D
Deleted member 541
Anyone care to share their thoughts on the SOTU address last night??? For me, same old talk, same old man, just different day.
-
We are a multilingual website again. Read the notice about this.
-
Understand AI use at MyPTSD: all AI use is explained in our AI help page. AI use is by choice here. It exists if you want it, but does nothing unless you choose to use it.
News Us politics - read first post before comment
- Post starter anthony
- Start date
- Status
scout86
VIP Member
I'd have to agree with that. Mostly, I was glad that it wasn't "The American Apocalypse Part 2".
I wish he'd quit going on about "American Exceptionalism", and I guess it's not just him. Maybe it's just my Scandinavian-American upbringing, but I find that pretty offensive.
I wish he'd quit going on about "American Exceptionalism", and I guess it's not just him. Maybe it's just my Scandinavian-American upbringing, but I find that pretty offensive.
Justmehere
Sponsor
He’s a populist and a nationalist. I think it’s a good thing when it rubs someone the wrong way. Nationalism is on the rise all over the world... America is no exception.
scout86
VIP Member
Most days, I think the U.S.is the worst offender.:(
D
Deleted member 41765
Sadly, I agree.
Justmehere
Sponsor
I disagree...
Iran, has a much stronger bent towards nationalistic exceptionalism: http://www.mei.edu/content/iranian-exceptionalism
North Korea (amoung others) has gone much further down the nationalist road...
I’ve been in a number of counties where the citizens of that nation thought they were better than those of another nation or all other nations. It was such a thing, it was not even a thing.
In the US, we are still a pretty darn individualistic country, and it’s so ingrained in our culture —- which is what I think perhaps makes the shift towards nationalism really shocking in the US. It is a huge shift. Other places? It’s how it’s been a long time.!
Our president is also being quite bold in declaring it, certainly not more bold than Putin, or so many other leaders on this, but he’s had a huge (YUGE) impact.
Iran, has a much stronger bent towards nationalistic exceptionalism: http://www.mei.edu/content/iranian-exceptionalism
North Korea (amoung others) has gone much further down the nationalist road...
I’ve been in a number of counties where the citizens of that nation thought they were better than those of another nation or all other nations. It was such a thing, it was not even a thing.
In the US, we are still a pretty darn individualistic country, and it’s so ingrained in our culture —- which is what I think perhaps makes the shift towards nationalism really shocking in the US. It is a huge shift. Other places? It’s how it’s been a long time.!
Our president is also being quite bold in declaring it, certainly not more bold than Putin, or so many other leaders on this, but he’s had a huge (YUGE) impact.
scout86
VIP Member
I scanned through the article about Iran and was surprised to find myself agreeing, in part, with the view attributed to Iranian leadership.
"Another important area of dispute between the Iranian leaders and the West concerns the latter’s political structure. The Iranian indictment of the Western political system, or liberal democracy, is twofold. First, according to Iranian leaders both before and since the Islamic Revolution, the notion that genuine democracy exists in the West is an illusion. The people in the West are misled by those who hold real power to believe that they are enjoying democracy — that they, as citizens, can choose their government and that they can alter the government and change its policies through the ballot box. These are deceptions and illusions. The real power in the West is held by those who own large economic enterprises — banks, factories, financial institutions, and multinationals. They choose the government and the ruling elite through a complex political and media network. It is true that the people in the West believe their votes at the ballot box changes the government and appoints new leaders, but lo and behold, it is the vested interest that holds all the strings and imposes its will upon the ordinary man on the street, leading him to believe that it was his or her vote which brought changes."
The one thing I'd say to somewhat disagree with that is that, technically, regular people COULD take control from the people who currently have the power, it's just not easy to accomplish. And, I think it's pretty hard to argue that the system in Iran is better that Western Democracies.
The other thing is, I'm not sure it's good that we, once again, find ourselves on a list that includes Iran, North Korea, and Russia...... I think I'd rather be on a different list!
"Another important area of dispute between the Iranian leaders and the West concerns the latter’s political structure. The Iranian indictment of the Western political system, or liberal democracy, is twofold. First, according to Iranian leaders both before and since the Islamic Revolution, the notion that genuine democracy exists in the West is an illusion. The people in the West are misled by those who hold real power to believe that they are enjoying democracy — that they, as citizens, can choose their government and that they can alter the government and change its policies through the ballot box. These are deceptions and illusions. The real power in the West is held by those who own large economic enterprises — banks, factories, financial institutions, and multinationals. They choose the government and the ruling elite through a complex political and media network. It is true that the people in the West believe their votes at the ballot box changes the government and appoints new leaders, but lo and behold, it is the vested interest that holds all the strings and imposes its will upon the ordinary man on the street, leading him to believe that it was his or her vote which brought changes."
The one thing I'd say to somewhat disagree with that is that, technically, regular people COULD take control from the people who currently have the power, it's just not easy to accomplish. And, I think it's pretty hard to argue that the system in Iran is better that Western Democracies.
The other thing is, I'm not sure it's good that we, once again, find ourselves on a list that includes Iran, North Korea, and Russia...... I think I'd rather be on a different list!
Justmehere
Sponsor
Well, I actually disagree right here. The US isn’t a democracy. Let’s not even pretend that it is. It’s a representative republic, and for good cause.
But back to the topic, the most dangerous lies are based on some element of truth. Iran isn’t wrong to say there is a problem with corporate involvement in politics - but the people can change that, and change it in a much easier manner than the people can in Iran.
The election of Trump if anything shows the media sure the heck doesn’t control who gets elected.
And in regards to being on a list within Russia, Iran, and North Korea, I’d put other many other nations in many other regions on the list as well.
Let’s take Denmark for example. The DPP (Danish Peoples Party) wants to allow the police to just take what they want from refugees. Denmark has some of the toughest immigration laws in Europe and yet they want to make them stronger.
None of this is to say that what the US us doing is ok, but that there is a larger perspective to take. We are not the worst ever. We are not so terrible that the world rise to nationalism is all because of us or that we exceed it in the world. I think it’s almost too American-centric to think that way.
This last article goes into nationalism on other continents.
Including Japan and so many others.
scout86
VIP Member
You're right and I know it's technically a republic. Should have said that.
And I never suggested that they did. The media is pretty diverse. A lot of it exists based on money generated from advertising, or money from owners with agendas. So "the media" doesn't even agree on who should get elected. But, "the media" can sure be used as a tool, by people who know how to use it, and have access to it.
I actually think it's going to be pretty hard for "the people" to remove corporate interests from our politics. There have been a few attempts, like McCain/Fingold, but they tend to get undone by the next wave of sold out politicians to get elected. We need elected officials to change the role of money, but that money got them elected. Changing the rules is against their own interest. Same for the political parties. They exist because of big money, mostly. Or big money has an outsized influence, at least. They aren't going to risk alienating their big donors.
As far as what's going on in other countries, I find the trend to be worrisome, but I'm really only offended when out comes from here. Sadly, Trump looks like he represents the U.S. I'm offended, and object to the fact that it looks like all that absurd bragging is something I subscribe to. Because I don't. In my own way, I think I'm pretty patriotic, but I've never bought the "my country, right or wrong" idea. It's my country, for sure, and I'll do what I can to make it worthy of a universal version of the ideals it was founded on. (As opposed to a version that only applies to white, property owning males.)
UnKnown-Self
Diamond Member
The clock is ticking AGAIN.
I do Not like being used as a bargaining chip.
I also think it’s all bluff. It’s a cliff hanger moment Barnum can’t resist. It might be different if the closing meant no pay. It only means no pay today. We will get it retro.
I know so many people live pay to pay. To go more then 2 weeks/ 1 pay period, the cost is more then the gov wants.
I just heard he wants a tank parade down Pennsylvania Ave for him on President’s Day.
Gotta go!
I do Not like being used as a bargaining chip.
I also think it’s all bluff. It’s a cliff hanger moment Barnum can’t resist. It might be different if the closing meant no pay. It only means no pay today. We will get it retro.
I know so many people live pay to pay. To go more then 2 weeks/ 1 pay period, the cost is more then the gov wants.
I just heard he wants a tank parade down Pennsylvania Ave for him on President’s Day.
Gotta go!
Just wanted to add that while, yes, this is a republican form of government, it also has aspects deriving from Greek democracy, which is why, technically, we have a democratic republican form of government.
A brief excerpt from a book I wrote says what I mean:
"The earliest influences on the U.S. form of government—a democratic republic—come from ancient Greece and Rome. The ancient capital of Greece, Athens, employed a system of government called demokratia – from demos, meaning “people,” and kratos, meaning “power.” From this derives American democracy, though Athenian democracy was quite different. In ancient Athens, every citizen—every adult man, that is—was expected not only to vote, but also to take a direct role in the government at some point in his life. Instead of electing people to represent them in the legislature, for example, citizens chose government leaders from amongst themselves by lottery. In comparison, the U.S. system of representative democracy is more like an oligarchy—rule by an elite few. The Founding Fathers preferred the example of the Greek city-state of Sparta, whose government consisted of two kings whose powers were limited by councils called ephors (meaning “overseers”), and whose members were citizens elected each year. Ephors had executive, legislative, and judicial powers. The kings generally served as military commanders and religious heads as well."
A brief excerpt from a book I wrote says what I mean:
"The earliest influences on the U.S. form of government—a democratic republic—come from ancient Greece and Rome. The ancient capital of Greece, Athens, employed a system of government called demokratia – from demos, meaning “people,” and kratos, meaning “power.” From this derives American democracy, though Athenian democracy was quite different. In ancient Athens, every citizen—every adult man, that is—was expected not only to vote, but also to take a direct role in the government at some point in his life. Instead of electing people to represent them in the legislature, for example, citizens chose government leaders from amongst themselves by lottery. In comparison, the U.S. system of representative democracy is more like an oligarchy—rule by an elite few. The Founding Fathers preferred the example of the Greek city-state of Sparta, whose government consisted of two kings whose powers were limited by councils called ephors (meaning “overseers”), and whose members were citizens elected each year. Ephors had executive, legislative, and judicial powers. The kings generally served as military commanders and religious heads as well."
EveHarrington
VIP Member
Omg I read this too fast and thought it said same dirty old man :hilarious:
- Status
Donation drives
Trending content
-
-
What Are You Feeling Today? Not Thinking, Rather Feeling! Can You Identify Yours?
- goingonhope
Comments: 34K -
-
-
-
