Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [OT] facism gaining ground in US

[Pierce T . Wetter III]

On Jul 16, 2004, at 2:14 AM, nadim wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Well I'm a bit desapointed! IMVHO, what does this have to do with  
> "facism
> gaining ground in US"?

 Nothing, its a rule of mailing lists that any topic that lasts more 
then
10 replies is no longer about its subject line.

 Basically, I thought the whole issue was overhyped, which led me to a
digression about incompetence in the media. You seem to agree that the
issue was overhyped.


> To throw some gas on the flammes I'd say:
>
> - moving an election date because of an imminent ("real") danger has 
> IMO
> nothing to do with fascism. It was just the day's subject and everybody
> jumped on it instead for looking at the long going fascistic 
> activities.

 Yep.
> - IMO the US has been a fascistic state for half a century! I don't 
> like
> Bush but I stopped being a dreammer as soon as as became politicaly"
> (more) mature and that was long before bush

  You've never lived or experienced a fascist state if you truly think
that. In Iran people get beaten & jailed for talking about having fair
elections.

  Bush might be using his power inappropriately, but he might not be 
doing
that as well. Its hard to tell given the media's bias towards 
sensationalism.

> - I'm afraid that there are few US citizens ready for a discussion with
> ,say, europeans because they (most often and there are great exception)
> are on the defensive all the time (I wonder why).

  Because its a lot of work to read enough history, culture and 
political
studies to be able to counteract some of the common European memes. Most
Europeans think they know more about the US then they do, countering 
that
takes more research then most Americans are willing to do. So American's
feel vaguely defensive often when talking to Europeans because Europeans
have some strange beliefs about America that we know are false, but 
don't
know exactly why.

 True story: A friend of mine was in Norway when the movie "Animal 
House"
came out, and he was watching it with a bunch of Norwegians and no one
laughed. He asked a couple of them why they didn't laugh, and they all
thought it was a documentary.

> - Want to compare with europeans, let's start comparing bombs amounts 
> and
> usage, attentats, terrorist activities, support for fascistic states,
> military support, falsness, comitment to ideas that are only because of
> the financial aspect (we can skip Irak (you  can't even fool yourselves
> anymore on that one)),

  I can. I think going into Iraq was the right thing to do. How we
presented it to the world was terrible, but that's a different issue.

> etc ... As a side point, do you know that many
> europeans coutry teach about the US history and political system
> (including France).

  So do the US schools, but the version of US history taught in schools
is quite different from reality. (We still call our involvement in the
Napoleonic Wars as the War of 1812).

I suspect the version of US history taught in European schools also is 
that way...


> Two very important points:
>
> (sorry I don't have the source) , 70% of the europeans think that the 
> most
> dangerous man in the world is Bush (I am and that's because I think he 
> is
> a fascist).

  Just because someone thinks something doesn't make it true. That 
could mean
that Bush truly is the most dangerous man in the world, or it could 
mean that
he gives the impression of being a loose cannon.

  I live in a very cowboy state, so I can understand better where Bush 
is
coming from then most Europeans or most Yankees.

> The states doesn't rate very well when it comes to the respect 
> europeans
> (those I know and talk with) gives them. Many think you have what you
> deserve but most make the diffrence between the US policies and the 
> people
> making the US. You (the people) think you stand for something good and
> have values, most (of us) belive you but it's getting harder. Not 
> because
> the people are doing things that are wrong but because they support the
> governement that do things that are wrong and when you don't support 
> them,
> they get done anyway.
>
> Now this is my opinion and I believe it's share by many but those who 
> don't
> agree with me are very welcome to counter.

  There are several things that Europeans don't think about when 
looking at
  US foreign policy:

   We're new to the game: The US had little influence on the world 
before WWII. We just didn't care. We often still don't.

   Post Colonial history: Immediately after WWII much of Europe was 
destroyed/exhausted. That
  left numerous "colonies" adrift in the world, most of which got 
dropped
  in either the US or Soviet laps. The US would probably have blown them
  off if not for the cold war. We mostly bungled what we did with those
  former colonies, but that's not surprising. We don't really have the
  temperament to be a colonial power. The original colonial powers have 
to
  share at least some of the blame for what happened with those 
colonies.

  Cold War: So I don't think you can entirely blame us for all the 
stupid things that happened during the Cold War. Policies that made 
sense in the short term often won out over what we consider our long 
term strategies. We knew we were making those decisions at the time.

  New World: The world has been in the post Cold War phase for a bit 
now, but
 both the US and the rest of the world is just starting to realize that 
it
 substantially changes the rules. Hopefully, this will mean that the US 
will push
 more towards what we consider our long-term interests (democracy for 
everyone,
 free trade, etc.) and less towards our short-term interests 
(installing "our"
 dictator instead of "their" dictator).

  In some cases, its led to some foreign policy successes for the US.

  Balance of Power doesn't make sense: 19th century balance of power 
politics
just don't make sense in the 20th and 21st centuries. The world is just 
too
dangerous a place these days. In fact, its not clear they made sense 
going back as far as Cardinal Richileu in the 17th century. He was a 
master of that, but he
ultimately gained France nothing.

  Cultural Divisions: West of the Missisippi, being a "Cowboy" is a 
compliment.
So if Europeans dismiss a President as being a Cowboy, many Americans 
won't get
that as being insulting. Similarly while being called a "peasant" may 
be insulting to a European, it could be a compliment to an American.

  We don't have to be perfect: The US is often looked to as an honest 
broker, not
because we're truly honest, but often just because we're the best from 
a list
of bad choices.

  Pierce