Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Is America # 1?

Name: Anonymous 2005-02-05 19:49

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.
-Thomas Jefferson.



No. 1?

BY MICHAEL VENTURA

Letters at 3AM

No concept lies more firmly embedded in our national character than the
notion that the USA is "No. 1," "the greatest." Our broadcast media are,
in essence, continuous advertisements for the brand name "America Is No. 1."

Any office seeker saying otherwise would be committing political
suicide. In fact, anyone saying otherwise will be labeled "un-American."
We're an "empire," ain't we? Sure we are. An empire without a
manufacturing base. An empire that must borrow $2 billion a day from its
competitors in order to function. Yet the delusion is ineradicable.
We're No. 1. Well ... this is the country you really live in:

. The United States is 49th in the world in literacy (The New York
Times, Dec. 12, 2004). The United States ranked 28th out of 40 countries
in mathematical literacy (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004).

One-third of our science teachers and one-half of our math teachers did
not major in those subjects. (Quoted on The West Wing, but you can trust
it - their researchers are legendary.)

. Twenty percent of Americans think the sun orbits the Earth. Seventeen
percent believe the Earth revolves around the sun once a day (The Week,
Jan. 7, 2005).

�The International Adult Literacy Survey ... found that Americans with
less than nine years of education �score worse than virtually all of the
other countries�� (Jeremy Rifkin's superbly documented book The European
Dream: How Europe's Vision of the Future Is Quietly Eclipsing the
American Dream, p.78).

. Our workers are so ignorant, and lack so many basic skills, that
American businesses spend $30 billion a year on remedial training (NYT,
Dec. 12, 2004). No wonder they relocate elsewhere!

. "The European Union leads the U.S. in ... the number of science and
engineering graduates; public research and development (R&D)
expenditures; and new capital raised" (The European Dream, p.70).

"Europe surpassed the United States in the mid-1990s as the largest
producer of scientific literature" (The European Dream, p.70).

Nevertheless, Congress cut funds to the National Science Foundation. The
agency will issue 1,000 fewer research grants this year (NYT, Dec. 21,
2004).

Foreign applications to U.S. grad schools declined 28% last year.
Foreign student enrollment on all levels fell for the first time in
three decades, but increased greatly in Europe and China. Last year
Chinese grad-school graduates in the U.S. dropped 56%, Indians 51%,
South Koreans 28% (NYT, Dec. 21, 2004). We're not the place to be anymore.

The World Health Organization "ranked the countries of the world in
terms of overall health performance, and the U.S. [was] ... 37th." In
the fairness of health care, we're 54th. "The irony is that the United
States spends more per capita for health care than any other nation in
the world" (The European Dream, pp.79-80). Pay more, get lots, lots less.

"The U.S. and South Africa are the only two developed countries in the
world that do not provide health care for all their citizens" (The
European Dream, p.80). Excuse me, but since when is South Africa a
"developed" country? Anyway, that's the company we're keeping.

Lack of health insurance coverage causes 18,000 unnecessary American
deaths a year. (That's six times the number of people killed on 9/11.)
(NYT, Jan. 12, 2005.)

"U.S. childhood poverty now ranks 22nd, or second to last, among the
developed nations. Only Mexico scores lower" (The European Dream, p.81).
Been to Mexico lately? Does it look "developed" to you? Yet it's the
only "developed" country to score lower in childhood poverty.

Twelve million American families, more than 10% of all U.S. Households,
"continue to struggle, and not always successfully, to feed themselves."
Families that "had members who actually went hungry at some point last
year" numbered 3.9 million (NYT, Nov. 22, 2004).

The United States is 41st in the world in infant mortality. Cuba scores
higher (NYT, Jan. 12, 2005).

Women are 70% more likely to die in childbirth in America than in Europe
(NYT, Jan. 12, 2005).

The leading cause of death of pregnant women in this country is murder
(CNN, Dec. 14, 2004).

Name: Anonymous 2005-02-14 16:40

we should redraw the iran and iraq borders to make various swaths of country for the particular indigenous factions.... the british made those countries out of thin air back when they were empire building

the reason they dont want to redraw is the oil wells are not evenly distributed across the region, ie status quo and pre-existing contracts

iraq just elected the theistic iranian shiite party....  i doubt they'll go to war if the same people are in government in both "countries"
---
modern democracies, multiparty democracies with modern voter rights... these democracies do not go to war with eachother
they may go to economic war with eachother, but thats as far as it goes

Name: 40 2005-02-15 3:55

I just read the news on that, so you're probably right about Iraq and Iran, but give India and Pakistan some time. They're both democracies. But most of all, truly modern democracies have only existed for 200 years, AT MOST. The entirety of Human Civilization stretches over 8-10 thousand. I'll agree up till now, they do not fight often, but you can't treat that like it's bible fucking law. Everyone being a democracy will never end war, because like Goering said:

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

And if anyone knows about bringing people along to do horrible things, it's a Nazi leader.

Name: Anonymous 2005-02-15 5:12

>>40
No it's not, it's defining a true democracy.  If only the elite(by wealth, leniege, military service(Starship Troopers rep. for yah) is that really a democracy?
>>42
The theory is it's political suicide.  In a country where "democracy" is a byword, leadership can be maintained by force, but if the vote off all citizens is what decides leadership for both sides, it's hard for most to rationalize war between them.  For example the latest US-Iraq conflict; the only way the slim majority would support the war, w/o WMD's being an issue, is that Saddam was a ruthless dictator.  What if it was secular like Turkey?  Not so easy to do.  Now in Iran, all citizens can vote in secret ballots, but the religous officials can only choose the candidates.  Do you see how the war option is pushed on the nuke-talks issue?

Yes, the theory has limited terms, but most theories do, and I'm just going over the International Relaitons-class stuff I learned.  I don't claim creation of it.

Name: Anonymous 2005-02-15 5:21

>>40
No it's not, it's defining a true democracy.  If only the elite(by wealth, leniege, military service(Starship Troopers rep. for yah) can vote, is that really a democracy?

screwed up, fixed

Name: Anonymous 2005-02-15 17:11

>>43
>the only way the slim majority would support the war, w/o WMD's being an issue, is that Saddam was a ruthless dictator.  What if it was secular like Turkey?

unfortunately, iraq _was_ secular(for the middle east)

iran is theistic... egypt and lebanon are secular as well(relative to the middle east) but our friend saudi arabia is certainly not secular in the least.

we should have kept saddam up there as a puppet dictator and based a war on iran from iraq... then deal with syria next, this would have removed most of the dangerous theistic dictatorships in the region...

instead we have to first deal with stabilizing iraq and then go after iran... but in the time it took to regime change iraq, iran gained nuclear weapons status. this was a strategic error.

iran > iraq ..since we flattened iraq in `91 it has been a joke, no where near an imminent threat, however you look at it

Name: Anonymous 2005-02-18 2:14 (sage)

strategic error lol

Name: Canuck 2005-02-18 7:56 (sage)

LOL true democracies are false, USA's racism offeres inequal representation, England is a sespool a crime, India is too populated, and Pakistan is Loaded with crime. Before you know it Iraq will be under a new and "happy" american friendly dictatorship

Name: Anonymous 2005-02-20 14:00

Here's a kicker. There's no such ethnic group as a pakistan. The country is a legal fiction based solely on being muslim and thus unable to stand living in the same state with hindus. It's heading straight towards failed state-status.

"Prior to 1947, the country now known as Pakistan was a British colony. In 1947 the United Kingdom granted independence to the region under a new name, Pakistan. The name had been developed by a group of students at Cambridge University who issued a pamphlet in 1933 called Now or Never. They came up with the term "Pakistan" as "composed of letters taken from the names of our homelands: that is, Punjab, Afghania [North-West Frontier Province], Kashmir, Iran, Sindh, Tukharistan, Afghanistan, and Balochistan. It means the land of the Paks, the spiritually pure and clean."

Name: Anonymous 2005-02-22 20:06

What government ever existed since our ancestors came down from the trees that was NOT a legal fiction?

Name: Anonymous 2005-02-23 3:56

None. But at least most governments and countries can claim social fiction, a common narrative of history, as well. Pakistan as a state and nation is inherently unstable because they were thrown together without much reference to the subjects and they lack a common narrative. 60 years isn't enough to create a nation, not when the central state can hardly control most parts of the country. Musharraf is still a dictator, and democracy would bring religious nutcases to power. That country is really fucked.

Democracy. Ah. It needs time to grow, it requires civic institutions to form. Democracy can also rot from within. The republic, the state form that uses varying degrees of democracy and claims to represent the people... it is inevitably corrupted by belief in superiority.

Name: Anonymous 2005-02-23 4:08

>and democracy would bring religious nutcases to power.

unfortunately this is true for almost the entire middle east as well

Name: Anonymous 2005-02-23 13:40

And the US too.

Name: Anonymous 2005-02-24 1:58

religion sucks, it should be abolished

cause of all humanities problems

Name: Anonymous 2005-02-26 8:11

Religion sucks, but humanity's problems have deeper root causes than that.  Labeling anything "the cause of all humanity's problems" strikes me as simplistic, unless maybe you're blaming human nature.

Name: Anonymous 2005-03-08 0:17

Is America # 1?....... DU we onley like RULE THE FUCKING WORLD. in your face brittan

Name: Anonymous 2005-03-08 0:18

Is America # 1?....... DU we onley like RULE THE FUCKING WORLD. in your face brittan

Name: Anonymous 2005-03-08 0:21

moran

Name: Anonymous 2005-03-08 21:00

HALF OF AMERICA ARE STUPID ASS FUCKERS

Name: Anonymous 2005-03-08 21:00

HALF OF AMERICA ARE STUPID ASS FUCKERS

Name: Anonymous 2005-03-09 23:47

Yes, America IS number one.  However, that's still nothing to be proud of.  Being the best country is like being the tallest midget.  The powers that be in America can & do abuse & exploit people all they want, just as long as they exploit them just a little less than the next guy.

I get sick of all these fuckers, mostly conservatives, who say "if j00 dont liek it in ameriKKKa, comie hippie fag, n if j00 cant be pruod of ur country, move to china lol!!!one"  Yes, America is better than China.  But all America has to do to be better than them is refrain from running people over with tanks.  Yeah, that's really something to be proud of.  *Waves flag*

Name: Anonymous 2005-03-10 5:39

The question is juvenile type of 'we could beat your country up' crap anyway. It's mostly a moot point between first world nations with nuclear weaponry in any large numbers. Other parts that might make a country #1, like standard of living, wealth, healthcare, education, crime rate etc all look like America probably isn't at the very top. There are some very real problems with the country, and with its foreign policy, unfortunately.

Name: Anonymous 2005-03-10 5:40

That said, it isn't total shit either, and is a fuckload better than a whole bunch of places if you had to choose where to live.

Name: Anonymous 2005-03-11 8:33 (sage)

Sssssttt!!!! You spoild the supprise of our evil commie masterplan of overthrowing the worldpower by outpowering them with big numbers!

Our oranges produce more juice than yours! HAHA! wicked man.

...

Name: Anonymous 2005-03-19 0:12

U.S. death

Name: Anonymous 2005-03-19 6:57

>>64
us own ur face

Name: Anonymous 2005-03-21 9:26 (sage)

you invoked godwin a long time ago. thread over.

Name: Anonymous 2005-08-18 5:29

America wins!

Name: Anonymous 2007-01-24 12:34

ミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミ
ミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミ
ミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミ
ミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミ
ミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミミ

Name: White Wizard 2007-11-24 21:17

*Casts ressurection*

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-24 23:03

tl;dr but Micheal Ventura's an idiot.

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List