. This is very similar to the circumstance that if you criticize the actions of the State of Israel in any way, you're labelled anti-semitic...

Yup. I get called an anti-semite a lot lately. And when I went after Dave Ahenikiw when he first made his remarks, they tried to crucify me for that too. That was years ago. It was before hating Arabs was cooler than hating Jews and when I went after Dave (who has a long history with my family and hid his anti-semitism well) they told me that I just hated Indians.

Piss on them though, these weird accusers who haven't got a clue. I don't have time to hate people at all, and when I do it stems from their actions, not their race.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
The law is clear. A country that attacks another country without provocation is breaking the law. A country that defies the will of the international community is breaking the law. There is no room for disagreement. ------ Reverend Blair.

Is that the end of your thinking on that subject?

Is it really as clear as that?

Aren't there a half dozen scenarios that defy that clarity?

Is there an unsaid presumption that a country has to take a devastating hit first?

Will a nation accept that risk?

Does your one truth blind you to other truths?

And in an international court of law, where can one have a change of venue? Mars? Especially when the prevailing opinion is heavily biased for whatever legitimate reasons it musters?

And by the way, the public trial of Milosovec in the Hague was quite a carnival and yet to be fair I don't know how they could have avoided its hideous circus aspects.


Instead of the final word which tends to describe your post, it appears to me to be more of a starting point that begs more questions?

Not so much the final word that ends thinking, but a starting point to question and analyze even more, yes?


And your damn right on America's duplicitous relationship with Iraq, but even that is not the final word that should blind you to other ongoing truths.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
Is that the end of your thinking on that subject?

Is it really as clear as that?

Aren't there a half dozen scenarios that defy that clarity?

Is there an unsaid presumption that a country has to take a devastating hit first?

Will a nation accept that risk?

In the case of the US actions, yes that is the end of my thinking on that subject. Contrary to what your media and your government has told you, the entire world did not believe that Saddam had WMD. There are still no ties between al Qaeda or 9-11 and Saddam Hussein.

Your country was told, by UN arms inspectors, that there was no evidence of WMD in Iraq. Colin got laughed at when he showed up at the UN with pictures of cartoon trucks.

Your government lied to you and your mainstream media helped them. When most of the world stood up and told you the truth, you refused to hear, instead insisting that the world was anti-American.
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
America is not being treated unfairly. They have created a hell of a mess internationally and the chickens are coming home to roost.
In the Middle East they have involved themselves in a new Vietnam that will take years to get out of. Even the ordinary people of Iraq want the Americans to go home.
The people of Iraq want to continue fighting for power and this democracy stuff is getting in the way of a good fight. In the Middle East people think more in terns of the tribe they belong to rather than the community as a whole.
In South America the people are rejecting the American way and electing left of centre governments. A large part of the reason for this is an anti American backlash.
Those who govern the USA do not understand the mind set outside of America and they rule by controlling the mind set of the people, inside the country.
There is no real debate inside the country, its just not correct to be critical of the government.
What has got them in trouble the most though, is the silly belief that their way is the best and only way, and the average person really believes the spoon fed line that everything will be alright if they stay their present destructive course. Soon they will face even more Anti-Americanism and they will be economically broke as well.
Unfortunately many Americans are watching reality shows, instead of the real news that is happening around them. Their own attitude has created the feeling of Anti-Americanism, and the feelings of resentment are fair game.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Much of what 'damngrumpy' says is true.

But much of it is uninspired ordinariness, predictable self-righteous indignation.

How could anyone have a different opinion than yours?

I certainly agree with many of the criticisms you and others bring on this board.

But where is your analysis of the alternative?

Leave Milosovec in power?
Europe sat by with genocide in their own backyard.
Again?

Leave Saddam in power? Let the conditions of his state of fear where families turned in their brother. Let the conditions brew hate and more hate? Do you need to see 24 hours of Iraqi burial sites?
Fester and fester --- allow that status quo?
And European business hungering for contracts with that status quo to develop their own personal Saudi Arabia, the hypcrisy of which you decry with America?


Let the little North Korean with the bad hair cut and taste for the American movie Scarface still export doom?

You're the supreme Moral Accountants of Now, but certainly is there no inight to What IF ?

Your way?

You all are so confident.

So sure.

This to me is amazing.