American Exceptionalism

[AlBell]

Yeah, but they weren't daft enough to let everybody vote.

A point not lost on the US founding fathers when they penned the original documents.

 

[Ziggurat]

Really - so you can remotely read my mind, and decide what I really meant? I am sure the JREF has a pretty hefty check waiting for you if you can prove your claim

Wooooooooooosh their go them goalposts

Oh, the irony. You complain about US free speech not holding people responsible. What, pray tell, do you imagine holding people responsible can even mean if not censorship? Plus, of course, your claim that I'm moving my goalpost relies on you reading my mind to claim that I argued something I never did. You're a hypocrite. You don't like me pointing out logical requirements of the position you've adopted because you didn't make them explicit, but you'll invent claims for me so that you have something to refute. Because god knows you can't refute what I actually said, as your repeated failures have demonstrated.

 

[Border Reiver]

You complain about US free speech not holding people responsible. What, pray tell, do you imagine holding people responsible can even mean if not censorship?

Freedom of speech is not the freedom from censorship. What it is, is the ability to say or print things provided that they cause no harm to others.

Justice Holmes dictum about yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theatre is appropriate here. As would the laws against libel and slander.

 

[Toke]

I am pretty sure the American exceptionalism was predated by the English "White man´s burden" and is nothing but overzealous nationalism.

As it is the US have somehow been inconsistent in implementing the high ideals from home in foreign policy.

Imagine if there had been a force for democracy in south and central America since the Spanish were kicked out of Cuba.

 

[crimresearch]

And what exactly is a 'brown'

Since the choice of phrase was yours, and I was just calling you on your use of it, what exactly are 'the blacks'? Let's add that to the list of legitimate skeptical questions you refuse to answer.

 

[MG1962]

Since the choice of phrase was yours, and I was just calling you on your use of it, what exactly are 'the blacks'? Let's add that to the list of legitimate skeptical questions you refuse to answer.

Dude now you are just making stuff up - feel free to point out where I used the word browns?

 

[Kopji]

I can think of a lot worse attitudes for the US to have than thinking we are enlightened protectors and promoters of democracy and liberty in the world.

 

[Ziggurat]

Freedom of speech is not the freedom from censorship.

That is exactly what freedom of speech means.

What it is, is the ability to say or print things provided that they cause no harm to others.

Not in the US it isn't. Harm is not the standard for imposing censorship, and thank god for that. The truth can cause some people harm, and some people should be harmed by speech. You're justifying censorship (and doing it poorly, too), but you aren't defining freedom of speech.

Justice Holmes dictum about yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theatre is appropriate here. As would the laws against libel and slander.

Both of those refer to limitations on freedom of speech that the Supreme Court has accepted (limitations which don't even match your description above). But freedom of speech itself is indeed the freedom from censorship, even if that freedom is not absolute here.

 

[Piscivore]

I take exception to Americanism, does that count?

 

[crimresearch]

Dude now you are just making stuff up - feel free to point out where I used the word browns?

You used the derogatory term that you used in post #87, as you are well aware, and your tactic of denial and sophistry to make fun of being called on it, simply proves my point.
Once again, you have nothing either correct or useful on the topic, but you'll drag down yet another thread with your 'othering' and endless sniping.

 

[epepke]

Political Science:

 

[Toke]

I can think of a lot worse attitudes for the US to have than thinking we are enlightened protectors and promoters of democracy and liberty in the world.

As long as the American people think it is so, the government have had a free reign to run the foreign policy just as cynical as any other great power.

Perhaps it would be better if the people knew what was going on and could take an informed decision on what they wanted from their foreign policy?

 

[MG1962]

You used the derogatory term that you used in post #87, as you are well aware, and your tactic of denial and sophistry to make fun of being called on it, simply proves my point.
Once again, you have nothing either correct or useful on the topic, but you'll drag down yet another thread with your 'othering' and endless sniping.

If you can find the word brown as a derogatory term in that post I will publicly request the moderation/admin team to de-register my account. Now lets try again, where have I used the word browns in post #87 of this thread or any of the other 11000 odd posts in my time on this forum.

 

[Corsair 115]

If you can find the word brown as a derogatory term in that post I will publicly request the moderation/admin team to de-register my account. Now lets try again, where have I used the word browns in post #87 of this thread or any of the other 11000 odd posts in my time on this forum.

Have you ever posted about the St. Louis Browns or the Cleveland Browns? You'd use the word "Browns" then.

 

[MG1962]

Have you ever posted about the St. Louis Browns or the Cleveland Browns? You'd use the word "Browns" then.

LOL - well I am staking my membership on the fact that I haven't

 

[Kopji]

As long as the American people think it is so, the government have had a free reign to run the foreign policy just as cynical as any other great power.

Perhaps it would be better if the people knew what was going on and could take an informed decision on what they wanted from their foreign policy?

I agree with the last part of that completely. Difficult to answer the first part though.

Phrases like "American [fill in the blank]". are so broad they are meaningless. waxing ancedotal... Americans include my Hulapai buddy at work who grew up in a town twelve miles from the nearest road. My sister in law who was an illegal immigrant from Mexico. A sister in California sees herself as a public servant and has taken several pay cuts and loss of hours. Wildly different people, but all Americans. If we think America is an exceptional place, I can't find a lot of fault there.

And anyway, we all know in our hearts that the really exceptional places are Norway and Australia.

One trait we might have in common is that we rarely listen to blow-hard politicians who claim to be some greater voice of the people.

We are a powerful nation. We make mistakes but have a great capacity to take a look at ourselves when we are wrong and try to correct what is wrong.

If we combine ignorance and fear with the idea that we are somehow instruments of a greater ideal or supernatural deity. That is the kind of more dangerous idea I mean.

 

[MG1962]

You used the derogatory term that you used in post #87, as you are well aware, and your tactic of denial and sophistry to make fun of being called on it, simply proves my point.
Once again, you have nothing either correct or useful on the topic, but you'll drag down yet another thread with your 'othering' and endless sniping.

And because my last post can not be edited. Please be careful claiming the race card. If using the word black is derogatory.. I would go talk to these people

http://thecongressionalblackcaucus.com/

 

[Childlike Empress]

Election update: Who lost the World?

Who lost Libya? Indeed, who lost the entire Middle East? Those are the questions lurking behind the endless stream of headlines about "Benghazi-gate". Here's the question we should really ask, though: How did a tragic but isolated incident at a US consulate, in a place few Americans had ever heard of, get blown up into a pivotal issue in a too-close-to-call presidential contest?

My short answer: the enduring power of a foreign policy myth that will not die, the decades-old idea that America has an inalienable right to "own" the world and control every place in it. I mean, you can't lose what you never had.

This campaign season teaches us how little has changed since the early Cold War days when Republican stalwarts screamed, "Who lost China?" More than six decades later, it's still surprisingly easy to fill the political air with anxiety by charging that we've "lost" a country or, worse yet, a whole region that we were somehow supposed to "have".

The "Who lost ...?" formula is something like a magic trick. There's no way to grasp how it works until you take your eyes away from those who are shouting alarms and look at what's going on behind the scenes. [...]

 

[Dcdrac]

I have always been rather peeved off that the US govt. seems to think the laws of the USA apply to the rest of the planet too.

Woe betide anyone non US person who supplies equipment to a country that US law forbids US companies from trading with.

 

[Mark6]

Election update: Who lost the World?

I had to look out the window to check for flying pigs. I agree on something with Childlike Empress!

Or at least Childlike Empress posts a link to someone I agree with. I've been telling people for quite some time "US is not in the position to dictate to the rest of the world. Learn to live with it, for wishful thinking will not make it go away." And more immediately, Obama recognizes this reality, whereas Romeny does not. (Or maybe he does, but the rest of Republican party does not.)