• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is America the greatest Country anymore? Or do you agree with Will?

Is America the greatest Country anymore? Or do you agree with Will?


  • Total voters
    57
It's not as great since the liberals screwed it up

Those nasty liberals - perhaps they should be deported to Canada or somewhere even further, like Sweden.
 
Those nasty liberals - perhaps they should be deported to Canada or somewhere even further, like Sweden.

Not even liberals should be deported, if they are citizens and we need laborers for the salt mines.
 
Better:

Next The Economist explains: Where Islamic State gets its money

Jan 4, 2015 ... Instead the bulk of its money comes from oil revenues from fields under its .... " Levitt is a national expert on terrorism and its financing, working ...
The Economist explains | The Economist

LabeledBlogs
Financial sanctions: The pros and cons of a SWIFT response | The ...

Nov 22, 2014 ... Though most of the terrorist group's funding comes from local oil revenues, ransoms and shakedowns of businesses in territories that IS ...
Page Not Found - Debate Politics Forums financial-messaging-network-potent-measure

LabeledPrint edition

The biggest single source of funding for Islamic terrorism is oil wealth. The fact that the majority of that funding does not come from American customers does not matter to me. The fact that any amount comes from profits of fuel sold to Americans does matter to me. As long as he maintain any dependence at all on Mideast oil, at least a small portion of what you pay at the gas pumps is in fact funding Islamic terrorism. North America producing all of it's it's own oil would have a major effect. It would produce a glut that would force OPEC prices downward.
 
Well, if "his country" is Equatorial Guinea I can see your point. On the other hand, if it's the USA you have to count me among the afflicted.



I might call the Soviet Union a "great contributor" if it hadn't helped start WWII by signing the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact with Germany. I mean, if you start a fire and then sacrifice yourself to help put it out does that make you the greatest fireman? :confused:

Exactly. Stalin had conquest on his mind just as much as Hitler did. Their intention was to share the spoils.
 
On the first point, describing your country as the "best" in the world is good for a laugh but to do it seriously is evidence of huge vanity. Like I said, colonial Britain did this sort of thing in the past so I know the mindset. But it's a mindset worth shaking off if you want to cultivate good relations with other countries.

One reason Great Britain came so close getting overrun by the third reich is that their military forces were so spread out administering all of the colonies they still held around the world. Shameful.
 
The British perspective has been that, in Western Europe, we stood alone against Germany after the rest of Europe had fallen (or remained neutral) between 1941 and 1943. We could say that we were alone while the USA was trying its best to find reasons to stay out of the war, given the very strong German ethnic influence in the USA. .

We have to remember that the pre-WW2 USA was not the global superpower it is today. We were not the "world police," and we did not have nearly the military we have today. At that time, the overwhelming disposition of the American People was that we don't want to get involved in foreign wars, or, to a point, in Europe's wars. That sentiment was a carryover from the 18th and 19th centuries, under which time it was official policy, and it's one that makes sense for a country an ocean removed from the motherland.

Putting it in to further context, up until WW2, it's not as if conflict on the European continent was uncommon. Beginning in 1776, when the US was founded, Europe engaged in over 100 separate internal wars, including the Napoleonic Wars, the French Revolution, the first world war, etc. Owing to this, the overwhelming feeling in America was that we don't want to get dragged in to another one of Europe's internal conflicts, and they'll figure it out themselves.

(List of conflicts in Europe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)


What really tipped the scales for us was the unprompted Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, a US naval base in the territory of Hawaii, in 1941. The Japanese awakened a sleeping giant with that move, as an outraged American public demanded justice against the Japanese. We also began to see how on the European front, this war was more dire than previous European wars.

President Roosevelt declared war on Japan shortly thereafter, and then Germany. One could say that the Pacific Theatre was always the central focus for the United States during WW2, however we did send a substantial amount of troops to aid the allies on the European front as well.

One could make the argument that fresh American troops, arriving later in the conflict, was not foreseen by Hitler and was enough to tip the scales on that front in favor of the allies.

While one could argue, correctly, that the British and Russians contributed more troops to the European front during the war, one might expect as much given that your nations were attacked by Hitler, and America was not.

In fact, an examination of the motives each country had for joining the war is prudent to our understanding of history. Remember that Russia, while contributing greatly to the allied cause, originally sided with Hitler. It was only after they were double-crossed and themselves attacked that they joined the fight for the allies...for survival.

Britain defended itself honorably during WW2, its people resolute and never wavering, and I don't think this is lost on anyone regardless of which perspective they're viewing the war from. However, if your perspective is to say that you went it alone, that perspective is incorrect. The US supported you with a significant number of volunteer troops and with supplies well before we joined the actual war.

The Americans never had to join the European front. We could have been content fighting the Japanese in the Pacific. At the end of the day, we arrived at the 11th hour with fresh guns, troops, and spirits to help the British defend their homeland and to storm Normandy and begin the reconquest of continental Europe.

At the end of the day, during Europe's darkest hour, of all the nations who were never attacked by Hitler, it was America who came to fight side by side with you. It wasn't the Canadians. It wasn't the Brazilians. It wasn't the Chinese. It wasn't the Swedes or the Swiss or the nations of the Middle East. It was the Americans.

So for all we can say America has done wrong in the world since that time, and there have been plenty of transgressions committed that we could fairly have the finger pointed at us for, my opinion is this is one moment in American history in which Americans have a legitimate right to feel proud of how we acted when our moment was there to act.

We did not, as we could have done, remain neutral. We did not shy away from what we ultimately saw as a moral obligation; millions of Americans fought and died on European soil alongside our friends and allies, fighting against one of the greatest monsters the world has ever seen. We stood up for what we thought was right, even when we didn't have to, and before we really had the means to.

It was the moment that gave rise to the birth of a superpower.
 
On the Soviet Union, they lost as many men every day in the Battle of Stalingrad as the USA lost in Pearl Harbour.

Once again, all I can say is if you invite fleas into your home you shouldn't be surprised if they invade your bed.

The USA was extremely reluctant to enter WW2 (understandably) and even losing a ship in an Arctic convoy was not enough for it to get involved. It was only when Germany declared war on the USA that they got involved. So there are some "what ifs" affecting contributions to the war on all sides.

Even before the U.S. officially entered the war the Roosevelt Administration and Congress were moving the U.S. out of the "neutral" camp. One example: the Lend-Lease Act, which was proposed in 1940 and passed by Congress and signed into law by Roosevelt in March, 1940. By the end of the war, U.S. aid under the act amounted to something on the order of $50 billion worth of arms, not chump change in the early to mid 1940s.

There's no denying that America's contribution to WW2 was massive and began at a critical time, and we should be forever grateful to you, but to make a point about one country or another making the greatest contribution to it is always going to be very subjective, unhelpful and just annoying.

Sorry if this is annoying, but it's not subjective to say that before the U.S. entered the war the Allies were getting their collective asses kicked. How long did France last? Six weeks? :surrender
 
Are we still on about "who is the greatest country"? If this keeps up, then you'll be hearing from me with some examples of how the US is very much not the greatest country. Could be an interesting project.

That is the subject of the thread, isn't it? :confused: Knock yourself out. You'll be just as wrong as Jeff Daniels.
 
One reason Great Britain came so close getting overrun by the third reich is that their military forces were so spread out administering all of the colonies they still held around the world. Shameful.
I agree that colonisation was and is wrong and that Britain should never have done it. However, I don't claim that my country has ever been the "best" or "greatest" by any objective standard, which I am astonished to see that some Americans really do believe about their country.
 
I tend to keep rather proactive company, so I don't see so much of the cynicism. But my point really was that "greatest" is simply so subjective and everyone's opinion would be based on wildly different criteria that it's not a very good question to ask. I would even dispute the character in the video's notion that this country used to be greater than it is sometime in the past. I also dispute the assumption that this was ever the greatest country in the world, because I don't think you can really tell. I don't like blind patriotism and I certainly don't like nostalgic views of the past that are almost always inaccurate.
Hmmm I understand what you are saying, but I will respectfully disagree on some points of yours, while maybe agreeing with your overall point.
There are things America was in the past, that really were quite remarkable, and resulted in it being the worlds largest Militarily/Cultural/Economic superpower... we became that for a reason, and to admire those reasons or admiring the US as it's place in the history of the human race- I don't think is a bad thing nor a thing that is inaccurate or unjustified. The history books 1000 years from now will look back at America as the one of the Greatest/Most Influential countries in the history of the world with quite a story to tell-among the greatest in human history. Like Rome/ England/etc etc. I don't think that in inaccurate.....Is that what you consider great? Maybe not, but that is what a lot of people mean when they say great.



The greatest country, to me, is the one that strives the hardest to be the greatest. Greatness is a process, not a status. And we certainly don't strive very hard, anymore. When it became public knowledge that our government tortured prisoners, and the reaction wasn't universal outrage, we weren't striving to be the most moral people in the world. When people actually argue that it's alright for police to perpetuate a culture of violence against blacks, we aren't striving to care for our own people. I don't know if we ever were the greatest in this regard. I don't know if we're really better or worse than anyone else. I do know that we're not doing very well, in some regards. We strive pretty damn hard towards personal liberty. The United States has some of the strongest free speech protections in the entire world. That's pretty great. Other countries make it a crime to deny the Holocaust. We would consider that unthinkable, and that's how I think it should be. Does that make up for all the black kids murdered by police every year? Or how we ration healthcare only to those with money? I don't know. Because I don't think greatness comes from your achievements. I think greatness comes from never being satisfied with your achievements. And right now, we are a people that is entirely too satisfied.
I agree with this for the most part.

So, I neither think that this is the greatest country, nor do I think it can be proved that it ever was, nor do I agree with Will McAvoy that we used to be greater and have lost something, and I certainly don't that mine is the worst.
Does this not contradict your statement above? "The greatest country, to me, is the one that strives the hardest to be the greatest." "We certainly don't strive anymore" , America in past was a much more changing country, and the Cultural Powerhouse of the world, from The Independence, to the Civil War to end slavery, to the first to enter the Atomic Age to woodstock to the technological boom in the 80s... America was changing/adapting/and striving... The cultural impact of America can not be understated.
Continued....
 
Our problem isn't cell phones, nor sexual freedom, nor even cynicism (I would argue that a lot of that cynicism is well earned). Our problem is complacency. There are fools in this country who really do think that racism is over. Or who think that equality and egalitarianism really means tearing down white males or Christians or heterosexuals in favor of someone else. Or who think that our society already does that. Too many Americans think that we've already hit the ideal and now there's nowhere to go but down. Some claim that we're the world's superheroes because of World War II. Some claim that the lofty words of men who died two centuries ago make us experts in liberty who can do no wrong.

The race issue is a complicated one, with many people thinking differently on how to solve it. The differences in opinion on how to solve the race issue, I think, should be recognized and NOT something that is taken as not taking racism seriously. I honestly don't know a single person who thinks racism is over... I know those who think it has been dramatically reduced and the battles for it have largely been won, but I know of no-one who thinks it's gone.
For example, I think continuing the concept of race is the poison, it will always be there as long as that's there. It divides people. Race is a social construct, I think, we should make every effort of wiping out.... or at least have efforts to try to. There are many who disagree with me on that, I honestly believe the concept of race and the thought that you belong to some kind of human breed, is the poison. It would take a lot of effort, but I think we should start now..... it;s a noble cause.

I think we are not actually in decline as a nation. We're improving. But our rate of improvement has slowed because of this complacency. Maybe that's the cynicism you're seeing. I see some who have lost hope because they've been ground down by a system that squeezes every last drop it can out of everyone it can for the benefit of the wealthiest of this country. But it's complacency that makes us not do something about that system. We're complacent in our little tiny piece of the pie so we won't risk it to help those with even tinier pieces, or virtually no piece at all, and we make excuses for why a hundred million share an eighth of the pie while a hundred thousand have three quarters of it and the last eighth goes to two hundred million. We're complacent in the invisible privileges we enjoy because of being male, white, Christian, or heterosexual so we won't accept any discomfort for ourselves to help those without those privileges, and make excuses for why they really have the same deference and opportunities we have but squander them.
Seem to be contradicting yourself again, to you, greatness IS striving to be Great.... and complacency is the opposite of that. America was striving harder to be great in the past, was it not? .... though given, in the past, they had a longer way to go(since we have built ourselves on the past)

If Americans could be a bit less self-absorbed and get off of our asses and expect better of ourselves, we could be pretty great. But we're too wrapped up in our own personal gain and wanting to feel superior to other people to risk making any kind of real difference that could change our country and society for the better. We can only become great when we actually realize that we aren't and decide to do something about it. Instead we pat ourselves on the back for past achievements and shout patriotic slogans and pretend that we're done with the process and greatness is a cushion we can sit on instead of a mountain perpetually to be climbed.
I think those are more reactionary statements rather than the true belief superiority and arrogance. What's wrong with a little nationalism? What's wrong with a little Pride? .... arguably, it actually motivates people to make America great.... otherwise if your always shooting her down, you just end up with bitter people arguing with you not recognizing what America IS great for. You hurt peoples feelings talking bad about any country they reside from, it makes them think you don't valuing the country like they do.

This is obviously the emotional response of the common people, and if you wish to inspire them, I would consider a different approach... because I don't think what you are saying is entirely wrong.

In short, "Great" is a thing you do and keep doing, not a thing you are.
agreed
 
Last edited:
The British perspective has been that, in Western Europe, we stood alone against Germany after the rest of Europe had fallen (or remained neutral) between 1941 and 1943. We could say that we were alone while the USA was trying its best to find reasons to stay out of the war, given the very strong German ethnic influence in the USA. The British were also in the Far East in WW2 though admittedly in much smaller numbers than the US and with little success. We also often forget the Eastern Front and Russia's massive contribution. But like I said to Ahlevah, the US's contribution to the defence of Britain and liberation of Europe was massive and we should be forever grateful for it.

Personally, I take great inspiration from Britain's defiance, e.g. during the London Blitz. And Britain over the years has been a steady ally--in Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, and so forth. When it comes to allies, I place Britain and former possessions such as Canada and Australia in a whole other category.
 
I agree that colonisation was and is wrong and that Britain should never have done it. However, I don't claim that my country has ever been the "best" or "greatest" by any objective standard, which I am astonished to see that some Americans really do believe about their country.

You shouldn't be so astonished. At the height of the British Empire, Brits overwhelmingly believed that their country was the "best" and the "greatest" and many other such things. Rudyard Kipling even wrote poems about it. It's only in today's post-imperial Britain that the trend of multi-polarism has become somewhat fashionable. However, talk to many conservative Brits even today and they'll be happy to tell you all about how Britain is God's gift to the world.

I think it's normal for any superpower to be a bit cocky. I think America's cockiness is mild in comparison to that which preceded it.
 
As a side note, Americas racism is overblown in comparison to most of the world and even most of Europe, The Scandinavian countries are the only ones more racially tolerant. America is on the same level as Canada and the UK.THIS DOES NOT MEAN that racism is not something we should all actively fight and strive to improve, it's just a matter of perspective....I hear a fair amount of people from around the world, because of the media, think America is some rampant KKK powerhouse.... when in fact that is not the case, America is a extremely diverse and accepting country in comparison to MOST countries in the world INCLUDING Europe.
 
(List of conflicts in Europe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
Your points about USA's involvement in WW2, ending with:
"It was the moment that gave rise to the birth of a superpower."
Thank-you for the information. You write well and I enjoyed reading it.

I am sure the Canadians were heavily involved in WW2 but I don't know when their involvement started.

I'm really not doubting that the USA made a huge contribution to the defeat of the Nazis and it's something we should never forget. I don't know exactly what commemorations will take place for VE Day this week (70th anniversary) but I hope that the USA has a big role - they certainly should.

The only thing that jarred was your final sentence, about the birth of a superpower. But by common definitions of "superpower", if we must use the term, then I accept that the USA has been one since WW2. But why you should want to use the terms begs many questions.

Going back to the thread, it really is for history to judge if one country was the "greatest" or the "best" in any period and, even then, arguments are bound to rage because of the arrogance of any such claim. What I am picking up from this thread is that there is a strong current in American thinking that it is important that they acknowledge that they are the "best" or the "greatest" country. This is very worrying. As soon as this thinking starts to take hold, people move into an unreal world where they are the good guys and they must sort the good guys from the bad; it also makes it harder to accept mistakes humbly and learn from them. A nation that thinks this way about itself will cast itself as having the "burden" of resolving major world problems, according to some God-given mandate. Ultimately, these beliefs lead to thinking that the lives of the people in their country are more important than the lives of other people. As I say, this is an extremely familiar mentality for Brits and, by no means have we recovered from it. If any Brit made similar claims as to how we were ever the "best" or "greatest", he or she could expect a similar response.

I'll hold back on specifics as to how America's best" and "greatest" mentality has led to horror for many people around the world for now. But if the thread continues in this vein, then expect some reality checks along these lines.
 
You shouldn't be so astonished. At the height of the British Empire, Brits overwhelmingly believed that their country was the "best" and the "greatest" and many other such things. Rudyard Kipling even wrote poems about it. It's only in today's post-imperial Britain that the trend of multi-polarism has become somewhat fashionable. However, talk to many conservative Brits even today and they'll be happy to tell you all about how Britain is God's gift to the world.

I think it's normal for any superpower to be a bit cocky. I think America's cockiness is mild in comparison to that which preceded it.

America's cockiness is just as dangerous as that of Britain's of the past, perhaps more, because of sheer devastating firepower. You'll never find me harking back to the greatness of Britain's colonial past - though many Britons sadly still do. The Americans were right to insist that Britain relinquish the empire after WW2, but are wrong to copy this mentality, as though it was their turn. The chickens have long been coming to roost as a result.
 
On the first point, describing your country as the "best" in the world is good for a laugh but to do it seriously is evidence of huge vanity.

If the description were only based on opinion, then I could see your point. But why can't we establish objective criteria to determine a nation's "greatness"? For example, if scientific achievement is a determinant of greatness, what's wrong with counting up the number of Nobel Prizes in Physics, Chemistry, and Medicine? In total, the U.S. has won more than three times as many Nobel Prizes (353) as the next largest winner, Britain (115).

Like I said, colonial Britain did this sort of thing in the past so I know the mindset. But it's a mindset worth shaking off if you want to cultivate good relations with other countries.

Nobody likes a braggart. I get that. On the other hand, if you keep kicking a giant in the nuts no one should be surprised if he blows your eardrums out when he screams. Quite frankly, I'm getting a bit annoyed at this idea that the U.S. is all washed up, like Sylvester Stallone by the time he got to the fourth Rocky sequel.
 
Personally, I take great inspiration from Britain's defiance, e.g. during the London Blitz.
As a Londoner, (and also a son of Glaswegians whose city was also bombed) thanks for this particular comment.
 
If the description were only based on opinion, then I could see your point. But why can't we establish objective criteria to determine a nation's "greatness"? For example, if scientific achievement is a determinant of greatness, what's wrong with counting up the number of Nobel Prizes in Physics, Chemistry, and Medicine? In total, the U.S. has won more than three times as many Nobel Prizes (353) as the next largest winner, Britain (115).



Nobody likes a braggart. I get that. On the other hand, if you keep kicking a giant in the nuts no one should be surprised if he blows your eardrums out when he screams. Quite frankly, I'm getting a bit annoyed at this idea that the U.S. is all washed up, like Sylvester Stallone by the time he got to the fourth Rocky sequel.
On Nobel Prizes, if the issue arises as to which country has won the most, then it's fair enough to quote the stats and leave it at that. But there's no need to induce that this is evidence of the USA's "greatness". Let non-Americans pay you that compliment, if they choose.

If you rejigged the results table pro rata according to the world's population or GDP, perhaps both our countries would be well down the list. If you excluded European emigres, then perhaps the USA would again fall down the list. Jewish people could claim that their race is the greatest if you looked at the ethnic origin of the winners. In any event, there's just no point trying to use these kind of stats to make a point about the USA being the "greatest". If you do, then expect others to keep kicking your country in the proverbials until it learns a little humility.
 
As a side note, Americas racism is overblown in comparison to most of the world and even most of Europe, The Scandinavian countries are the only ones more racially tolerant. America is on the same level as Canada and the UK.THIS DOES NOT MEAN that racism is not something we should all actively fight and strive to improve, it's just a matter of perspective....I hear a fair amount of people from around the world, because of the media, think America is some rampant KKK powerhouse.... when in fact that is not the case, America is a extremely diverse and accepting country in comparison to MOST countries in the world INCLUDING Europe.
From my experience of meeting Americans, you are very good at naturally showing respect to individuals in their diversity. Racism is hard to define well but, on gut instinct, I wouldn't say that the USA is more racist than England.
 
The only thing that jarred was your final sentence, about the birth of a superpower. But by common definitions of "superpower", if we must use the term, then I accept that the USA has been one since WW2. But why you should want to use the terms begs many questions.

Going back to the thread, it really is for history to judge if one country was the "greatest" or the "best" in any period and, even then, arguments are bound to rage because of the arrogance of any such claim. What I am picking up from this thread is that there is a strong current in American thinking that it is important that they acknowledge that they are the "best" or the "greatest" country. This is very worrying. As soon as this thinking starts to take hold, people move into an unreal world where they are the good guys and they must sort the good guys from the bad; it also makes it harder to accept mistakes humbly and learn from them. A nation that thinks this way about itself will cast itself as having the "burden" of resolving major world problems, according to some God-given mandate. Ultimately, these beliefs lead to thinking that the lives of the people in their country are more important than the lives of other people. As I say, this is an extremely familiar mentality for Brits and, by no means have we recovered from it. If any Brit made similar claims as to how we were ever the "best" or "greatest", he or she could expect a similar response.

Well I had to take a swipe at the Canadians... little brother and all that. :)

The reason I included the last sentence, and mentioned that WW2 was the moment that gave birth to the United States as a superpower, was simply to point out the magnitude of the event insofar as how it has shaped the world around us since that time. I'm making the case that had the United States not gotten involved in the European part of WW2, we would not have been the power we are today, and, ergo, there never would have been a counterbalance against the Soviet Union during the Cold War, there never would have been a counterbalance against communist expansion in Latin America and Asia during the 50's through the 80's, there never would have been a counterbalance against those Middle Eastern nations who want to wipe Israel off the map.... etc.

The world would be a very different place. And that's worth noting as an interesting fact.

As for your fear that American arrogance will lead to blindness and unpredictable action, I think your fear is understandable, however I don't share it. You are looking at it from a chiefly European perspective, through the lens of European history and experience. Europe has a history of Fascism, which is essentially what you're describing to a tee - a people believe they are superior to other groups of people, therefore they commit atrocious acts against other people justified internally by their own sense of superiority.

American patriotism is a rather different animal compared with European fascism, and a much more benign one.

Ours really stems from two things. First, we're a nation of immigrants. The majority of white Americans originally came from some form of oppression in Europe - either religious, economic, political, etc. America, to those people, represented the land of freedom and opportunity which they did not have in Europe at the time they left. This positive attitude has carried over the generations and that's why we still identify ourselves as the "land of opportunity" and with concepts like "freedom" and "liberty" and so forth, even though one could rightly say that other nations have since caught up in those respects.

The other key point is simply cultural. Americans value a positive, confident attitude and a "can-do" attitude to a much greater extent than other countries I've lived in or visited. We're generally more comfortable around someone who is self-aggrandizing than someone who is self-deprecating, and I would say this is quite opposite from what you see in Britain and can indeed be the source of some cultural friction. We can get in to that in more detail if you wish, but suffice it to say for now that it's just the way Americans are, and you shouldn't take much from it.

When we puff our chests out and say "America is the greatest," it's meant as a statement of self-confidence, not in any way an indictment of other countries. Most Americans would fully expect and encourage you to counter "Britain is the greatest" or "Scotland is the greatest" or whatever. We'd be more comfortable with that than the self-deprecating European "no country is the greatest, we all suck, blah blah."

It's just a cultural thing.
 
America's cockiness is just as dangerous as that of Britain's of the past, perhaps more, because of sheer devastating firepower. You'll never find me harking back to the greatness of Britain's colonial past - though many Britons sadly still do. The Americans were right to insist that Britain relinquish the empire after WW2, but are wrong to copy this mentality, as though it was their turn. The chickens have long been coming to roost as a result.

I disagree. I think America, while undoubtedly making mistakes along the way, has overall been a force for good in the world since WW2. On the political front, American power has been the counterweight to the Soviets, to the spread of communism in Europe, Latin America, and Asia, has been responsible for opening up China to the West, has ensured the survival of Israel and the post-holocaust Jews both by protecting Israel and by welcoming the largest number of Jews on to our shores of any nation on earth since the war.

On the economic front, America has essentially fed the world by exporting cheap food and has been integral in the global population boom since WW2, has been the champion for free trade and economic prosperity both in the east and west, has furthered the world culturally with everything from inventing Jazz, then Rock and Roll to Hollywood and the Internet, has exported its values of diversity, open competition, and capitalism throughout the world.

We helped end Apartheid in South Africa. We helped bring down the Berlin Wall.

We have not colonized, although we could. We have not conquered, although we could.

Overall, America has been a force for good in the world. I only hope this continues, and that we don't see our power get to our heads and corrupt us in the future.
 
Last edited:
Thank-you for the information. You write well and I enjoyed reading it.

I am sure the Canadians were heavily involved in WW2 but I don't know when their involvement started.

I'm really not doubting that the USA made a huge contribution to the defeat of the Nazis and it's something we should never forget. I don't know exactly what commemorations will take place for VE Day this week (70th anniversary) but I hope that the USA has a big role - they certainly should.

The only thing that jarred was your final sentence, about the birth of a superpower. But by common definitions of "superpower", if we must use the term, then I accept that the USA has been one since WW2. But why you should want to use the terms begs many questions.

Going back to the thread, it really is for history to judge if one country was the "greatest" or the "best" in any period and, even then, arguments are bound to rage because of the arrogance of any such claim. What I am picking up from this thread is that there is a strong current in American thinking that it is important that they acknowledge that they are the "best" or the "greatest" country. This is very worrying. As soon as this thinking starts to take hold, people move into an unreal world where they are the good guys and they must sort the good guys from the bad; it also makes it harder to accept mistakes humbly and learn from them. A nation that thinks this way about itself will cast itself as having the "burden" of resolving major world problems, according to some God-given mandate. Ultimately, these beliefs lead to thinking that the lives of the people in their country are more important than the lives of other people. As I say, this is an extremely familiar mentality for Brits and, by no means have we recovered from it. If any Brit made similar claims as to how we were ever the "best" or "greatest", he or she could expect a similar response.

I'll hold back on specifics as to how America's best" and "greatest" mentality has led to horror for many people around the world for now. But if the thread continues in this vein, then expect some reality checks along these lines.

I think another important point when distinguishing European-style fascism with American patriotism, and this one is important, is the question of blame.

When Hitler came to power in Germany, or when Mussolini came to power in Italy, etc, the attitude of the fascists in these countries was to blame outsiders for the trials and problems faced by their respective countries.

Hitler blamed the Jews, blamed the French, blamed everyone except the Germans for their failures. This led to a hatred of others, and justified, in their minds, violence against others.

Americans, while cocky as can be, don't blame anyone other than Americans for their woes. It's inconceivable to an American that we wouldn't be the masters of our own destiny. In fact, we're an open book.... dig through this forum and I challenge you to find many instances in which an American of any political persuasion blames a foreign country for what is going wrong in our country.

American liberals blame American conservatives. American conservatives blame Obama. There's a lot of finger pointing, but it's all internal. We believe that we are responsible for our own fate, and that, my friend, is a huge distinction from the fascists of Europe who blamed others and thus used this to justify violence against them.
 
I think another important point when distinguishing European-style fascism with American patriotism, and this one is important, is the question of blame.

When Hitler came to power in Germany, or when Mussolini came to power in Italy, etc, the attitude of the fascists in these countries was to blame outsiders for the trials and problems faced by their respective countries.

Hitler blamed the Jews, blamed the French, blamed everyone except the Germans for their failures. This led to a hatred of others, and justified, in their minds, violence against others.

Americans, while cocky as can be, don't blame anyone other than Americans for their woes. It's inconceivable to an American that we wouldn't be the masters of our own destiny. In fact, we're an open book.... dig through this forum and I challenge you to find many instances in which an American of any political persuasion blames a foreign country for what is going wrong in our country.

American liberals blame American conservatives. American conservatives blame Obama. There's a lot of finger pointing, but it's all internal. We believe that we are responsible for our own fate, and that, my friend, is a huge distinction from the fascists of Europe who blamed others and thus used this to justify violence against them.
Ok. Lots to chew over. I've never compared US patriotism with European fascism. I don't think Brits are inclined to think this way, though I have to speak for myself. I've never seen it anyway.

Brits tend not to blame other countries either for their problems, though more recently concern has risen over the level of immigration. There is also a big section of the population who disagree with membership of the EU, or at least the power of the EU (I am in this group) because of the impact on our home-grown democracy.

Though British Conservatives would think differently, I have to disagree with your assessment of the US's role in preserving world peace. With its dropping of A-bombs in Japan in 1945, amassing of nuclear weapons, invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam, and Cold War posturing the USA has proved itself to be more of an enemy of world peace than a friend since WW2. I think that the American position on world events is closely aligned with the protection of its commercial interests, which is bolstered by a Messianic belief in its own righteousness. Britain's contribution as a key ally has been no less dismal. I don't have a problem with individual Americans - just American politics, as it affects the rest of the world.

On culture, I like country music (unusually for an Englishman), many US sitcoms, a lot of classic US rock music, and some Hollywood films. However, gratuitous violence in Hollywood films is now really bad and I am careful what I watch. Rap music and heavy metal and their associated cultures are disturbing. And generally, the dominance of US culture across the world is often not good for the healthy development and preservation of local cultures. On the other hand, its widespread nature has given us common cultural references which bridge nations at a certain level. So American culture is a mixed bag for me.
 
Back
Top Bottom