Idealistic/Naive or Strategic/Calculating

[welsh]

Ok, was watching Jon Stewart's The Daily Show and he had a guest that said, basically that the US was essentially an idealistic country but often Naive. Thus it was idealism that got the US to try something like democratizing Iraq and it was Naive to think we could do it easy.

I used to think that too. But now I'm less certain. Perhaps that's the apologetic position.

What do you think, is the US generally idealistic but naive, or is it calculating and ruthless, strategic and cunning? Or whatever else you might wish.

And please, let's avoid a flame fest.

 

[DJ Slamák]

I think the big wigs are strategic and cunning, and that's why they try to keep the rest of the nation idealistic and naïve. Much like everywhere else.

 

[Kahgan]

the US is like a wuss in a power armour and with a turbo plasma rifle

hey, im talking about the us government, so dont get pissed just because you are american......

 

[Johns Volition]

I think the problem is that you can not see the usa as an entity, with just one mind controlling it... in fact you have to imagine it (like any country) as a total insane person, with tousends of different personalities, each one trying to pull of something for itself... sure most trying to find the way that is the best for the country as a whole, but in the end, they are still striving in different directions.

(such a nice parable)

 

[Roshambo]

the US is like a wuss in a power armour and with a turbo plasma rifle

hey, im talking about the us government, so dont get pissed just because you are american......

I agree. I just hope Nixon II doesn't get re-elected in 2004.

Of course, I don't care much for the alternative, either. It's like picking one of two piles of dog shit to step in, and you have no choice but to put your foot down in one of them.

Sick as it is, and I don't endorse the thought, but perhaps we do need to have another high-caliber impeachment. It might scare the jokers away from the office.

 

[Wooz]

I don't think it's naivete that drove the US into democratizing Iraq. Democatizing. Hah.

The "corporate evil media" might make you think so, but no. Invasive wars are fought for profit, power, and well-being of some bloody state.




Also, there are two inpending Signs Of Doom in this thread: Rosh agreeing with a MR member and posting in a political debate.

 

[Tannhauser]

I don't see the United States profiting over this war, and it really isn't over a power-base. I see it as naivete, assuming that Iraqis would think like Americans. A corporation may make some money, but it hasn't been translating into the United States economy (which is a move I don't think a politician would knowingly make).

I'm sure other people in this forum read Robert A. Heinlein, has anyone read Expanded Universe? Heinlein proposes some ideas, such as having the loser in a Presidential election put to death. Only people willing to die for their ideas would run for President, eliminating spineless politicians from the office. It's an idea, though not without many flaws.

 

[DarkCorp]

I would take calculating/agressive/strategic/cunning.

As an American citizen, I really don't buy into the "The world is dark and America is the light" deal.

However if you look at history, every country that was ever worth its salt, got there at another countrys' expense.

America does what it needs to do to maintain the status quo.

 

[Wooz]

Kotario, do you really believe this war isn't fought for money, strategical influence over the middle east and power?

Face it: Who's going to run the oil companies?
Who's going to rebuild the stuff blown up by bombs?

Soviet invasions throughout the 60's and 70's were done under the same pretext, and I most definetly don't think of it as naivete...

 

[DarkCorp]

The United States doesn't give a damn if other countries like them or not. To this day, many Japanese want the Americans to go home. Many other countries do not want american bases on their soil.

In the end its all about kill or be killed. If a country does not defend the things that make it strong, then it goes weak and some other country will kick its ass (either economically, diplomatically or through war).

 

[Zoe]

America does act in a ruthless "I am the ruler of the world and UN is in my territory so that i find some justification to my actions" way. The speech Bush gave the night Iraq was invaded was ridiculous, claiming to be the salvation (when all they wanted was to garanntee at gun point and at the spence of other people's blood their price for the barrel of oil.

I do hope to live to see the day when the world will see some democracy and humanitarism from USA. Cause its easy to say pretty words in front of a camera, thousands of miles away from the place where the "dirty job"is being made. Its easy to smile and let the hairdresser fix you up while you read your lines - later on, we saw what this brought to and we see from the rampant violence (poor american guy that got his head off on tv is only one - how many iraquians have suffered and were tortured while the american soldiers laughed and filmed "to prodly show the neighbors at home".

I am sorry, all this makes me sick. I am thousands of miles away from both sides of this conflicts, but it hurts me, it aggravates me as a human being that so many barbarisms are still made in the 21th century, that civilized nations are killing and torturing people... For what? For a **** economical reason? It's so shallow, so callous and so puny that its hard for me to accept it comes from "civilized world", from "democracy", from a land who claims "Its a self evident truth that all man are born equal"and bla bla bla... As the old saying goes, it seems that "Some are more equal than the others".

 

[Zoe]

Oh and to make clear: I don "hate"anybody or any country - I just wish there was more sense in the "world leaders" - cause, as Gandhi remarked, "an eye for an eye will make the world blind".

 

[DarkCorp]

Sadly thats the way the world works curently. The golden rule is great and all when applied to day to day life. However, one learns quickly that politics is all about scheming, alliances and backstabbing.

Just see it as self preservation. The Romans, French, English, Spanish, Japanese, Germans and shitloads of other countries did the same thing.

The only way this will end is when we evolve enough to work together and create the often dreamt of Utopian world.

 

[DarkCorp]

Oh and to make clear: I don "hate"anybody or any country - I just wish there was more sense in the "world leaders" - cause, as Gandhi remarked, "an eye for an eye will make the world blind".

Ghandis words ring true. However no matter how much warning we get, someone will always fuck up a good thing, its human nature.

 

[Jebus]

Ghandis words ring true. However no matter how much warning we get, someone will always fuck up a good thing, its human nature.

Take Ghandi himself, for example. He sure fucked up the lives of plenty poor people.

 

[Wooz]

On the other hand, without Ghandi, India would be much more fucked, yesno?

Meh, no, no need for an utopian world. How many loons have already tried to make utopian worlds by force? No thanks.
We can start by not lying that much, treating people like dirt on the account of "human nature", and basing a society on scam.

"Human nature".
Hah. You realize the previous two words linked together are a complete paradox? There IS no thing as human "nature", for humans are the only bloody thing in nature that separates itself from it. Basic territorial and posessive instincts are not proper to the human being, even seagulls are capable of that.
Arguably, the only thing one could call "human nature" is the predisposition to think rational, abstract thoughts. Predisposition, beacause it's a well-known fact that not everybody does so.

'Sides, the fact that the world is as fucked as it is doesn't mean one can try to make it better. Of course, you can't change the world in a day, nor makke it better slaughtering millions of people defending a Good Cause, but you can do a good deed, that, makes the world a tad better.

Like Planting a tree, segregating your trash, helping people all around you and kicking nazis in the side of the head with steel-toed boots.

 

[Jebus]

On the other hand, without Ghandi, India would be much more fucked, yesno?

Meh, the things that happened to India would've most likely happened without Ghandi too. The British empire was falling apart, and it would've fallen apart without Ghandi too. Granted, it might all have been bloodier, especially the entire hindoe-mulsim stuff.

But on the other hand present day Indians would've been better off. We all remember Ghandi for his non-violent resistance and his legendary victim-complex, but what we all fail to remember is that he might very well be the sole reason the Cast-system (or whatever it's called in English) is still in place, and millions of 'outcasts' are being discriminated to this day.

I just don't like the guy, what can I say. They should've let him starve to death.

 

[MrMarcus]

Sadly thats the way the world works curently. The golden rule is great and all when applied to day to day life.

No - politicos operate under a different golden rule:

He who has the gold makes the rules.

 

[Zoe]

'Sides, the fact that the world is as fucked as it is doesn't mean one can try to make it better. Of course, you can't change the world in a day, nor makke it better slaughtering millions of people defending a Good Cause, but you can do a good deed, that, makes the world a tad better.

Like Planting a tree, segregating your trash, helping people all around you and kicking nazis in the side of the head with steel-toed boots.

I do agree with "each doing his part". Even bit by bit, can make a great difference.

 

[quietfanatic]

We all remember Ghandi for his non-violent resistance and his legendary victim-complex, but what we all fail to remember is that he might very well be the sole reason the Cast-system (or whatever it's called in English) is still in place, and millions of 'outcasts' are being discriminated to this day.
.

And there are so many damned Catholics in America because they voted for John Kennedy. It is unfair to blame Ghandi for the continuation of Hindu tradition. But it probably did help to reinforce their culture.

India being the 'jewel in the crown' was a very positive thing for their nation. The gift of the English language and political influences are a major reason for India's increasing success (although they didn't need the British class system ). The India of today is a direct legacy of the previously tyrannical rule as part of teh empire.

I do think that Americans cannot understand that other people think very differently and that this is one of their major problems. Some of them do mean well and are naiive but they are in a powerless minority.