Elections in the USA tomorrow...

[Lord Alex]

Well, subject line says it all... Will the Dems take back the House and Senate or will the Repubs retain their death-grip on national politics... On your mark, get set, flame... I mean,... GO!

Btw, it should be restated that I'm not interested in a flame-war here. Just curious about how folks inside and outside the U.S. view our political circus we call a democracy.

I should also state that I am an old-school yellow-dog Democrat myself (father was a union man, mother was a JFK devotee) and am not afraid to admit it. However, I have friends and relatives who are both Republicans and Independents, so am open to differing opinions.

[txa1265]

I live in a state where the Republican population is ~12% (down from 14% two years ago! :D ), so the general political trends are pretty obvious.

I hope that the Democrats take back both house and senate. If it means nothing but in-fighting and logjams than it is better than what has happened.

On my local level, I have really liked the balance of power in recent years - having house and senate both heavily Democrat and a Republican governor has balanced things well. But as much as I like that check & balance system, I'm inclined to vote for the Democratic candidate because he has both a clue and a grip .. .which is rare.

Personally I'd characterize myself as libertarian - fiscal conservative, social liberal.

[Khass]

Not that my opinion would be any good, but I respect the thoughts of a certain wise man I know. And I quote:

I find that quite alarming, considering there's a very real danger these same US Americans will eventually elect a Republican more intelligent, more capable and more right wing than GWB, who for all his faults - thanks to all is faults - is mostly harmless...

[Lord Alex]

The Founding Fathers had it right. A mixture is best... checks, balances, and a noose for the extremists in either party. ;) For my money, extremism (of all types) marks the deathknell of modern society.

[Korplem]

I voted for myself in every category. You may now greet me as the supreme emporer of the state of Minnesota!

I am a great fan of liberty but I cannot call myself a "liberal" since the titles these politicians wear are not what they mean. That and, being in the military, I'd probably be cruicified.:p It seems so strange to me that most everybody I've met in the military voted for Bush, knowing full well that he was going to have many soldiers killed. *shrugs* Would Kerry have done a better job at keeping people alive? I have no idea but he didn't seem like a loose cannon. (slightly off topic)

[txa1265]

Would Kerry have done a better job at keeping people alive? I have no idea but he didn't seem like a loose cannon. (slightly off topic)

The right-wingnuts talked about how Kerry would have done ... well, whatever ... but in reality with a Republican Congress he'd have done very little, and everythig would have been by concensus with compromise.

[slam23]

Well, having a European perspective on American politics, I think the US system is essentially flawed. A two-party system is not enough to represent the whole gamut of political views. Alternative voices are not being heard, and they themselves ultimately choose one side to prevent the other "more bad" side winning, not because that side represents the views they want representation for. It's a myth that a multiparty system (>2 parties) leads to stagnation and a passive stance, because power is diluted across the board. Forming coalitions gives small parties a chance to get into government.
"Circus" is an apt word for the presidential election campaign, we can't believe the level of smearing and backstabbing that goes on in for example TV spots. That would actually be illegal in Holland, you could get sued for misrepresentation and slander. And the costs for a campaign are ludicrous: If the US would skip 1 election they could reform health care and education with the money that was not spent. But that would leave Bush in office for another term, so I personally think this time it would be money well spent :) I think it's good that there is a chance of renewal if Bush bites the bullet in the long run, starting his downfall with this Senate thing. His whole "if you are not for us, you're against us"-attitude is a bit scary for me. He himself doesn't seem all too bright, it's his clique that is scary. They let you believe that the outside world is a dangerous place (part true) and that the only way to keep it out is by selling out on your personal privacy (not true). In the land of the free and brave, you're not that free anymore. You essentially live in a fear-driven society that favours conservatism and agressive behaviour (to strike them before they strike us). In a land that has a clear freedom of speech principle, it is logical that large corporations get to influence the media, because that is their right, right? But freedom of speech is now directly related to the funds you have to get your view out in the world. The more money you have, the better your freedom is to express your views because of better control of the outlet. It seems the republican senators are not sticking by Bush this time, the constituency wants change and wants out of Iraq (which actually now would be disaster to that country, civil war wil tear it apart). To be fair, I'm not stomping on US politics just to point a finger. I'm disappointed with our government as well. Ours fell a couple of months ago, so we get elections next week. It actually looks that our leftwing green and social parties are stealing seats from the bigger political parties who are bickering among themselves. So that looks promising. Our prime-minister just went puppy-eyed when he got to visit the great world leader Bush in the US to support the campaign against Iraq, it was shameful. We're still awaiting our first terror attack. Although a famous contrarian and independent film maker (Theo van Gogh) was brutally (ritualistically) murdered last year by a fanatic Muslim who meant to upset society with his deed.
Well that was a lot to get of my chest. It pains me to see that a great country like the US (which I like for a lot of reasons) has to suffer the slights of the world because of it's president's agressive and at times unbelievably stupid behaviour. So I hope nobody is offended (remember freedom of speech), and if some are, so be it. We all have the right to disagree in a democracy.

[Corwin]

Why vote for a politician; it only encourages them!! As someone once said, it doesn't matter who you vote for, in the end you just elect another politician!! They are all the same and I wouldn't trust any one of them as far as I could spit in the face of a raging hurricane!! As you can see, I'm totally apolitical, I hate them all!! :biggrin:

[Prime Junta]

Since you asked, I think the American experiment in democracy has ended.

There's the political discourse. It's hardly ever even about politics, it's about which side has the best advertising, whether or not the Republicans will manage to use Diebold to steal this election too, or what kind of concentration camp (inside or outside continental America) should be set up for the Demonrats and Lieberals. And so on.

Then there's voter participation. If 40% participation is considered high, at a time when stakes are as high as now, the system has failed. The machinery has been taken over by whichever clique can get 20.1% of eligible voters to drag their fat asses to the polls. That's not democracy either.

So how does it look from here? Panem et circenses. It makes for pretty good entertainment, mixed with a hefty dollop of Schadenfreude. Every people gets the government they deserve, they say, and it feels good to think that might be true.

The definition of fascism is a fusion of corporate and political power. That's happened in America a quite a while ago. The good news is that living under a fascist regime isn't intolerable; most of the world manages it just fine. And eventually they tend to collapse under their own weight. Should be interesting to watch...

PS. I don't know nearly as well how American politics functions at the state/municipal level, but I have a feeling it may not be quite as bleak. In other words, there may be hope for American democracy yet, but if so, it won't be at the federal level. Perhaps the US will become a bit like the EU -- a loosely amalgamated union of more or less independent states most of which cordially loathe each other but have agreed not to hit each other with big sticks.

[Danicek]

Why vote for a politician; it only encourages them!! As someone once said, it doesn't matter who you vote for, in the end you just elect another politician!! They are all the same and I wouldn't trust any one of them as far as I could spit in the face of a raging hurricane!! As you can see, I'm totally apolitical, I hate them all!! :biggrin:

You are wrong, they are not all the same. I guess your opinion is simply result of living in good, prospering and stable country and that is (to be honest) very irresponsible. You haven't lived in totality (ruled by communists as we did over here). The main point of voting is to add a single point to a party other than communists that still exists here and even never said sorry for what have happened. There is enough people that still do vote for them and these people are very reliable, they will always come and vote. You couldn't travel, you coulnd't read what you want, say what you want, listen to music of your choice and if you had a bad luck and said something wrong (or one of your relatives did so) you couldn't study or work (and worse things could happen to you...). Bad times may return....

[Korplem]

It's funny that we can preach about democracy when the CIA world fact book classifies the US as a "federal republic". Yes, they're close but fundamentally different.

I think the American experiment in democracy has ended.

When I read this I want to be upset but, sadly, you may be right. There are so many things that are wrong with my country... but in spite of it all I believe we can turn things around. I really can't see that happening though, unless a leader steps up that can inspire us and work for the betterment of the nation instead of their own interests.

I really hate talking politics though, it makes me feel sick.

P.S. Be gentle on me and my views.

[Prime Junta]

@Korplem -- wrong, they're not "close but fundamentally different." They're concepts in different domains.

Democracy is a principle of government -- government for, by, and of the people. Republic is a form of government -- namely, a government consisting of an executive, legislative, and judicial branch, where at least the executive and legislative branches come into power through some form of electoral process.

While the republic was originally envisioned as a form of government that embodies the principle of democratic government, there are plenty of examples of republics that don't, usually by subverting the electoral process.

There are democratic non-republics, for example Great Britain and Sweden, which are constitutional monarchies.

There are undemocratic republics, such as North Korea, the People's Republic of China, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Russian Republic, and the United States of America.

And of course there are undemocratic monarchies and democratic republics (not to be confused with Democratic Republics, which usually aren't.)

[josephwatson]

Being in academia, I lean liberal. Honestly, though, I like it when control of the government is split by the two parties. It's painful to watch conservatives push the country further and further to the right. Even if democrats win the house and senate, they still need to develop some balls and be willing to push back. I live in the southern U.S., so democrats here can't really be socially liberal. They have to run on education reform and against the war. I have a lot of problems with republican arguments over here...if the republicans, as the majority, presented the people of the U.S. with faulty intelligence and then forced us into a war that drains huge amounts of our tax money, why do you think we should support your party? Because the democrats might try to pull out of Iraq? I think we're in the middle of a bad choice, and the republican strategy is no more appealing than the strategy presented by the democrats (sink money into an ever-widening hole of war). Therefore, I think we should punish the republicans for their ill-informed, poor decisions. We'll see if it happens :) They're shaking in their boots, by the way. If the dems win, there should be many hearings on capital hill to expose some of the more egregious republican decisions.

[txa1265]

I think that the growing federalism is a real problem. Being done by both Dems and Repubs (dems 'for the people' and repubs 'to protect us), it is really a poorly disguised power-grab.

Oh, Junta - fascism has little to do with your definition, if it did, America would be less fascist than Europe, Russia and most of all Japan ...

[Prime Junta]

Sorry, txa -- that's the accepted definition of fascism in political science. OK, a part of it at least. Apart from corporatism, a full definition should also include the nationalism, militarism, and statism.

Russia is certainly more fascist than America, while Japan is... a bit of a special case. Most of the EU countries are not fascist in this sense at all; quite the opposite in fact. (Otherwise we wouldn't have our strict, even overly strict labor laws and heavily progressive taxation.)

[Lord Alex]

Since you asked, I think the American experiment in democracy has ended.

I tend to agree actually... In a market-driven two-party system, elections are purchased by the highest bidder. Every politician alive in the US will agree that a well-funded negative campaign is the smartest way to get into office, even if the smear campaign is mostly fabricated.

So how does it look from here? Panem et circenses. It makes for pretty good entertainment, mixed with a hefty dollop of Schadenfreude. Every people gets the government they deserve, they say, and it feels good to think that might be true..

Every American has a right to vote. The fact that so many don't means they are accepting of a government that elects and runs itself. However, don't be too hard on us, as many of that 40% you mentioned are painfully aware of the problems you state, but feel handcuffed to do anything about it. We read, we vote, we stay politically active, and we watch the circus from the sidelines, much as you do.

The definition of fascism is a fusion of corporate and political power.

Well, the definition of "facism" changes depending on who is teaching your Civics class at the moment, or (in our case) who is in power. Is the US a fascist state? No. The reason: because I can still wear a donkey costume, paint myself yellow, and walk out into the middle of Washington Ave. and say in a loud clear voice "George W. Bush is a dim-witted SOB who is willing to send our American servicemen off to war without cause or any real conviction" and I won't be tossed in jail for it. The minute I can't do that is the minute I leave the country... for good.

PS. I don't know nearly as well how American politics functions at the state/municipal level, but I have a feeling it may not be quite as bleak.

And your "feeling" would be right. Even though National politics gets all the lime-light and funding, local politics affect how and where your children go to school, how and when your roads are built, and how and where your criminals are prosecuted. And local politics is far more diverse and organic. For example, I live in a Southern state, a supposed conservative, Republican bastion, and yet our governor and local congress have both been Democrat for quite some time.... and may remain so for quite a while.

All governments are flawed... which is why Corwin has it right when he recommends simply "flipping the bird" at all those in power.

[txa1265]

And your "feeling" would be right.
But to speak to what Lord Alex says, there is a saying here 'All politics is local'. That sums it up - the national stuff gets the international limelight, but state and local stuff is where the *work* gets done.

[Prime Junta]

@Alex -- I'm not blaming you (plural) for the situation... much. You're pretty much like the proverbial frogs in the kettle; as the heat is slowly turned up, it's very hard to tell when to jump. My point was that the system is broken if only 40% of eligible voters (in a good year) feel like participating, whatever the reason.

You can define any number of acid tests for fascism, and yours is just about as valid as any other. However... there are many countries that are widely considered to be totalitarian where that would apply. You wouldn't have been thrown in jail for that in Brezhnev's USSR, for example; they would simply have ruined your career for you and given you the choice of either starving or farming potatoes somewhere. In Mussolini's Italy, you wouldn't have been jailed either; you would've had an "accident" coming home from work. In Pinochet's Chile, you would simply have disappeared. And in Russia today, absolutely nothing would be done to you; people would simply consider you to be a loon.

(There's an old joke supposedly told by Nikita Khruschev himself. This guy was running through the Red Square yelling "Khruschev is an idiot! Khruschev is an idiot!" He was sentenced to ten years hard labor: three years for insulting the presidency, and seven years for revealing a state secret. Make of it what you will...)

In my view, a Rubicon was crossed when the right of habeas corpus was abolished. Your chief executive now has the power to imprison anyone at his discretion for any amount of time. The fact that he does not (yet?) exercise this power to an extent where you're likely to run into it personally is of secondary importance.

[LordRac]

My point was that the system is broken if only 40% of eligible voters (in a good year) feel like participating, whatever the reason.


This pretty much sums up what is wrong with most elections. There are more mud-slinging advertisements on TV and in our mail than positive ads. It's no wonder no one wants to show up at all.

And for those that do show up, unless they are a diehard Democratic or Rebublican, a voter will wind up choosing who they think is hopefully the lesser of two or three evils. There's so much hate advertising that it becomes impossible to feel confident about ANYONE. :-/

[txa1265]

In Massachusetts they are trying an initiative to get multiple parties to back the same candidate as a means of further supporting third-party candidates ... which sounds great until you realize the implementation involves having the same person listed multiple times on the ballot ...

[Prime Junta]

How hard would it be to have replace the winner-takes-all system with a proportional one, even at the state level? That would permit the emergence of third parties and encourage coalition-building rather than win-at-any-cost.

[Lord Alex]

@Alex -- I'm not blaming you (plural) for the situation... much. You're pretty much like the proverbial frogs in the kettle; as the heat is slowly turned up, it's very hard to tell when to jump.

You know, if I wasn't such a complacent, pig-headed American, I'd almost think I'd been insulted there ;) ....... But, thinly-veiled insults aside, you seem to be implying that the only way to fix a bad situation is to leave, like the proverbial frog leaping from the pot before his hind quarters (erm... I mean his "principles") are singed beyond repair. I must say that unless you are swimming around in the pot yourself, that is a hard call to make.

I have lived abroad, as have members of my family. I consider myself open-minded and accepting of differing opinions, faiths, lifestyle choices, etc. and, though it might not always seem as such from the way we're portrayed in the media, there are MANY Americans who feel the same. We folks are, in effect, true Americans who believe and wholeheartedly support the notion of a Melting Pot. However, we are labeled in our own country as "liberals" and "heathens" who lack the ethics/morality to govern ourselves and others around us.

Now the problem is that I do love this country, even if I do not love (or respect) its leaders. So, do I forsake control of the country to those who stand to do it even MORE harm, or do I stay and fight (vote) for what I believe in? Call it an idealistic stance, but when it comes down to it, it is this idealism that just might cause a shift the other way. Our country hasn't always been this way. We could be better in the future, if given the chance.

In my view, a Rubicon was crossed when the right of habeas corpus was abolished. Your chief executive now has the power to imprison anyone at his discretion for any amount of time. The fact that he does not (yet?) exercise this power to an extent where you're likely to run into it personally is of secondary importance.

Agreed, though I still don't believe he has crossed this imaginary Rubicon of which you speak. If your implied comparison is Caesar (achieving the role of Dictator), we still have a working Senate and a House, one or both of which might be Democratic by tomorrow. ;) And, believe me, if both parts of Congress flip Democratic, it will be Caesar in the pot and not us helpless frogs....

[Prime Junta]

Alex, on the contrary -- it's when you're in the pot that the call is hard to make. It's much easier to see from the outside.

However, you're taking my analogy further than I intended. I didn't mean that getting out is the only valid option; on the contrary, the most moral course of action is active opposition. IMO just voting and going home won't cut it; it's like being a good German in the 1930's. (I'm sure there were plenty of good Germans back then wrestling with similar moral dilemmas as you are: "I don't approve of all aspects of the Führer's racial policies, but I do love the Reich...")

Until now, the American system has indeed been self-correcting. However, I believe that its foundations may have rotted beyond repair; you no longer have the enlightened electorate that a democracy requires to function; rebuilding it would take a generation or two -- and I don't see any efforts being made to give it a start. The Democrats are only marginally less corrupt than the Republicans; both are prisoners of the same system, and neither can fundamentally change it without destroying themselves in the process. It's a matter of values, assumptions, and structures, rather than a matter of which party happens to be in power.

In other words, I just don't see it happening.

[Corwin]

While I have problems with it, one interesting difference between Australia and America, is that voting is COMPULSORY here. You get fined if you don't vote!! Wonder what difference that would make if implemented in the good old USA!! :)

[txa1265]

Alex, on the contrary -- it's when you're in the pot that the call is hard to make. It's much easier to see from the outside.
Sort of like a marriage ... but similar to that, the outsiders are usually ill-informed, overly confident of their correctness, and largely wrong. I take as primary evidence the lack of knowledge of state and local politics, the very underpinnings of the system. If you don't know about that, then you really are ill informed and in no position to say that you see anything all that clearly.

[Bargeral]

The thing that scares me most about politics in America is the lack of outrage over irregularities that have taken place during the last several elections. I remember during '04 some talk of having international observers monitor elections as they have in other countries. The reaction was one of outrage rather then open transparency. I think the strongest tool the established powers here have is the overdeveloped sense of self-importance and, I don't know how to express it well, but being beyond reproach or criticism makes us too easily influenced by pride.

[Corwin]

Americans and Pride??!! I can't believe it!! (Said with tongue firmly in cheek) :biggrin:

[Korplem]

*with a new york accent* Shuddup! :rolleyes:

[josephwatson]

Woo-hoo! Democrats take the house!!!

[Corwin]

Where are they taking it? :)

[Prime Junta]

@txa -- as an outsider, I'm not even particularly interested in how well America functions at the state level. I'm commenting on how it functions at the federal level, which is something I'm quite well positioned to observe. And at that level, the system is broken; whether there's enough machinery for change at the state level to fix it I just don't know.

[GothicGothicness]

Well, having a European perspective on American politics, I think the US system is essentially flawed

I'd just like to say, that the system of many European countries where you have a lot of parties to vote for is even worse than the US system. At least in the US system there is a winner! and the polictics will go in this direction.

In for example Sweden there are 4 winners with different opinions and they can never agree.... in fact the disagreement is so much that some of these 4 parties will take make deals with the 3 parties from the other side to get through a specific proposition. There are even things like exchange of votes.... you vote for our idea we will vote for yours... even if we think it sucks. A good example would be a party wanted to found the building of a rubber factory in Africa to help people get jobs... they got it through in this way.... but none checked if there was acctually enough rubber for the factory...... needless to say the money was wasted and the factory buldozed..... on top of that it takes forever to get through a decision. No a strong power is to be prefered over one that doesn't act... infact the EU is the same way they talk and talk and talk but can never agree.

[josephwatson]

Who knows, Corwin...hopefully to gridlock, at the least.

[Prime Junta]

@GothicGoddess -- how is the system you describe worse? It works very well in practice. Look at recent global surveys of good governance (e.g. the Transparency International corruption index or global competitiveness surveys), and you'll find that most of the top countries have proportional multi-party systems.

As an aside, "no a strong power is to be prefered over one that doesn't act" is the main argument in favor of a dictatorship.

[Ragnar]

All I can say is that I would rather live in America that anywhere else…



Except maybe Australia…spend my days digging for Opals.



Or Germany…drinking their wines.



Maybe Japan…study under a real Master.



No…I know…New Zealand and retire as a Hobbit

[Corwin]

There are many great countries I could enjoy living in, Austria springs to mind, and while I like America and enjoy visiting the country, I wouldn't choose to live there!! Too many guns for one thing!!

[slam23]

@GothicGothicness: what Prime Junta said :)
But you are partly right I think, there are flaws in European democracies too, there is no perfect governmental model imho. Our government is sometimes slow in acting and mired in compromise because of the multiparty system. But I would still prefer it over a two party system.
@all: Belgium has compulsory voting and that seems to fuel the extreme rightwing more than it helps the left because of "protest" votes. Now you could argue that the last ones are votes also and represent a part of the people that actually hold those views. Then again, in the Netherlands we have quite a low voting rate and that is not good either. How does that work out in your countries?

[Lord Alex]

Btw, just wanted to reiterate, as per my earlier prediction, that the US is about to get a whole lot more civil in its foreign affairs policy. The Dems gaining the House, the Senate, and the Governor's Majority, is HUGE. Perhaps we can finally start mending fences with those in other countries and stop apologizing for the faults of our leaders. I know it might look like "political business as usual" from the outside, I can say that from inside the pot there's a lot of happy frogs right now. ;)

[Prime Junta]

I certainly hope so. However, until some structural changes actually happen, color me skeptical.

Hanging Bush, Cheney, Rummy et al. as war criminals would be a good start. Preferably from the same gibbet as Saddam.

[txa1265]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1655000/images/_1655688_star_yoda150.jpg

Revealed, your opinion is ...

[Prime Junta]

What, that I hate America? You could've just asked; it's not a secret.

[txa1265]

What, that I hate America? You could've just asked; it's not a secret.
The inherent problem is that your bias therefore inherently taints your purported objectivity. Your perspective becomes clouded as to whether you think the US is broken based on solid reasoning or because you hate it and chase supporting tidbits ...

[Prime Junta]

On the contrary. I didn't always hate America. I came to hate it following a long period of objective analysis. Hatred is the only logical and moral response to America as it currently stands. *Love* of America is the biased, immoral position.

[txa1265]

On the contrary. I didn't always hate America. I came to hate it following a long period of objective analysis. Hatred is the only logical and moral response to America as it currently stands. *Love* of America is the biased, immoral position.
I don't see things so black & white as that. But then the current state of the US tends to bring out the extreme reactions in outsiders, particularly those of a more socialist leaning.

... and not without reason ...

[Prime Junta]

Oh, I'm not socialist at all. I'm politically as centrist as anyone you're likely to find in this part of the world.

There's a problem with language, you know. You can be either terse, or precise, but rarely both. "Hate" is an oversimplification of how I feel about America, even if it's roughly accurate; it's just the shortest word that gets it in the ballpark.

[Korplem]

If you don't mind me asking, why do you hate America?

[Prime Junta]

@Korplem -- Because it's taken the ideals that I hold closest to my heart, and turned them into slogans being used to destroy lives.

[Pfandpirat]

@Prime Junta: I do understand that you dislike the momentary right-wing government but you shouldn´t make the mistake to see Mr. Cheney and his NeoCon-Clique as America as a whole.
I think, like many europeans, that the foreign policy of the Bush-Administration is at least very very questionable since they have managed to ridicule the UN with their solo run in Iraq so that nearly all efforts that the international politic has done since the end of WWII to prevent wars of aggression from happening have just gone down the drain, but it´s a bit overacting to say that America as a whole
has "rotten" or something like that.

[Corwin]

PJ, HATE is neither logical, nor moral!! It's actually a waste of time and energy. I don't Love America, I certainly don't agree with a lot it does, (neither do many Americans I suspect), but to hate it would be silly. What is 'America'? or any country for that matter? Is it a geographical PLACE, a group of people, a government, or what? Disagreeing with a person, or a gov't is fine, it's also healthy, but Hate isn't. Hate destroys the hater, often more than the hatee (if there is such a word). You say you're concerned about ideals being twisted!! Wake UP!!!! That's been happening all through history by every country and government. Hatred dispels reason and can lead to the situation we see now where Terrorism is taking hold. Hatred is an extreme position, so shouldn't line up with your avowed centrist position!!

Let's have good discussion and honest disagreement, but let's keep Hate out of the equation. It achieves nothing that is positive, so why bother!!

[slam23]

I would shudder to think that anyone would see our government and prime minister as being representative for all our people's views, even if they were chosen in a fair and democratic system. Which I may add, was not really the case with the last Bush election, but that's beside the point. And I came across a nice chart that really set things into perspective: it shows the mean IQ of people in all the states that voted for Kerry and those that voted for Bush, guess which states had the lowest score?
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e324/Slam23/iq.jpg
Right.....More frightening is that there is almost no exception! Not to say that "dumb" people shouldn't vote, but to make a point that the people who voted for Bush didn't have the priviledge of access to good education and therefore may have more trouble making an educated choice in politics. The irony of it is that Bush was chosen by the same people he sent to war (a lot of poor uneducated men choose the army as career) and for whom he didn't do s**t when it comes to basic health care, employment and education. He would be stupid too, because he benefits by keeping his electorate dumb as they are. I came across a lot of young American people during my travels over the last couple of years that were pleading not to look at them through the image of their goverment and leader. Let's not get into black & white arguments.
BTW: Have you ever seen our "leader"?, he looks like a LEGO man for chrissakes! He walks like one of them also :)
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e324/Slam23/JPBalkenende.jpg

[Prime Junta]

America's betrayal of its ideals happened long before the W came into power. His clique is simply the culmination of a long historical process. It's possible that America will be able to reinvent itself (it has happened before), but I find it very unlikely. Therefore, I base my actions on the assumption that it won't.

Oh, and Corwin -- again, language is imprecise. It's hard to pin down what any word really "is," let alone a word as amorphous as "America." I'm referring to America as a country, society, polity, idea, and set of values reflected in action; certainly not "all Americans."

[Korplem]

Maybe Prime Junta is just upset that his president looks like Conan O'Brien. :biggrin:

Of course, if I had to choose between a president that looked like a monkey and one that looked like Conan, I'd probably go for Conan...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c0/Ilta_Sanomat_front_page_Conan_and_Tarja.gif

[Lord Alex]

@PJ: I see your point... Honestly, I do, and I agree that the "ideal" of America, as was stated a few hundreds of years ago, has been lost in the shuffle of dollar bills exchanged by a small and increasingly wealthy minority.

However..... you miss the point in lumping the U.S. (i.e., those people who live in the geographic location called the United States) with the bad work being done by this wealthy and vocal minority. I will not dispute that Americans as a whole are uneducated compared to other countries, which (as history has shown) is a recipe for extremism. This, too, is a result of our 20th century leaders favoring "bread and circuses" over "Reading, wRiting, and aRithmetic."

Also, as Corwin so eloquently stated, words have power. Hate is a word we in America are all too familiar with and its ability to polarize is one of the main reasons the Neocons were able to take a foothold. So, if you respect the ideals of sane Americans, I would request you come up with another term that more closely fits your view of the failed experiment that is the American political system. In fact, I think just calling it a "failed experiment" gets your point across just fine. If your reaction is more emotional than that, than you have issues of your own you need to address.

[Prime Junta]

@Alex -- as stated, language is imprecise. I do not lump all Americans automatically with the concept of "America" that I "hate" (for want of a better word). On the contrary, I have nothing but the greatest of respect and admiration for the Americans that are working like hell to return America to the beacon of hope and liberty that it used to be, and I feel pity rather than hatred for those Americans who are simply prisoners of the system or have opted out of it.

The point is that they're not the ones who are acting in the name of America. Haven't been for a very long time.

Moreover, I don't hate America for being a failed experiment, any more than I would have hated Argentina for collapsing its economy due to Perón's populist policies. As said, I hate America for taking those ideals that I love most dearly -- liberty, democracy, justice, human rights -- and turning them into curse words. If there's one political change I'd like to see happening in the world, it's democracy in the Arab world -- but I can't even *say* that anymore, because all it does is invoke pictures of the smoking ruins of Falluja, the oil slick that destroyed most of Lebanon's coastline, and that guy in a black hood standing on a cardboard box with wires through him.

And, Alex, I'm sorry, but I can't think of any word that better expresses my feelings about all this than "hatred" -- and I believe that I would not be a moral human being if I did not have this response. I could try "outrage," but that's not strong enough. You're a writer, I understand; perhaps you can suggest something?

[Corwin]

Disgust leaps to mind!! That's what I feel when I look at some of those images, revulsion would be another, but I don't hate those people, I rather feel sorry for them in some way!!

[Korplem]

Wait, what? Images of what? America or the war?

[Prime Junta]

Korplem, images of the war are images of America.

[Korplem]

That's like saying a picture of an exhaust pipe is a picture of a vehicle.

[Prime Junta]

But it is, isn't it? The exhaust pipe is an integral part of the vehicle. It wouldn't run without the exhaust pipe. It may not be a picture of the entire vehicle, but then it's not possible to display the entire vehicle in a single picture; something will always be left out.

[Korplem]

No, that is not a picture of a vehicle. That is a picture of an exhaust pipe. A core is not an apple, a rectangle is not a square, G.W. Bush is not America, leprosy does not represent the soul of a man.

You strike me as a glass-is-half-empty kind of guy.

[dteowner]

@PJ: By that logic, I should "hate" all Arabs after seeing footage of 2 towns dancing in the streets after 9-11. Those towns are, by your definition, an integral part of the Arab world, and as such, can be used to paint the opinions of the entire region and all its people. Which, by extension, means that I can paint you as such as well, yes?

[Prime Junta]

I never said I hate all Americans. That would be wrong. Besides, I know personally and like very much quite many Americans.

As I said, it's America the state, polity, and idea that I hate. That's different, more like your hatred of the ideas and organizations behind 9/11.

[Corwin]

Are you saying that America is really a terrorist organisation? That's the implication!!!!

[Prime Junta]

The term "terrorist organization" only refers to non-state actors, so obviously America does not fit that definition.

[Corwin]

Let's not equivocate and split hairs over defining precise terms!! Do YOU consider them to be 'terrorists'?

[Prime Junta]

@Corwin -- I'm not equivocating, nor am I splitting hairs. I'm just trying to be as precise as possible when using some highly charged terms. "Terrorism" has a very specific meaning. It means violent action designed to achieve political means through terrorizing the population. Applying the term to state actions stretches the definition in ways I find problematic, even if terms like "shock and awe" have very similar definitions.

Second, I don't want to lump all terrorists together. Terrorists come in an enormous variety of organizations, motivations, causes, and idelogies, from FARC in Columbia and Sendero Luminoso in Peru, to the Liberation Tigers Tamil Eelam in Sri Lanka, the French Resistance fighters in World War II to the Mujahideen who fought the Soviets in Afghanistan, the Aum Shinri Kyo to the Japanese Red Army to the Brigadi Rossi, the ETA to the IRA... and of course the variety of organizations inspired by Sayyed Qutb's legacy.

Some of these organizations fight or fought for causes that are undeniably just using tactics that are cleaner than those used by most states and regular armies. Others fight or fought for for utopias that can never be realized and did not or don't care how many people they kill in the process, or whether they're killed themselves. All have looked into the abyss and been changed by it.

So, my answer to that specific question of yours is still "no, because America is a state and terrorists are defined as non-state actors." However, I have a feeling that that's not the question you're really interested in.

Had you asked me if I consider Americans to be terrorists, I would have to answer "no" as well, because not all Americans are active supporters of the American ideology.

However, had you asked me if I consider the state/ideology of America to be the moral equivalent of the organization/ideology of Al Qaeda, I would have answered "more or less, give or take a few years in purgatory either way."

And yes, that makes the leaders of America today the moral equivalents of the leaders of Al Qaeda, the foot-soldiers of America today the moral equivalents of the foot-soldiers of Al Qaeda, and the sympathizers of America today the moral equivalents of the sympathizers of Al Qaeda.

[Corwin]

That basically, was what I was asking!! In some ways I agree with aspects of what you say, though I'd probably say they are more bullies than terrorists!!

[Prime Junta]

OK, glad we got that sorted out. Perhaps we could go back to discussing role-playing games now?

[Corwin]

Nah, this is the religion and politics forum!! :biggrin:

[dteowner]

And yes, that makes the leaders of America today the moral equivalents of the leaders of Al Qaeda, the foot-soldiers of America today the moral equivalents of the foot-soldiers of Al Qaeda, and the sympathizers of America today the moral equivalents of the sympathizers of Al Qaeda.This is so incredibly off-base and insulting that it doesn't merit a serious response. You're entitled to your opinion, so we'll just move on.

[Prime Junta]

@dteowner -- I'm sure you'll find it insulting, if you belong to any of the groups listed (leaders, foot-soldiers, or sympathizers of Al Qaeda or America).

But how is it off-base? Because your mission to export your twisted brand of democracy is more noble than their mission to export their twisted brand of Islam, no matter how many people die in the process? Because you're the "good" ones and they're the "evil" ones? Or something else that I've missed, perhaps?

[dteowner]

I will refer to my previous example. You don't see Americans dancing in the streets if nearly 3000 people are killed in cold blood. Taking joy in mass killing is a rather significant difference between "us" and "them". And before you go quoting the recent "150,000 dead Iraqis" report, make sure you seperate out those killed by US forces from those killed by each other.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

American citizen puts a stamp that's probably 200.000 Dollars worth on an ballot paper (http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,447945,00.html). It's in German.

There's a picture of that stamp there.

[Prime Junta]

@dteowner -- Claiming that Americans are only responsible for those Iraqis actually killed directly by Americans, rather than indirectly as a result of the disaster caused by the American invasion, is both despicable and cowardly. As Colin Powell put it, "you break it, you own it." (BTW, The Lancet puts it at 625,000 dead Iraqis. I don't see any reason to think their numbers are off.)

Dancing in the streets when you got a taste of your own medicine is mild in comparison. You're far more efficient mass murderers than Al Qaeda could ever be. Unless they manage to get their hands on a nuke, of course. (But then, you're the ones with the experience of dropping nukes on civilians, not them...)

Ever read the Free Republic, by the way? There's plenty of "dancing in the streets" there, every time something bad happens to Arabs. Would you like me to give you some links? It's at http://www.freerepublic.com/ if you're interested. Check out the commentary on the Middle East articles.

[Arhu]

I know someone who's of the opinion that humanity as a whole should be wiped out, because humankind is the source of all evil, or something along those lines.

As for condemning whole countries, I don't know. Call me naïve but to me there's just too many innocents part of any country to warrant such contempt.

[Korplem]

There's plenty of "dancing in the streets" there, every time something bad happens to Arabs.

Are you kidding me? Have you ever been to America? I have never seen or even heard of celebrations over bad things happening in Arab nations. Maybe I'm wrong... Can you give a specific link? I saw nothing about dancing in the streets.

[Prime Junta]

I recently read about some research where it was discovered that discussing highly charged issues like this one only serves to harden attitudes. I can feel it happening right now. A few more pages for this, and *I'll* be (belatedly) dancing in the streets about 9/11, as well as shopping for a nuke to ship to D.C., so I think it's better to call it quits now. Thanks for the discussion, everyone.

To answer Korplem, though -- yes, I've been to America. I've lived there for three years, and visited maybe a half-dozen times, the last time in 2004. Here's a photo I took on the road to Walla Walla in Washington State:

http://static.flickr.com/14/14528798_cc3af86ec1.jpg

And here's one from Monterey:

http://static.flickr.com/27/61303828_d3104d1cdc.jpg

[Korplem]

Ok, agree to disagree. I'll just keep thinking you're more or less nuts and you can keep thinking I'm the moral equivalent of a foot soldier of Al Qaeda. :p (That was meant as a friendly joke, not a malicious jab)

[Alrik Fassbauer]

No comment on my link ? Sad.

[dteowner]

Sorry Arlik, don't read German. According to the news, there were actually 4 collectable stamps on that envelope. The "Inverted Jenny" was by far the most valuable, but the other 3 were worth thousands as well.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Ah, thanks, I see. So the letter was worth even more ?! :D

[dteowner]

Ah, thanks, I see. So the letter was worth even more ?! :D
Actually, no. The ballot had to be thrown out because there was no identification on it. ;)

[Londonchris]

Politics in general is all bollox.
No matter who is elected/voted for there are the same problems that never get solved.
I am sorry to admit,and hate to cause any offence to any American folks,but.....
No-one outside the u.s gives a shit.
Also just think,thats a big world out there!
Maybe i should keep my opinions to myself,however i get quite annoyed when Miss America wants all the attention and just has to be a voice of the planet ALL THE TIME ,just wished it took a backseat once in a while like a powerhouse should, instead of being so brash and "look at me" all the time.
Like i said who gives a shit.
And nothing changes........
Cheers. and don`t make quick reply to this until you actually think and realise what i mean.

[lostnumber]

... i get quite annoyed when Miss America wants all the attention and just has to be a voice of the planet ALL THE TIME ,just wished it took a backseat once in a while like a powerhouse should, instead of being so brash and "look at me" all the time...

Heh, Miss America is just one example among many vociferous Americans I wish I had a STFU button for. Uhhh.. I want o save Africa and stop the AIDS epa.. epa.. epi - dem - ic... like you know? I think I need to update my list of people that need to be loaded into a rocket and launched into the sun.

[Prime Junta]

Walp, we had a Miss Finland candidate a while back who explained, with the required beaming smile, that she wants to work for domestic violence and cruelty to animals...

[Londonchris]

was she blonde?

[Ammon777]

I am American and I voted democrat this time, for the first time in my life. Previously I had voted republican. :)

[Prime Junta]

was she blonde?

Now that you mention it...

[Londonchris]

Well i guess that sums it up.
Though,least she can speak Finnish,which i assure you is not very easy to get the hang of !
hyvää viikonloppu kaikille. (have a good weeekend all).
kippis/cheers.

[Corwin]

I think it's time to close this thread!!