Let's talk POLITICS ( NO FIGHTS)

[Scut Monkey]

Exactly. So if Mr.Bush is making decisions on behalf of his country which they have absolutely no say on. We can just say

 

"those damn yanks."

 

 

UHH NO!

 

They aren't doing it HE is. Blame HIM not the people of america for what he does on behlaf of him because it isn't them.

 

I can't see most of the americans i know (OK not my redneck cousins but they're an exception) deciding to go to war It's been decided FOR them not BY them!

 

 

YOU CANT BLAME USA FPOR THE WAYS OF GEORGE BUSH!

This is not about blame, it is about responsibility.

 

The USA is a democracy not a dictatorship: George Bush is responsible for the USA and takes action on behalf of the USA because the people of the USA elected him. George Bush and his administration are directly responsible but the people of the USA are indirectly responsible.

 

Democracy is based on majority not unanimity.

[Mika4Life13]

This is not about blame, it is about responsibility.

 

The USA is a democracy not a dictatorship: George Bush is responsible for the USA and takes action on behalf of the USA because the people of the USA elected him. George Bush and his administration are directly responsible but the people of the USA are indirectly responsible.

 

Democracy is based on majority not unanimity.

But majority of the people did not vote for him.

 

 

What about the people one year under voting age? They have oppinions and views yet they can't vote their thought wasn't added.

 

QUOTE:

No, that's not it....it's that....ok. Everyone votes and they tally up the votes, but those aren't what directly decides the election. There's a representative assigned to a certain number of voters. Say, 5 million voters vote for Bush. That means something like ten representatives who SAID they would vote for Bush are asked to vote. If all the representatives vote for the person they SAY they're going to vote for, then popular majority wins.

But they don't always vote the way they say they will. And that's how Bush won the last two elections.

QUOTE: Artsy. An American.

[Scut Monkey]

That's unfair. You say that as if it's all of us. We don't have the proper education on international affairs, but that doesn't mean that all of us are just sitting on our asses not even trying to remedy the problem.

 

Being an american citizen, (NOT part of the government) I didn't expect a lot of sympathy from other countries for the very same reasons you've been stating all night: our government isn't that helpful to others. The fact that the Bush administration did expect help appeared horribly pompous and presumptuous to me. I was horrified and am still horrified by the lengths the government has gone to wage war and still justify the loss of life. The brainwashing techniques used to make us feel PROUD that we're at war are downright frightening to me, because I know that they do work.

 

I am currently an active protester against the war and working to get international studies implemented in public schools, and I'm not a one-woman movement but involved in nation-wide organizations, so please, do NOT tell me that americans don't feel empathy for people in other parts of the world.

I doubt that Christine implied that. Unless I'm wrong she was speaking of the actions of America as a whole, which clearly has exceptions or many exceptions in this case since the war in Iraq was relatively unpopular with the American people or at least a vocal subset of it.

 

I completely agree with the part that I've bolded in your post.

 

I also want to say that I admire your efforts.

[Scut Monkey]

But majority of the people did not vote for him.

 

 

What about the people one year under voting age? They have oppinions and views yet they can't vote their thought wasn't added.

 

QUOTE:

No, that's not it....it's that....ok. Everyone votes and they tally up the votes, but those aren't what directly decides the election. There's a representative assigned to a certain number of voters. Say, 5 million voters vote for Bush. That means something like ten representatives who SAID they would vote for Bush are asked to vote. If all the representatives vote for the person they SAY they're going to vote for, then popular majority wins.

But they don't always vote the way they say they will. And that's how Bush won the last two elections.

QUOTE: Artsy. An American.

I didn't say that >50% of the American population voted for George Bush, I said that the democratic process means that a leader is chosen that pleases the largest number of people possible NOT everyone. I'm pointing out that democracy inherently means that a leader is given the power to speak for everyone even though not everyone agrees with them.

 

In addition, not even all Americans of voting age voted in the election. But by choosing not to vote, they handed the reigns of power over to whomever won without resistance.

[Mika4Life13]

I didn't say that >50% of the American population voted for George Bush, I said that the democratic process means that a leader is chosen that pleases the largest number of people possible NOT everyone. I'm pointing out that democracy inherently means that a leader is given the power to speak for everyone even though not everyone agrees with them.

 

In addition, not even all Americans of voting age voted in the election. But by choosing not to vote, they handed the reigns of power over to whomever won without resistance.

Exaclty and whomever gave him the reigns of power are the americans we can say are stupid yaddayaddayadda but saying the all are isn't fair.

[Scut Monkey]

Exaclty and whomever gave him the reigns of power are the americans we can say are stupid yaddayaddayadda but saying the all are isn't fair.

No one said "all", merely "as a whole" which is different. He does speak and act on behalf of America as a whole whether all Americans agree with him or not, that is a power that election through the democratic process give him.

[Christine]

That's unfair. You say that as if it's all of us.

 

I say it as if it's been US government policy for longer than the current term and it has been. If the majority of Americans disagreed with it from the get-go then they should have taken action. As Scut pointed out, it's not a dictatorship and the majority of Americans have either actively supported or condoned the decisions of the current government by their apathy.

 

I'm not addressing every individual American on MFC or in the United States. I'm talking about US policy and the justifications for it. If Americans don't agree with their government's policies then they should be more vocal against the government instead of defending against outsiders who criticize it.

 

This is one of the fundamental differences I've noticed in discussions with Americans regardless of their political views. In Canada and Britain it's practically a national sport to criticize, mock and even bring down the government and force an election. The US was founded on the same principles of defiance against authority and it's surprising to me that in the past couple of decades things have swung so far in the other direction that a leader like George Bush would be tolerated for going on 8 years.

 

You are 300 million strong and there is no need to put up with it if you don't support it.

[artsyfartsy17]

I say it as if it's been US government policy for longer than the current term and it has been. If the majority of Americans disagreed with it from the get-go then they should have taken action. As Scut pointed out, it's not a dictatorship and the majority of Americans have either actively supported or condoned the decisions of the current government by their apathy.

 

I'm not addressing every individual American on MFC or in the United States. I'm talking about US policy and the justifications for it. If Americans don't agree with their government's policies then they should be more vocal against the government instead of defending against outsiders who criticize it.

 

This is one of the fundamental differences I've noticed in discussions with Americans regardless of their political views. In Canada and Britain it's practically a national sport to criticize, mock and even bring down the government and force an election. The US was founded on the same principles of defiance against authority and it's surprising to me that in the past couple of decades things have swung so far in the other direction that a leader like George Bush would be tolerated for going on 8 years.

 

You are 300 million strong and there is no need to put up with it if you don't support it.

 

I don't have a defense for that; it is very true. Although, on this forum, it's been my opinion that the americans here are defending the country and the ideals it represents rather than the present government. I haven't yet seen any actual defense of George Bush.

As for tolerating it, we don't. I'm not sure where the idea of a unified front came from, but it's not true. There are protests daily about the flaws in the Bush administration, especially as the largely conservative "baby boomers" begin to go into their retirement and the more liberal members of our generation begin to come of age.

[soangel]

Hmmm this thread has been interesting, and filled with misunderstandings.

 

How I see it, when talking about Americans, or Australians or even Canadians in terms of going to war, the people being referred to are often the government in power, chosen "from the people, by the people for the people", that is the select few who represent what are seen to be the majority views of the people. While this may not always be the case that these views represent the majority (or even a minority), by electing a leader it is accepted that the views, policies and decisions of that leader are the views, policies and decisions of the people of that country, who in the majority in some way, voted them into power.

 

So in referrring to Americans, they are referring to the leaders in power (Bush, etc) and the commonly accepted generalisation in international relations that his views are everyones views (no matter how false, when it comes to politics this is the generalisation.) It is not an attack on anyone, because as has been shown, and as often happens, many of the public disagree with these decisions. Rather it is criticism of what the government has done in the name of the people of their country, not what the people themselves hold to be true. Those who are criticising mean no offence, they are simply critiquing the government, not the people. The idea of the unified front a country projects is one often projected by the government itself, in order to reassure the public that it is capable of doing its job (as I have often seen)

 

(or at least thats how I see it, correct me if I'm wrong)

[Scut Monkey]

when talking about Americans, or Australians or even Canadians in terms of going to war, the people being referred to are often the government in power, chosen "from the people, by the people for the people", that is the select few who represent what are seen to be the majority views of the people. While this may not always be the case that these views represent the majority (or even a minority), by electing a leader it is accepted that the views, policies and decisions of that leader are the views, policies and decisions of the people of that country, who in the majority in some way, voted them into power.

 

...it is criticism of what the government has done in the name of the people of their country

That is how I see it. I refer to the leaders who have been elected by the people to represent them and act on their behalf for a reason.

[Christine]

There are protests daily about the flaws in the Bush administration, especially as the largely conservative "baby boomers" begin to go into their retirement and the more liberal members of our generation begin to come of age.

 

As I said this is something I've really only noticed about the last two decades. I hope you're right that the trend will reverse with the coming of age of a generation with different ideas.

[artsyfartsy17]

As I said this is something I've really only noticed about the last two decades. I hope you're right that the trend will reverse with the coming of age of a generation with different ideas.

 

*tired sigh*

One can only hope.

[Kelzy]

Well, I hope the 'nationality bashing ' is over now and we can continue on expressing our views on what happens in each country, because of the politicians who run the country, not the people themselves, without someone taking unneccessary offence...

 

Let us not forget that although we live in a particular country, most of our ancestors lived elsewhere. (Just a random thought) So we are all Mutts!!

 

Let us also not forget that when it comes to 9/11 not every person that died that day was American, they just happened to be upon American soil. What happened affected the entire world. It's just that some people were affected more than others, and some people are reminded of it more than others. Australians, generally speaking, are reminded of it more often than Americans, generally speaking, may think we are reminded of it. Just so you know: We haven't forgotten.

 

I find it tragic that so many lives have been lost in the War on Terror since then. I worry that while our soldiers ('Our' being the combination of all countries) are ordered to continue to invade Iraq that we are just stirring the pot for worse to come. It may not happen this decade, but it could happen. And that scares me.

 

I'd like to point out that I will defend Australia, as a whole, should anyone bad mouth Australia, as a whole. But should anyone have something negative to say about Australia's government, things that the government decides on behalf of Australians that we should participate in or endorse, for eg. 'Our crappy Australian Anthem'.. then I accept your opinon and would like to know what you base that on yada yada yada...

 

Also, I have great respect for people from other countries. I won't judge you by your flag, but by your personality and how you treat others..

 

So, having said all that and based on the last post by (my MFC adopted Aussie daughtah) Artsy... Bush is a terrible president, and when I say that I mean that in American History you have had far better Presidents..

And I too hope all the people who don't want him as president kick him off his high horse and the next Man (or Woman) to represent you fine American MFCers is alot better than this dude..

 

Peace

 

(btw ex prime minister John Howard was a terrible PM and Bush's arse kisser:thumbdown: )

[nico_collard]

Sarie, I did not read that as her insinuating anything about you thinking the boy being stupid in the slightest. Her original comment was obviously just her providing information, her other comments just as obviously agreed with you. You may to be a little less defensive... you seem to think people are insulting you when they aren't a lot.

 

--Jack

 

Thank you Jack!

 

That was exactly what I was getting at...

 

I'll start with President Bush:

I think he's done a terrible job... I don't feel safe with him as my president and I think we have lost alot of foreign relations because of him.

 

I'm curious to know what others from all over the world think of him:naughty:

 

Hmmmm... his Bush-isms are quite amusing...

 

I personally find him quite arrogant...

 

He reminds me of a schoolyard bully... and with Howard and Blair at his side, too scared to stand up to him...

 

We can only hope that Rudd and the new British PM will be more assertive...

 

And that is my opinion...

 

I'm currently interested in seeing how American/Australia relations change due to our prime minster changing. Because Johnnie was Bush's man through and through, Kevin Rudd (our prime minister), however, is not.

 

I sincerely hope Big Kev is more assertive than what Johnny was...

 

If he stuffs up, he's out on his arse..

 

I brought it up because it was in Sarie's post. I just said that because I think she meant that his communication problems made him look less intelligent to other people.

 

I guess I didn't understand, sorry.

 

Tis okay... all forgiven..

 

Despite the fact that 9/11 is a smaller tragedy in terms of death toll than others (even going back in history - how about Hiroshima and Nagasaki?) I would say that one treads on very, very thin ice to say anything that minimizes the events of 9/11.

 

People are still extremely sensitive about it, and rightfully so.

 

I think that for many people in westernized nations, the things going on now in the middle east, for example, are so far removed that they don't permeate their collective consciousness as much. Same goes for things like the tragedies of WW2. Geography and history tend to dull the depth of these horrors - which is a blessing and a curse.

 

The events of 9/11 resonate more, because they took place against the main Western "superpower" of today - and because of how recent they were. That's why it's such a tender issue.

 

I wasn't saying anything to minimise the events of 9/11.

 

What I was saying is along the lines of what I've bolded in your post: I didn't cite examples from last century, I cited examples more recent than 9/11 such as the Darfur situation which only reached its peak in 2005 which should be even more fresh in our minds yet have received less attention due to geography and politics i.e. it took place in 'a far off land' of a third world country that no one has political motives for interfering in unlike, say, Iraq.

 

I understand that because it took place on home soil 9/11 is naturally going to be a tender issue for Americans. What I'm saying is that people from other countries are more removed from the situation and are able to step back and look at our world's recent tragedies in a more objective light.

 

I'm sorry, America, culturally-influential superpower or not, the world doesn't revolve around you.

 

I feel I need to demonstrate how others might not be as sensitive as the Americans in regards to 9/11...

 

For example... when the terrorists hit the twin towers, something else happened that might not seem as tragic to other people (certainly not to other people in Australia) affected my community in a big way.

 

On the same day, two 18 year old boys (one who went to my school and had also dated one of my closest friends) and his best friend were involved in a major car accident. They both died. So while I was upset about what had happened in the US, what happened to Andrew and Nic affected me more because I knew them and they were around my age.

 

So from now on, when A lot of people remember the terrorist attacks in America (which happened late 11 Sept/early 12 Sept here), all I remember is hearing on the radio that two 18 year old boys had died in a car accident and hoping and praying that it wasn't someone in my year (which they were, but they were basically my age).

 

Hopefully everyone can see my point that not everyone is as deeply affected by 9/11 as the US... whether by distance or by some other reason.

 

you're right

 

i get what you're trying to say:thumb_yello:

 

EDIT: now i'll be known as unpatriotic in addition to an American hater

 

oh well

you can't please everyone:cool:

 

Exactly... and no-one should have to please everyone...

 

What I want to know is why so many foreign members are sitting here bashing the United States and it's policies, but as soon as an American explains why we did something, or attempts to argue, we get told we're being defensive.

 

Quite honestly, it sounds like the Australians/Canadians/Europeans are the ones being defensive. As soon as anyone challenges your opinion, suddenly you know more about our country than we do, and we're being rude, making snarkmarks, etc.

 

May I ask how the Canadians/Australians/Europeans are being defensive? I'm not asking to start an argument, I really do want to know...

 

 

Sarie, feel free to criticise (not in a nasty way, but discussing what you do and don't like) about Canadian/Australian/European policies... I think it might make for an interesting change to American policies..

[greta]

Italy is became a 3rd world country...in Naples ppl died of cancer for the garbages...and maybe I've eat contaminated vegetables too:boxed:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iHdYGgFyVTKkhbtHxQWZR0y12g0wD8TVUAV82

[kk448]

 

 

It is possible to talk about America as a whole. When President George Bush and his party make a decision they don't say that it's coming just from them, they do it on behalf of the whole country i.e. the country that elected them as leaders and gave them the power to speak for them. That is not to say that all Americans agree with their leaders, though, merely that the elected leader can take action on behalf of the country whether the country as a whole agrees with it or not.

 

Actually, the electoral college voted Bush in. Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000, which meant that the electoral college should have voted just about the same way, but instead they went against the popular vote. If American government was as much as a 'democracy' as they say they are, Bush would have never been president. Bush only won reelection in 2004 because Kerry was a joke.

 

Why is this thread so defensive?

 

I didn't claim that anyone here said that or agreed with that sentiment. I'm arguing a general point of view that is not aimed at the MFC.

 

So perhaps I should have said instead: sorry, MFC, but the world doesn't revolve around you.

 

I don't really think I was being defensive or at least I wasn't trying to be. I just a made a comment is all. I was just curious as to why you brought that up.

 

 

More Americans die in car crashes every year and no one gives a flying f*ck about that or makes any attempts to mitigate it. Yet trillions are spent, basic human rights are violated, wars are declared and hundreds of thousands of lives have been turned upside down or completely destroyed over 9/11.

 

I guess I am "no one" in this situation.

 

And actually, there have been quite a few laws that have been passed lately regarding car accidents, at least in my state. Even just a few weeks ago, they reduced the speed limit on my road because there were so many accidents. About three or four years ago, they installed a stoplight on a busy intersection after three people were killed in a span of a year, including a 13-year-old girl who was a friend of mine.

 

I'm not saying I don't agree with the rest of your statement because I really do, especially with the lopsided amount of money we are spending on war. Why don't we start using some of that money on education? It's so ridiculous how fast our government will make cuts on education so they can have more money for war. Bush's "No Child Left Behind" Act is a joke. Maybe if there was better education, more people would be less likely to choose war as an answer.

 

I'm not addressing every individual American on MFC or in the United States. I'm talking about US policy and the justifications for it. If Americans don't agree with their government's policies then they should be more vocal against the government instead of defending against outsiders who criticize it.

 

This is one of the fundamental differences I've noticed in discussions with Americans regardless of their political views. In Canada and Britain it's practically a national sport to criticize, mock and even bring down the government and force an election. The US was founded on the same principles of defiance against authority and it's surprising to me that in the past couple of decades things have swung so far in the other direction that a leader like George Bush would be tolerated for going on 8 years.

 

You are 300 million strong and there is no need to put up with it if you don't support it.

 

I get what you mean with the standing up against the government. I guess too many people feel like what they have to say doesn't matter, just like why some people don't vote, which isn't a good reason not to do something. I was always taught that if you don't like something, try to change it or don't complain.

 

Also, the comment about British and Canadian politics. I've always enjoyed watching them on T.V. I like the way they handle things.

[Wendi]

I am waiting to see where Gordon Brown puts himself in

World politics - Tony Blair was George Bush's right-hand man,

but don't think GB will be quite the same. He is already talking

about mass troop withdrawal from Iraq. Time will tell.

 

Something else that bugs ME - when there has been any kind

of disaster our news say "plane crash, and there were 4 British people

killed - and they totally forget the other 256 that were killed who were

not British. That probably sounds petty - but I believe life matters,

regardless of colour, creed nationality etc!!

[kk448]

Something else that bugs ME - when there has been any kind

of disaster our news say "plane crash, and there were 4 British people

killed - and they totally forget the other 256 that were killed who were

not British. That probably sounds petty - but I believe life matters,

regardless of colour, creed nationality etc!!

 

Our news does that too, especially regarding the war. I agree with you, everyone's lives matter just the same. It's as though those people are more important.

[soon-to-bemrs.penniman]

I am waiting to see where Gordon Brown puts himself in

World politics - Tony Blair was George Bush's right-hand man,

but don't think GB will be quite the same. He is already talking

about mass troop withdrawal from Iraq. Time will tell.

 

Something else that bugs ME - when there has been any kind

of disaster our news say "plane crash, and there were 4 British people

killed - and they totally forget the other 256 that were killed who were

not British. That probably sounds petty - but I believe life matters,

regardless of colour, creed nationality etc!!

it doesn't sound petty at all.

 

A life is a life no matter what the nationality, sex, creed etc.

[Kalas]

Italy is became a 3rd world country...in Naples ppl died of cancer for the garbages...and maybe I've eat contaminated vegetables too:boxed:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iHdYGgFyVTKkhbtHxQWZR0y12g0wD8TVUAV82

Isn't berlusconi in control of all your medias? cause he's the owner? And isn't the situation is the same i russia? It's creepy. Hope they wont start to control the internet also as in china ..

[kk448]

Isn't berlusconi in control of all your medias? And the situation is the same i russia? It's creepy. Hope they wont control the internet also as in china:boxed:..

 

I heard about the internet rules in China. How absurd. People should be able to make their own decisions on what they want to do on the internet.

[Wendi]

I heard about the internet rules in China. How absurd. People should be able to make their own decisions on what they want to do on the internet.

 

North Korea is even worse. The government weld the radio dials to

the "proper" station, they have no access to normal TV, and there

is a loud speaker telling folk when to get up, and the power etc goes off

when they have to go to bed!!!

[Kalas]

I am waiting to see where Gordon Brown puts himself in

World politics - Tony Blair was George Bush's right-hand man,

but don't think GB will be quite the same. He is already talking

about mass troop withdrawal from Iraq. Time will tell.

 

Something else that bugs ME - when there has been any kind

of disaster our news say "plane crash, and there were 4 British people

killed - and they totally forget the other 256 that were killed who were

not British. That probably sounds petty - but I believe life matters,

regardless of colour, creed nationality etc!!

 

 

yep but we always want to identify ourselfs with those who are like us... and most people in the western world usally cares a lot more about people who are similar themselves than those who don't look like them, lives far away or don't speak the same language.

 

I mean, 200 000 civilians have been killed in Darfur, and FN is not getting massive support. If 2000 civilians died in a western country according to war that massive support wouldn't wait. We share our history, and that seem to be more imomportant than equality of lives.

[kk448]

North Korea is even worse. The government weld the radio dials to

the "proper" station, they have no access to normal TV, and there

is a loud speaker telling folk when to get up, and the power etc goes off

when they have to go to bed!!!

 

Jeez, I didn't know it was that bad in North Korea. I can't imagine living somewhere where the government decides everything for you.

[stien]

 

Maybe if there was better education, more people would be less likely to choose war as an answer.

 

 

Now that's very true, I think!