Why does the world feel justified by judging America?

Post Reply New Topic

Well, I'm sorry I don't want to offend any non-Americans, but why do people sometimes give a negative perspective of American politics? Sure, we don't have universal health care and stuff, we may have crappy roads but why must people guilt trip Americans by saying they should have the government offer this stuff? I am conservative fiscally, but very liberal socially. What's weird is that people always say it's the Americans who are being the bullies to the world.

I'm sorry to offend anyone here from the other industrialized nations here, but as a born American, this is my perspective. I'll welcome a good reason to judge America and it's conservatism, but I can't think of a reason to justify it.

I'm a European, and I don't think most people feel that way today. The low point was probably during the height of the Iraq war and the years following that. Besides, criticism of US government policies differs from what people think of American citizens. Many Americans are critical of their own government, but that doesn't mean they dislike their own people.

Of course I'm not completely satisfied by my own country's government either. Sorry if I missed, but I should also clarify that I think just because someone criticizes the American government doesn't mean they criticize the people. I just feel like I'm being guilt-tripped for not supporting government-run health care and those things. To be fair, it was only my parents who instilled that philosophy in me though.

Yes, I know about the Iraq war, and that was bad.

It does seem a little unfair sometimes. People often act as though the US is the only country with uncivilized quirks, which is quite untrue. For example, Autobahn crashes have a nasty record of wiping out entire families in a flash, but Germans aren't up in arms about speed limits. In the US we've lowered speed limits and repeatedly increased vehicle safety standards. I always think of that when gun-control advocates say 'No civilized country would tolerate the level of mayhem that we have.'

The same thing happens with health care. Before the ACA, not many limousine liberals knew anyone who was on public healthcare, and they seemed to assume that it didn't exist. I had friends who were on MinnesotaCare, which covered medical, dental and optical with no premiums and no co-pays. It also covered out-of-state expenses. You might expect Europeans to understand, since they have a loose federation (the EU) and healthcare provided at a more local level, but a lot of them don't. I was talking to a Dutch woman a few months ago who seemed to think that our lack of federal healthcare meant that poor Americans were living in something out of the Wild West.

Have you studied history at all? We are the most wealthy nation on Earth and yet income inequality is like a third world country. People go hungry while politicians debate whether humans and dinosaurs co-existed. ...Michele Bachmann? Someone actually thought electing her was a good idea. Our leaders deny basic science and make decisions based on the wishes of special interest groups and wealthy donors. The most highly esteemed conservative president, Ronald Reagan, sold advanced weapons systems to our enemy Iran, and used the money to finance anti-communist militias in direct violation of a law specifically written to prevent that (not that fighting communism was so bad, but these guys were basically terrorists). I'm defensive about our country too sometimes, because I feel it represents great promise, and tries to uphold enlightened secular values. But we also have to be aware of our faults, if only to be able to fix them.

In contrast, many European countries appear to be governed sensibly. I've been to Germany, and in spite of being highly regulated in some ways, there was more personal freedom. If you want to go to college, you just have to pass a test, there is no tuition. That also applies to graduate school. People get much more time off just to live and go on vacations or be with their family, day care is affordable. You can smoke anywhere. Pot is decriminalized, and you can drink when you're 16. You can drink a beer, in fact, while driving. The autobahn has virtually no speed limits. Trains go to all the major cities. I could go on, but we aren't beyond criticism as a nation, far from it.

Not true. You have to go to Gynasium if you want to pursue the academic track. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gymnasium_%28school%29 ) Grew up in a poor family? Tough beans.

American politics should be regarded in a positive light?

Should politics in general?

Observing the test drop. Both aircraft have Edwards tail codes.

I don't mind foreign criticism of the US but I wish people would stop talking as if it were 1890 and this country was laissez-faire. It's a mixed economy, and compared to any other country likely to have WP members, it's probably a little freer in some respects but less free in others.

Still free of cost for everyone, apparently.

Because conquered peoples suffer by americas economic imperialism, cultural imperialism and imperialist aggression for profit. America likes to impose its dysfunctional way of life on the world, so we all have a stake in how you guys turn out.

Last edited by Stannis on 15 Aug 2014, 3:37 am, edited 5 times in total.

America has the best politicians that money can buy. Enough said.

Everyone feels justified by judging someone else. Whether or not we like to admit it we all justify ourselves to some extent.

^This.

German roads are still among the safest in the world. The Autobahn is safer than the American highways despite the higher speeds.

The "fiscally conservative" option is to support free at the point of access healthcare for all citizens.

The American system is needlessly inefficient; as a result, the government spends much more per capita in order to provide [url=http://www.commonwealthfund.org/~/media/images/publications/fund-report/2014/june/davis_mirror_2014_es1_for_web.jpg?h=511&w=740&la=en
]an inferior service[/url], and indeed not provide much of a service at all to many people.

(I am mostly comparing with Britain's NHS, but several other countries also achieve the same thing)

If you want to spend less on healthcare, remove the bureaucracy and give it to everyone - perversely, the inefficiencies you remove make up for the extra services you provide.

Unless, of course, you are against governments providing services rather than governments spending money, in which case I apologise for this irrelevant post.