why the US is so conservative

[spice756]

I'm busy with study science so I do not have that much time to read books , but is the US always going be conservative ?

The big quetion that gets to me everyday is why the US is so conservative and more important why the US is so slow at changing.From the 60's to now there has not been that much change and in the past 35+ yaers there has been no change.

When you look at Europe or South America they are more progressive.Why is the US so slow at changing ?

Do you see any progressive in the next 10 to 15 years in the US? To me only the 60's and 70's and little in the 80's in the US history seems to be the time when people thought out side the capitalist box to rebel and be diffrent like hippies ,punk ,anarchy and left movements !! But the 90's to now nothing but sheep to the system and lack of thought and will.

Here is the snip I found on the US make up.

+++++++++++++++++++++++


I've been blogging for a while now and along the way I've met more Americans than any other nationality of people, I've clashed with a few of them and built excellent relationships with many of them and as times gone on I've become more and more fascinated by the political landscape of that great nation.

For me, it has always come down to how a man with the policies and beliefs of George W. Bush can win two elections with the backing of his people and why is it that the political make up of America is so much further to the right than Europe?

This line of enquiry owes much to John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge and their book "The Right Nation. Why America is Different" and the sources they have put me in touch with via their excellent tome. So go buy it!

First, for those of you that doubt that America is conservative (ie: is right of centre on most policy issues) at all, some thoughts: Americans tolerate lower levels of government spending than any other advanced country; Americans tolerate high levels of social inequality: 1 in 6 US households earns less than 35% of the median income with the nearest rival being the UK with 1 in 20; America is the only developed nation to not have a full government supported health-care system and the only Western democracy that does not provide child support to all its families; America does not provide paid maternity leave; America upholds the right to bear arms and still uses the death penalty; the US is far more willing to use force and is suspicious of International treaties; American citizens are far more religious than their European counterparts and more traditional in their moral values; the United States is one of the few developed countries where abortion is still a galvanising issue and where the majority of people say grace before their meals.

Importantly, these positions are not Republican but American and run through the very heart of American society. What's interesting is that a coherent conservative political force that reflects this agenda was lacking throughout most of America's political history, those on the right of American politics positioned themselves as 'true liberals' in the European sense of conservative governing (Nixon and Kennedy ran on virtually identical platforms) and the hard right was on the wane in the US. The peak of liberalism was of ocurse the 60s, when America got the closest it ever got to the European model of governance, reflected in 43% approval rating for the death penalty; Republicans using the middle ground of mixed economy and centrist politik; President Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society and politicians wearing their European education and influences like a badge of honour.


+++++++++++++++++++++++

[Sarah Palin]

150+ years of bourgeoise leaders and hard core propaganda could have something to do with it. People can say it's because of American stupidity and how religious they are, but those features can be attributed to the aforementioned propaganda.

[Raúl Duke]

First, for those of you that doubt that America is conservative (ie: is right of centre on most policy issues) at all, some thoughts: Americans tolerate lower levels of government spending than any other advanced country; Americans tolerate high levels of social inequality: 1 in 6 US households earns less than 35% of the median income with the nearest rival being the UK with 1 in 20; America is the only developed nation to not have a full government supported health-care system and the only Western democracy that does not provide child support to all its families; America does not provide paid maternity leave; America upholds the right to bear arms and still uses the death penalty; the US is far more willing to use force and is suspicious of International treaties; American citizens are far more religious than their European counterparts and more traditional in their moral values; the United States is one of the few developed countries where abortion is still a galvanising issue and where the majority of people say grace before their meals.

Importantly, these positions are not Republican but American and run through the very heart of American society. What's interesting is that a coherent conservative political force that reflects this agenda was lacking throughout most of America's political history, those on the right of American politics positioned themselves as 'true liberals' in the European sense of conservative governing (Nixon and Kennedy ran on virtually identical platforms) and the hard right was on the wane in the US. The peak of liberalism was of ocurse the 60s, when America got the closest it ever got to the European model of governance, reflected in 43% approval rating for the death penalty; Republicans using the middle ground of mixed economy and centrist politik; President Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society and politicians wearing their European education and influences like a badge of honour.Some would say it's because the U.S. is the main imperialist nation in the world.
Perhaps that does play a role, or at least creates/created the social environment that allows this to occur.

Some of it has to do with history. The U.S. always had a social environment that is, for some reason, fertile to religion (and odd-ball cults/denominations like Mormons (although "mainstream in west"), Koreshan, and modern-day Scientology). Some people say it's because the U.S. never had a "central church" per se that is/was "in on the government" as say Tsarist Russia and parts of Europe. Others might point the concept of "American exceptionalism", which sometimes has religious connontations and/or religion was used to back it, which was used for the imperialist conquest of the west from the rest of the Native Americans.

Personally, I do not know the exact reason(s).

Either way, some studies have pointed an increase in secularism (i.e. the "none" category) in the U.S., a decrease in mainstream churches, and slight increases (increase which are declining from the past if I heard correctly from 2008's religious indentification survey) for more conservative/fundamentalist denominations.

[mel]

You also have to take into account that unlike most other western countries, the US has never had a real reaction to enlightenment thought or individualism. The romantic movement in the US (the first reaction in most countries against enlightenment thinking) was relatively weak, and not much grew out of it. The US was founded on enlightenment principles, and it never really moved past that.

[Bud Struggle]

^^^

All nonsense.

America is conservative because we have it good. Not all of us, to be sure, but enough of us to see something worthwhile in the way we are living life now.

I don't want to see any change. We have it good.

[Jimmie Higgins]

The big quetion that gets to me everyday is why the US is so conservative and more important why the US is so slow at changing.From the 60's to now there has not been that much change and in the past 35+ yaers there has been no change.Struggle in the US tends to happen in big "booms" followed by demoralization and retreat. Big labor upheavals have tended to come all at once, followed by decades of busniness/craft unionism. The CIO had only a few radical years, but all the mass unionization happened at that time. The IWW has been around longer but there were only a few years of real influence and massive growth. There was more change for civil rights between 1962 and 1972 than in three decades since or the 3 decades before.


When you look at Europe or South America they are more progressive.Why is the US so slow at changing ?Again I think things like the civil war, Industrialization, mass radicalization in the 30s and 60s have been very quick changes, so the question for me is why are these movements in short explosions rather than a longer more steady building process.

For me the answer is the lack of a sustained organized left. This means radical parties as well as reformist ones like a Labor party (not New Labour) or other Social-Democratic party. Partially this is due to faults in the left organizations but repression has also been a major factor. So you have the Communist Party and the Industrial Unions who supported the Democrats and this made them ineffective after the war when Democrats and Republicans began moving against radicals in the unions - and everywhere for that matter. You also have the Black Power and New Left organizations which were brutally repressed with cops shooting Black Panthers and spies disrupting the anti-war movement.


Do you see any progressive in the next 10 to 15 years in the US? To me only the 60's and 70's and little in the 80's in the US history seems to be the time when people thought out side the capitalist box to rebel and be diffrent like hippies ,punk ,anarchy and left movements !! But the 90's to now nothing but sheep to the system and lack of thought and will.Well I see the next few years being incredibly polarized (probably with fights in the streets between Left and Right groups if the right keeps radicalizing like it has been). Right now the right wing is making all the noise, but the left is also radicalizing and angry. There will probably be more gay rights fights and other left movements pushing back against the town-hall crazies as well as Democratic politicians cutting services while giving handouts to the rich.

I think it's important to remember that even though every region and country has its own history and experiences and regional cultures, people are essentially the same. The reason that there are general strikes in France every 10 years has nothing to do with baguettes vs. doughnuts (i.e. some kind of "national character") and more to do with the fact that the French left is stronger, more connected to the working class and they have forced the capitalists to make concessions like the right of any worker to strike.

The french say "with the eating comes the hunger" and man, the American working class is starving! Just wait until we start to get a taste of victory, there will be an explosion of movements!

[#FF0000]

^^^

All nonsense.

America is conservative because we have it good. Not all of us, to be sure, but enough of us to see something worthwhile in the way we are living life now.

I don't want to see any change. We have it good.

And that's why we haven't moved on from Enlightenment thinking; because, due to many factors, it's widely perceived that it has been working for "us".

Conditions shape ideas, silly.

I also just want to throw it out there that the U.S. has rather poor standards of everything, compared to most of Europe, which is generally far more "progressive" or "liberal" than the united states.

[JimmyJazz]

150+ years of bourgeoise leaders and hard core propaganda could have something to do with it. People can say it's because of American stupidity and how religious they are, but those features can be attributed to the aforementioned propaganda.

European countries don't have the same propaganda? And yet the stark difference between Europe and the U.S. is reflected in all kinds of numbers:


In the mid-1950s, 36% of the United States labor force was unionized. At America's union peak in the 1950s, union membership was lower in the United States than in most comparable countries. By 1989, that figure had dropped to about 16%, the lowest percentage of any developed democracy, except France (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France). Other union membership for other developed democracies, in 1990 were:[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_comparisons_of_labor_unions#cite_not e-wsj-0)


95% in Sweden (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden) and Denmark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denmark).
85% in Finland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finland)
Over 60% in Norway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway) and Austria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austria)
Over 50% in Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia), Ireland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ireland) and the United Kingdom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom).
Over 40% in West Germany (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Germany) and Italy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italy).



And if they don't have the same level of propaganda, then the important question would be, why not? (After all, they do all have a capitalist class). That's why I don't think the propaganda answer is all that informative.

Personally, I think the answer that captures the most truth is that Americans have historically perceived more benefit to themselves by aligning themselves with their nation than with their class. That's broad of course, and there are a million reasons why that has been the case, but a broad question can only be meaningfully answered by a broad answer. Simply put, Americans are less class conscious in the same proportion as they are more patriotic. Part of that might be the fact that they have a continent to themselves; it's a little easier to see the silliness of the nation-states system when you can put one toe across the border from your country into the next one (and furthermore, those borders are constantly shifting, due to wars, treaties, etc).

[mikelepore]

I think it's a problem with conceptual understanding, and therefore has to be corrected with conceptual education.

"Most members of the working class want capitalism. This is not because they like the wars, wage-freezes, soul-destroying jobs, and shabby houses which capitalism necessarily thrusts upon them. They want capitalism because they have cockeyed notions about the way it works, which lead them to suppose that their problems can be solved within capitalism, or, alternatively, could not be solved under any other system."

-- A paragraph that I copied from a 1968 issue of "The Western Socialist" magazine, a former publication of the World Socialist Party (U.S.)

[OneNamedNameLess]

I don't want to see any change. We have it good.

You need change and socialist change at that. Comrade Obama will give it to you.

http://inyer.org/spannerdump/obomber.jpg

[Jimmie Higgins]

First of all, we need to separate the "american working class" as seen through the media and politicians (i.e. "hard working white americans" like the phony Joe the Plummer) from the actual american working class which is multi-racial, mostly women, and suckers for the Democratic party.

The right-wing populist outcry in the Townhalls is a small segment of the population - they are also the most reactionary and the ones that the Republicans and Democrats have focused most of their attention to in the last 30 years even though there are more young people and more minorities - but to get these larger groups to vote (which Obama did and that's how he won) you actually have to offer things that will help working class people (like healthcare).

So why are the right-wing crazies so much more influuential than the millions of Americans who would support universal healthcare or want an end to the war? The short answer is that the right wing is REAALLLY organized and the liberals do whatever they can to de-mobilize their supporters and the Left has been unable to break the hold of Democrats on the working class and opressed groups.

[spice756]

America is more conservative for number of reasons I think.

1.The US is driving engine of dollar like in trade and capitalism
2.The media and culture has brainwashed people we are the best ,best country ,best idea ,best econmics ,best army ,big super power.
3 lack of left party to vote for only conservative and liberal. (( no social democradic or socialist party))
4 The effect of the cold war
5 no social democradic or socialist party to say some thing if the conservative or liberal party say some thing. (( fox saying stupid stuff and no social democradic or socialist party to counter it.

Other countries just trade in US dollar and use US capitalism .Lack of we are the best ,best country ,best idea ,best econmics ,best army ,big super power and more easy to learn or try different ideas.

The electoral college have more parties and thus you can vote social democradic or socialist party..Doing elections or goverment problems the social democradic or socialist party can speak out to the people and this is not the case in the US.


If a conservative goverment say ome thing stupid or media outlets say some thing stupid like (fox ) the social democradic or socialist party can speak out .

[Muzk]

Well, as stated before, I too think "earlier" Propaganda is one of the main reasons. Communism bad bad bad, they want to take away your property! Oh no! And your food!
We are the best, here you can do what you want, we rule, we rock, join the army uncle sam wants you...
Once you have a country 100% brainwashed pro-capitalist, it's very unlikely it will change... Maybe, just maybe sometimes someone might break out of the death-cycle. But then? Who can you talk to?

[Radical]

Two words;

GREED
CHRISTIANITY

[mel]

Two words;

GREED
CHRISTIANITY

Yes, let's ignore the material development of an entire country and blame its conservatism on a stereotypical personality trait and religion. That must be it. Thank you comrade Radical! I'm so glad that you solved it for us!

[graffic]

I think spice765 is correct. The free-market propaganda has been much more easily swallowed in America than in Europe or South America. McCarthyism probably has a lot to do with it too.

[Smash DEM BMP]

I dont know
why?

[AvanteRedGarde]

150+ years of bourgeoise leaders and hard core propaganda could have something to do with it. People can say it's because of American stupidity and how religious they are, but those features can be attributed to the aforementioned propaganda.

What people hasn't been subjected to capitalist propaganda? Furthermore, saying that Amerika is conservative simply because of propaganda is to throw Marx out the window. Amerikans are bourgeoisified labor aristocrats, resting their weight, thanks to militarism (which they support [see G.I. Joe thread]), atop the exploitation of Third World peoples. Face it, Amerikans are so reactionary because they are- for the most part- part of a reactionary class.

[Rosa Provokateur]

Americans arent conservative, we're just stubborn. As someone who's lived in the South his whole life I can say that it's not conservatism as much as it is nobody trusts other nations and we dont like the feeling of bending over for anyone (even when we're not).

[MarxSchmarx]

What's interesting is that a coherent conservative political force that reflects this agenda was lacking throughout most of America's political history, those on the right of American politics positioned themselves as 'true liberals' in the European sense of conservative governing (Nixon and Kennedy ran on virtually identical platforms) and the hard right was on the wane in the US. The peak of liberalism was of ocurse the 60s, when America got the closest it ever got to the European model of governance, reflected in 43% approval rating for the death penalty; Republicans using the middle ground of mixed economy and centrist politik; President Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society and politicians wearing their European education and influences like a badge of honour. From a historical perspective, the turning point in the 1960s is key. Indeed, until then America had probably been one of the more "left-leaning" of the major democracie, at least in terms of domestic policies. And let's not forget as late as the 1960s France and Britain still laid claim to vast colonial swaths they weren't giving up without war. While it was tough to be a communist in America, in terms of reformist concessions and concrete standards of living, ordinary Americans did actually OK in comparison to western Europeans, Japanese or even Canadians.

Except in one major respect: race.

What happened after the 1960s was an enormous backlash against the move to enfranchise black people and bring them into the relatively decent reformist white mainstream.

The rightwing rode this wave for every penny it was worth, and it culminated in the election of George W Bush. At some point it became impolite to talk about "race" as such, but make no mistake, no such hatred against social programs existed when the "war on poverty" focused on white chicken farmers in Appalachia instead of inner city blacks. Support for the death penalty shot up. Education as a right was eviscerated. The country was effectively balkanized into suburbs and the dying countryside and cities. Workers could very easily be divided on this supposedly most fundamental of differences.

Fixated on race, the American psyche shifted from instituting a reformist body politic and perhaps some of the first experiments with "social capitalism" into a right wing capitalist's fantasyland where the dominant political discourse is simply so reactionary in just about every way imaginable.

To be sure concrete, material gains were made by previously excluded groups, most notably women and, somewhat debatably, blacks as a whole. But this was also true of every other industrialized country - what happened is that some reforms, like women's suffrage and formal racial equality, could not be done away with even in america.

In short, what Americans are living through is a long, protracted and insidious period of a thermidorean reaction, led by an alliance between the feudal lords (aka southern white elite) and the right wing of the capitalist class against some final stages of a bourgeois revolution in the form of expanding civil rights. Slowly but surely this reaction is running out of steam as demographics and the inevitable economic development of late stage capitalism proceed, but if the recent spate in rightwing mobs in america is any sign, it will not go quietly.

[Dimentio]

I don't understand what is wrong with "the right to bear arms". That social liberals and social democrats are against it is hardly surprising. But anarchists and radical socialists should uphold the right to bear arms, as it will give the working class one further mean to empower itself.

[Rosa Provokateur]

I don't understand what is wrong with "the right to bear arms". That social liberals and social democrats are against it is hardly surprising. But anarchists and radical socialists should uphold the right to bear arms, as it will give the working class one further mean to empower itself.

I support it just to keep gun-nuts and militants offf my back, you keep your rifle and I'll keep my sling-shot:lol:

[RGacky3]

They arn't, don't think the government/media is representative of the actual population, even with the hardcore right wing propeganda (and it is hard core, at least compared to the rest of the world), and the intense Capitalist power, the population is more leftist than most people think, they may not call themselves that, but when it comes to the issues, many statistics show that Americans are generally more progressive than the media and governmnet.


I don't want to see any change. We have it good.

Nor according the opinion polls and statistics.

Europe in any respects is'nt as progressive, there is much more racism in europe and much less scepticalism about the governmnet.

Historically the American Labor movement has been much more radical than the European labor movement, in Europe the labor movement was capitalized, in the United States, it was crushed.

South America is a much different issue than American and Europe, you can't compare apples and oranges.

[MarxSchmarx]

there is much more racism in europeThis is a little hard to say. My guess is that, on average, it is about the same. To be sure, there are far more individual racists in Europe. Individual Americans, on the whole, are far less "racist" in the sense that they do not take into account the race of other individuals as much when dealing with them. Further, eastern and southern Europe is going to take a very long time to stop being as virulently racist in culture.

But racism is more than individual beliefs. It is a social construct, and thus has implications outside of a person's own subjective experience. When you look at the lack of social mobility and the institutionalized racism, although it is about as bad in America in France and to some extent England, such institutionalized, generation-to-generation racism is almost non-existent in much of Europe in, for example, Austria or Norway where people of different races are still in small enough numbers that there is considerable social mobility. For instance, it is not uncommon for, say, a Dane who is the child of an African father and a Danish mother to be a well respected professor in Denmark and be largely integrated into Danish society. Most Danes probably celebrate this sort of "diversity", in a way that is quite different from, say, the French might have qualms about an Algerian professor or the unspoken difficulties an African American professor has to put up with.

[AntifaAustralia]

The australians are also conservative as well, but not to the extremities of the USA, we are probably just like the europeans, but way more politically IGNORANT!. here we have our racists, and asiaphobics, third world phobics, and most of all capitalists, nationalists; we are pretty secular, but more has to be done.

The cold war and authoritaritan revolutions of soviets, cuba, china, vietnam, etc. wasn't very pleasant, and gave disgusting birth to the american culture of anti-leftism. Also it seems as if though autocratic revolutions and the deaths associated, leads to the further bashing of the left.

extreme cultural Capitalism, nationalism, and religion are the major factors to just why the yanks are so, plainly put, fucked. i reckon they they will learn soon.

Patience my siblings

[MarxSchmarx]

The australians are also conservative as well, but not to the extremities of the USA, we are probably just like the europeans, but way more politically IGNORANT!. here we have our racists, and asiaphobics, third world phobics, and most of all capitalists, nationalists; we are pretty secular, but more has to be done.

The cold war and authoritaritan revolutions of soviets, cuba, china, vietnam, etc. wasn't very pleasant, and gave disgusting birth to the american culture of anti-leftism. Also it seems as if though autocratic revolutions and the deaths associated, leads to the further bashing of the left.

extreme cultural Capitalism, nationalism, and religion are the major factors to just why the yanks are so, plainly put, fucked. i reckon they they will learn soon.


And yet isn't it interesting that australian leftists, as well as American or German or Japanese leftists, all face the same very real problems when challenging the hegemonic capitalist ideology - how we convince a largely apolitical populace with leftist instincts to chuck the entire system and establish a classless society.

At the end of the day, I suspect that the differences between the first world capitalist countries, much less the anglo-saxon countries, are rather trivial. On this fundamental difficulty, I think the international left is still largely adrift.

[AntifaAustralia]

above

Yes, tackling capitalism is going to be hard, especially the rich nations that are hard to topple because we are so selfish!.

The maoists and trotskyists are INFLUENTIAL to the 3rd world nations.Nepal, India, south americas are seeing progress in communist uprisings (maoism especially), But africa and arabia are too busy with religion(religious socialism?, highly non marxist.)

In Australia and USA, germany, japan, they are already too greedy to want to stop exploiting Cheap foreign labour, this is National greed, NATIONALISM, that is why i am an ANTIFACIST!

I think 3rd world nation revolutions are crucial to topple the now global capitalists, but that will be hard, Global Terrorism is a sign that Third world problems exist, syndicalist action might help, but then it is up to us RICH NATIONS to assisist.

[spice756]

Will out going into too much here .Do you see the US changing ? Or is there nothing that we can do?


I mean in the past 35+ years there has been no change at all.

[Blackscare]

I'd guess that part of the reason that the US population is so conservative is that for much of the US's history (particularly the second half of the 20th century), it has been on the "winning side" of capitalism/imperialism. Why would people oppose something that's worked out so well for them? I mean this in comparison to much of the rest of the world.

People are revolutionary/reactionary often times in direct proportion to how well/badly the current system is working for them. You won't find a revolution springing up in a country/system that is functioning properly, a quick glance at history confirms this. When there is economic uncertainty, be it because of war or whatever, revolutionary politics become relevant. Remember that in the 1930's left wing politics was fairly strong in the US, because there was the economic stimulus for it.

This is why countries on the periphery of the capitalist system are where most successful revolutions have taken place.

[Blackscare]

Will out going into too much here .Do you see the US changing ? Or is there nothing that we can do?


I mean in the past 35+ years there has been no change at all.


I would say that the current economic uncertainty is the harbinger of major change. I don't think that the world economic order we've been living within is long for this earth, and as a result political attitudes everywhere, the US being no exception, are bound to change sooner than later.

[Bud Struggle]

I would say that the current economic uncertainty is the harbinger of major change. I don't think that the world economic order we've been living within is long for this earth, and as a result political attitudes everywhere, the US being no exception, are bound to change sooner than later.

No offense. That's just dreaming. Economic colapses happens every now and then and that's just Capitalism. Since the great Depression we've had 20 or so and this one is nothing compared to some others.

You want a Revolution? OK, but you have to do better than a dip in the sub prime-mortage derivitive market to egg it alone.

[Blackscare]

You want a Revolution? OK, but you have to do better than a dip in the sub prime-mortage derivitive market


Are you aware of anything that happens economically outside your own country? It takes a lot more to destabilize the world economy, as has happened, than a housing market in one country (no matter how significant that one country may be.)


Do you honestly believe, first of all, that the US will continue to be the dominant political/economic force in the world? Do you think that all those "values" that we associate with capitalism (liberal democracy, personal freedom, etc) will continue to be dominant when capitalist countries like China are overtaking us and have little in common with "our" traditional ideals?

The world is changing, America is on the decline, and yes, this will lead to major economic and political changes. Capitalism is based on growth, and guess what, now that the USSR is gone and China is capitalist, there isn't much more room for growth. What happens then? What about peak oil (should it prove correct)? There are so many things going on today that point to the fact that the hayday of the US and western capitalism is past/passing.

Do you have your head in the sand or what?

[Bud Struggle]

Do you honestly believe, first of all, that the US will continue to be the dominant political/economic force in the world? Yes. America changes to the market. We always have.




Do you think that all those "values" that we associate with capitalism (liberal democracy, personal freedom, etc) will continue to be dominant when capitalist countries like China are overtaking us and have little in common with "our" traditional ideals? Yes, because those "ideals" are taking in hold of China itself. When China is fully Capitalistic it will be fully Democratic. To be honest--the Capitalistic Culture takes the lead--but China will be a Demoracy.


The world is changing, America is on the decline, and yes, this will lead to major economic and political changes. Capitalism is based on growth, and guess what, now that the USSR is gone and China is capitalist, there isn't much more room for growth. What happens then? Capitalism MAKES new markets...it always has.



What about peak oil (should it prove correct)? There are so many things going on today that point to the fact that the hayday of the US and western capitalism is past/passing.

Do you have your head in the sand or what? You could have said any of that with more assurance in the last 100 years. Communism (or at leat a reasonable try at it) has come and gone--and Capitalism remains.

[RGacky3]

No offense. That's just dreaming. Economic colapses happens every now and then and that's just Capitalism. Since the great Depression we've had 20 or so and this one is nothing compared to some others.

The economic collapse in the 30s changed capitalism compleatly, after that capitalism was a compleatly different creature, both for the positive and negative. Remember, around that time, the United States, and other countries were EXTREMELY close to socialist revolution, even with Stalin around to give te western countries perfect propeganda material. If if was'nt for FDR who knows what would have happened.

The 20 or so collapses hav'nt really been collapses perse, but downturns. This, as most analyists and experts say, is something much more serious, not as extreme but akin to the 30s. So we don't know whats going to happen.


Yes. America changes to the market. We always have.

I agree, the US (For now) is going to be on top. But that has nothing to do with changing to the market. the united states CONTROLS the market, through vast amounts of capital, economic imperialism, and so on.


Yes, because those "ideals" are taking in hold of China itself. When China is fully Capitalistic it will be fully Democratic. To be honest--the Capitalistic Culture takes the lead--but China will be a Demoracy.


I doubt that, but who am I to say, however democracy and capitalism don't go hand it hand, democracy only happens when the people force democracy, it has nothing to do with capitalism.

The fact is also what you call democracy, in many capitalist countries (especially the ones on the bottom), is hardly democracy, even by European or American standards.


Capitalism MAKES new markets...it always has.


In the past, historically, its the State that makes new markets, in other words, it takes public money and spends it to private hands to get the markets going.


You could have said any of that with more assurance in the last 100 years. Communism (or at leat a reasonable try at it) has come and gone--and Capitalism remains.

Not really, communism has'nt come and gone, communism has popped up in small areas and effected society a lot, however as a major system it has'nt come and gone. What has is a distorted form of state socialism, which came up and left mainly due to extreme opposition by the leading super power in the world.

During the American revolution the British gave up America pretty fast, they had other things to worry about, the United States worked on Russia for decades.


Will out going into too much here .Do you see the US changing ? Or is there nothing that we can do?


I mean in the past 35+ years there has been no change at all.

Whats going to happen is whats slowly been happening in the United states for a while, through popular struggles the rulling class looses a little bit of power nad the people get a little more. Public health care is one of those struggles, if the ruling class can get beat on that, in my opinoin thats a major victory for the American people.

Many people forget the history of AMerica. Free speach was'nt GIVEN to Americans, neither was relative racial equalty, all the great things about America were fought for, and fought for hard by the people against the ruling class. Free speach is something relatively new in America, and many people struggled hard for it.

[Blackscare]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ww9STw-o0cc

[spice756]

Well that see here .

1.The US runs the show of the world and spreads its propaganda ( where is europe or other counties doing it )

2.The US More conservative than europe

3.Free heath in Europe and US no.

4.In alot of places Europe has very high warfare state.

5. School is free in alot of places in Europe in the US it is grade 12 and down.

6.In the US anything that is not mainstream media is wrong or not going with crowd like talking about Government and Police corruption or police powers or corruption, conspiracy or appose to Bush or War in Iraqi so on.

7 . In Europe they are stong on monoply laws.

8. In the US you are rich or poor and in Europe you are more the same.

9.In Europe the goverment tells big businesses what to do and in the US big businesses tell the goverment what to do.

10.text books and learning in school is all rigged and Europe less propagada.

11.US Federal government debt increasing

12.US off shoring and exploiting others and where is Europe doing this.

13. In the US alot of people still go to church and well in Europe there much less amout of people going to church.

14.Alot of people belive in god in the US well in Europe alot of people do not.

15. In the US alot of people are in jail than any other country well Europe has the lowest people in jail but not the USSR.

16.The rich rule the US and manipulate the government

17.The US government is not accountable and does not lesson to the people like invasion of Vietnam and Iraqi not like some other countries.

18. The US has no respect to world and the UN.

19. The US like to go to war and tell other countries want to do. (( I do not see Europe doing this or any other country ))

20. The US is very ati-science

21.The US is very narrow-minded: un-willing to accept new ideas or ways of thinking, in favor of preserving the traditional values and customs, and against abrupt change. (( Not like south America or Europe ))

22. Alot more social programs and free stuff in Europe than US.

23.And cops in US are very bad at least Europe and Canada they are better.

[spice756]

One thing you can at least mark has prograss at least Obama is going to overhaul the healthcare and welfare system. There is much debate in the news on how he is going to do it .

An other thing is Obama up the tax for the rich and corporations.Also people say Obama wants to overhaul the prison system.

Not much prograss in the US in 35 years but at least this is the start.And we will have to see what Obama is going to do.

[Brusilov(Conservative]

23.And cops in US are very bad at least Europe and Canada they are better.


What do you mean by "Cops are very bad." They supposedly "mistreat" minorities? As if minorities don't actually commit crimes sometimes. What are they supposed to do, just give their criminals a free pass? Now, I guess anytime a police officer apprehends a legitimate minority criminal, it is automatically "racis?"

Now, I understand that much minority crime stems from their supposed "disadvantages and oppressions," but the fact that the police have to stop them from violently threatening innocent people does not make the police "bad." I am sorry, but being black in this country does not mean that you are entitled to a free pass.

Anyway, how have these "bad" cops misused you? My experience with American police has been nothing but pleasant.



21.The US is very narrow-minded: un-willing to accept new ideas or ways of thinking, in favor of preserving the traditional values and customs, and against abrupt change.


WTF........ This is a blatantly incorrect stereotype............. Although this is the kind of liberal stereotyping crap you hear in your "sociology class." Of course, no one has a problem when liberals stereotype conservatives like this, but when someone pidgeonholes a minority or a liberal, well, you never hear the end of it.


5. School is free in alot of places in Europe in the US it is grade 12 and down.

Well, if you are non-white the government will probably pay for your school.


20. The US is very ati-science

? How exactly is the USA "against science?" Are we against technology, or not accepting of certain liberal sociology dogma?


19. The US like to go to war and tell other countries want to do. (( I do not see Europe doing this or any other country ))

England, Spain, Italy, Denmark, Germany(to Afghan), Poland, Norway, and Greece, all sent troops to Iraq, and many of these countries fit your definition of being liberal welfare states. No one in their right mind "likes war." I am against the Iraq war myself. But it is absurd to make a blanket statement like this and the other ones you made.


6.mainstream mediIn the US anything that is not a

So what about liberal media elitists like Wolf Blitzer or James Carville and those Obama-mamas. On election night, the liberal pundits were virtually wetting their pants on MSNBC after Obama won Ohio............ It was disgusting.

Or how the media refuses to report on black-on-white crime. Or how the media took videos of 9-11 universally off the televison and refuses to discuss the event at all for fear of "stirring up hatred," at the Muslim colonists.


8. In the US you are rich or poor and in Europe you are more the same

Absurd. Perhaps the gap is wider from top to bottom in the USA, but are you stating in absolute terms that there is NO American middle class? It is hardly the neo-feudal system that you paint it to be.


10.text books and learning in school is all rigged and Europe less propagada.

Well, it is propaganda all right........... That "diversity history" that is inserted at regular intervals in school textbooks to placate minorities. If it is really all propaganda, than how come there is all of that "Black History Month" and "Color me Human" stuff and the teachers seem obsessed with promoting the liberal diversity agenda? The government in the US is far more concerned with the "change and diversity" program to sate minorities than promoting some rigged agenda.

How come minorities can have a "minority acheivement club," but we can't have a "caucasian acheivement club."

What rigged conservative agenda are you talking about anyway. The textbooks say nothing about 'respecting the natural order of things," unless you think it is reverse psychology or something along those lines.


17.The US government is not accountable

I am no defender or apologist for the Bush administration, but I don't see Obama being in any hurry to pull the boys out of Iraq. Who is the Government supposed to be accountable to anyway? You?

Why do some liberals think that just because they took a sociology class, where they were indoctrinated by their "black studies" professor, that that gives them some mandate to rule? Sure, many liberals do have academic credentials, but that does not necessarily translate into actual intelligence or make them any more capable of actually leading the country.

[RGacky3]

Brusilov, I actually agree with alot of what you said, most people have a stereo type of AMericans that is simply not true, most americans are WAY farther left than the media or the politicians, not nominally maybe but when it comes to the issues.


So what about liberal media elitists like Wolf Blitzer or James Carville and those Obama-mamas. On election night, the liberal pundits were virtually wetting their pants on MSNBC after Obama won Ohio............ It was disgusting.

Or how the media refuses to report on black-on-white crime. Or how the media took videos of 9-11 universally off the televison and refuses to discuss the event at all for fear of "stirring up hatred," at the Muslim colonists.

Now this is rediculous, the media may be "liberal" sometimes, however it is FAARRR far right of the public and far right of what is generally fair and balanced.

For example, it is always assumed in the media that hugo chavez is a dictator, dispite all evidence to the contrary, its just assumed not arguement. Its also assumed that the US has the right to intervine anywhere it wants, the question is only is it in our intrests, I DARE you to find some part of the media that critisizes isreal. There are tons more of examples, compared to the rest of the world and compared to the American public the media is far right.



Absurd. Perhaps the gap is wider from top to bottom in the USA, but are you stating in absolute terms that there is NO American middle class? It is hardly the neo-feudal system that you paint it to be.


There is a middle class sure, but compareing it to europe its very very much class differences.


Well, it is propaganda all right........... That "diversity history" that is inserted at regular intervals in school textbooks to placate minorities. If it is really all propaganda, than how come there is all of that "Black History Month" and "Color me Human" stuff and the teachers seem obsessed with promoting the liberal diversity agenda? The government in the US is far more concerned with the "change and diversity" program to sate minorities than promoting some rigged agenda.

How come minorities can have a "minority acheivement club," but we can't have a "caucasian acheivement club."

What rigged conservative agenda are you talking about anyway. The textbooks say nothing about 'respecting the natural order of things," unless you think it is reverse psychology or something along those lines.

Because caucasions have always been in control and have always been assumed (in history) to be superior), so these minorities are tried to get some of their dignity back.

The textbooks in the US are rediculous, of coarse its biased way to the right, just look at the "economic" discussions in high schools, its pretty much this Capitalism=freedom and socialism=State controls you, rediculous.


Who is the Government supposed to be accountable to anyway? You?

The people ...

The fact is, European smug superiority really pisses me off, Europeans are in a compleatly different situation than the United States, they are not "smarter" than Americans, and the American labor history has been MUCH MUCH more intense and had much much more repression than the europeans. The United States is a world empire, you don't think the conditions would be the same there do you? Of coarse not.

[ZeroNowhere]

I would say that the current economic uncertainty is the harbinger of major change. I don't think that the world economic order we've been living within is long for this earth, and as a result political attitudes everywhere, the US being no exception, are bound to change sooner than later.
Gaze into the crystal,
See what it tells,
It can bring you all fortune,
Do you so well.

Visions and dreams you can see in the
Crystal ball.

Unrelated to that post, I didn't know that the US was a person (shitty animes aside).


Remember, around that time, the United States, and other countries were EXTREMELY close to socialist revolution, even with Stalin around to give te western countries perfect propeganda material.Now you're just making stuff up.


Whats going to happen is whats slowly been happening in the United states for a while, through popular struggles the rulling class looses a little bit of power nad the people get a little more. Public health care is one of those struggles, if the ruling class can get beat on that, in my opinoin thats a major victory for the American people.Public health care doesn't make the ruling class have more or less power. It may be problematic for a sector of it, but it doesn't mean much of a change in power dynamics.

[Outinleftfield]

The US is so conservative because it took a longer time to change from a rural nation into an urban nation. Europe was already populated everywhere so as the population grew the entire country started urbanizing and so everyone was confronted with the problems that came from urbanization whether they liked it or not such as an increase in sweatshop labor.

In the US there was a large frontier to settle. The people who would've been the most radical, the most angry at the new working conditions were upset enough at the changes that they left for the frontier, an option not open to Europeans(except those that moved to America). Those that hated industrialization the most ran away from it instead of confronting it.

There's also our power. People think since we're in the most powerful country in the world things can't be so bad. And then when the USSR became our rival it was easier to demonize the left.

Another poster also brought up racism in the 1960s and how this lead to more conservatism.

Now there is no frontier to settle, no USSR, with China's increasing economic power soon we might not even be the most powerful, and the racism is dying down. Given the large economic inequalities we can expect without all these factors the left will make some very big gains in this next decade.

EDIT: On the other hand there are also several factors that could spell trouble for China in the future. Its economy is based entirely off of exports and growing anger at lost jobs and scandals like lead toys could lead to less exports and the bottoming out of its economy. Given the ethnic tensions with Tibetans and Uighurs and a working class growing angry at sweatshop conditions China could be in trouble. But either way it doesn't look like we're going to keep our hegemony.

[RGacky3]

Public health care doesn't make the ruling class have more or less power. It may be problematic for a sector of it, but it doesn't mean much of a change in power dynamics.

What I mean, is that the ruling class MUST respond to public pressure, which in a sense, is giving the public more power.

[mannetje]

I admit that i'm an america-hater but i don't hate americans. And it all has to do with wat is see read or hear about america.
I have forgotten the exaxct number but I thought that about 50 million americans have no health insurance. You can buy guns on every corner of the street, but if you get caught with a itty bit of marijuana you go straight to prison. Ghetto's is also something i can't get to with my mind.
(black)people killing eachother everyday for the punyest things. and america is always involved in some kind of war. and the prison system how does a criminal reintegrate if he's spends time in a hellhole where the gangs have the power. I'm not sure if america got rehabilitation programms. but they should provide education in prisons. I guess they already exist but that's only in low security prisons i've heard.
There are so many things wrong in the usa i think, that I can write about it for hours. maybe you thinks why is he concerned about america he's dutch. But they say that america is the 'boss' of the world and america is policing the world. let the american government change their own nation for the better. instead of putting all their money in weapons and the hopeless 'war on drugs. let them put their money in to social changes for a better living for all people living in the states. america is the 'big boss' so let america give the good example that is a responsebility you have if your so powerfull as america. like the spiderman quote "with great power comes great responsibility". (wow comics makes some sense too sometimes). But my biggest wish is for america is that the government get overthrown by the left-side one day. viva la revolucion.:mad:

[spice756]

When did the US change from anarchy to goverment control?Where in the 1800's in the US you had separation of church and state and libertarian than big government .Tell the president in 1800's of law on smoking pot , having seat belt ,no drinking on boat in water and so on !! He would say the country has gone mad.

Why was the US more anarchy in the 1800's and separation of church and state but now the government feels people need morals and faith to live a good life :(but the mentality in the 1800's what you do in your home is not my business.

Why did US go from libertarian to a big government ?

And why did communists and socialists feel the need that people need morals and why where they anti- gay ,lesbain and bisexuality ? The communists , socialists ,left wing where anti- smoking ,drinking ,drug use , sex and porn amog others deem vice and bad ? And belive people need morals from the government ?

But now new ommunists , socialists ,left wing are really anarchy communists , anarchy socialists , anarchy left wing has they are removing the big government control.

Why did the US government get so obsess with morals and faith and what got that started? I mean in 1800's if some one wanted to drink battery acid the government would not step in of fear of big governmet .And the police had much less power so we did not have a police state.

What got big business to control government or the government to be so pro-big business and pro-rich?

[Crurkean]

Wow this is a pretty crazy thread considering the USA is actually one of the most liberal/ left places on Earth!

The USA was founded as an Enlightenment project near the same time as the French Revolution for crying out loud!

USA launched World War Two to make the World safe for economic materialism (Capitalism and Marxism are the same).

[Crurkean]

Baron Julius Evola wrote a pretty good essay on the nature of the United States (titled 'American 'Civilization'') so one should look there for a more comprehensive critique from an authentic Right Wing source.

Suffice to say what passes for 'Conservativism' in the USA is just another form of the Zionist Conspiracy run by neo-cons who all have one thing in common (bagels and lox anyone? :p )

[Crurkean]

Whats that? Neocons are all Jewish?

Richard Perle

Paul Wolfowitz

Douglas Feith

Charles Krauthammer

David Frum

Robert Kagan

Dov Zakheim

Henry Kissenger

Norman Podhoretz

Elliot Abrams

Alan Dershowtiz

Daniel Pipes

Eliot Cohen

Bill Kristol

[spice756]

Whats that? Neocons are all Jewish?

He is a troll or high on some thing has even conservatives would not think like that.



Wow this is a pretty crazy thread considering the USA is actually one of the most liberal/ left places on Earth!



Ya I must buy you a apple now , how nice of 90% of the people are very left on this site.

http://forums.techguy.org/62-civilized-debate/

http://forums.techguy.org/26-random-discussion/

After reading those threads and posts at that web site it sure shows how left the US is .

[willdw79]

^^^

All nonsense.

America is conservative because we have it good. Not all of us, to be sure, but enough of us to see something worthwhile in the way we are living life now.

I don't want to see any change. We have it good.
That resticted dude is right about this one, I think. It seems like many people have a little bit and they feel like any progressive policies social or economic, threaten their little bit. Then the majority of the people who don't have shit know several people who do, so they figure that if they just "have faith" and "act professional" they will get some too. So the powers that be use the "carrot" on most people, but they also have a big stick here too, crime/prisons. The U.S. will lock you up in a second, for a long ass time too. So I think most people try to "get money" without bucking the system and the ones who do buck the system tend not to be progressive. This is a huge generalization, but I think that it is essentially true.

[Outinleftfield]

When did the US change from anarchy to goverment control?Where in the 1800's in the US you had separation of church and state and libertarian than big government .Tell the president in 1800's of law on smoking pot , having seat belt ,no drinking on boat in water and so on !! He would say the country has gone mad.

Why was the US more anarchy in the 1800's and separation of church and state but now the government feels people need morals and faith to live a good life :(but the mentality in the 1800's what you do in your home is not my business.

Why did US go from libertarian to a big government ?

And why did communists and socialists feel the need that people need morals and why where they anti- gay ,lesbain and bisexuality ? The communists , socialists ,left wing where anti- smoking ,drinking ,drug use , sex and porn amog others deem vice and bad ? And belive people need morals from the government ?

But now new ommunists , socialists ,left wing are really anarchy communists , anarchy socialists , anarchy left wing has they are removing the big government control.

Why did the US government get so obsess with morals and faith and what got that started? I mean in 1800's if some one wanted to drink battery acid the government would not step in of fear of big governmet .And the police had much less power so we did not have a police state.

What got big business to control government or the government to be so pro-big business and pro-rich?

But there were big government types back then too. They were called federalists.

The Federalist Party wanted to use big government to help big business. It wasn't about the "working class" or the "little guy" it was about business. In fact the Democratic-Republican Party was more about the common man, which at the time were mostly farmers. The Federalist Party had policies that promoted big business at their expense.

In the end though the Democratic-Republican Party did represent higher class interests, southern plantation owners.

According to Marx the Slave Society stage moves into the Capitalism stage. America was a mix of the two stages. The Democratic-Republican Party was lead by the elite of the Slave Society and the Federalists and later the Whigs and then the Republicans supported the bourgeoisie, the elite that ran most of the Northern economy.

The Revolutionary War was a war lead by two classes in two different class systems, the bourgeoisie and the slave-owners. Both wanted independence from the overseas aristocracy.

Both classes wanted to expand. At first compromise was possible but eventually it lead to war. The bourgeoisie wanted to expand its economy into the South but with most people either slaves or slave-owners finding enough workers to industrialize would've been difficult. The Civil War was the final triumph of the bourgeois class over the slave-owning class.

During this conflict both sides tried to make themselves look more moral than the other. Both quoted the Bible. They both started taking on more and more "moral" causes, but especially the Republican Party given the influence of Massachusetts puritanism. Also since the bourgeoisie influenced industrialization and urbanization it would become easier for people including religious people to get movements off the ground since you'd be speaking to more people in a city than out in the country. This created loud movements, both progressive and reactionary for politicians to pander to for votes. At its beginning there were already Republicans talking about prohibition. Its founder left the party afterward saying he intended it to be a single-issue party against slavery and that people should form a single issue party against alcohol. But there were also people talking about woman's suffrage.

Alcohol prohibition was also influenced by nativism. Alcohol was increasingly associated with German and Irish immigrants. Had it not been for WWI against Germany alcohol prohibition might never have happened.

Of course urbanization in Europe also influenced calls for change. But I think the main reason conservative movements in America were more successful than progressive movements is that while you had some big, urban, industrial centers you also had a wide, agrarian frontier. The majority of the country still lived in farms. These people would still vote and would still hear about the social movements in the country. Since rural communities tend to reinforce traditional values conservative movements had a leg up in getting their ideas put into policy compared to progressive movements. This would also lead to less agitation than in Europe, since people who really hated industrial sweatshop conditions could just go start their own farms in the frontier. Most people who moved to the frontier owned their own farms, did not work for other farmers because they were given land by the government. Basically the Frontier was an opportunity to escape class hierarchy since they kept all their labor for themselves instead of giving it to an employer. If you can escape exploitation instead of fighting it most people will choose to escape.

This can explain the conservative attitudes in America. These people existed as their own class. In their experience the only people who ever took anything from them were the Indians(though they were actually taking from the Indians), and the government(through taxes). These people had little interest in progressive causes. Sweatshop labor and child labor didn't directly affect them until industrialization hit home. These people's experiences can explain the anti-tax attitudes prominent in America today, since in their experience the only thing taking any part of their labor was the state.

The moral causes that won were influenced by money. In 1913 the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act passed against cocaine and opiates. The Hemp/Cannabis Industry, Alcohol Industry, Caffeine Industry, and Tobacco Industry were able to lobby to prevent it from being extended to their substances. In 1937 the Marihuana Tax Act would effectively ban marijuana. During that time the Paper Industry felt threatened by hemp and were able to use anti-Mexican racism and media sensationalism to their advantage.

This moralism helped shape the religious Right of today, but the main reason the right is so rabidly dogmatic religious today also has to do with the officially atheist USSR. This opposition to religion was easily used as anti-USSR propaganda so it became useful for the ideological state apparatus to emphasize religion as important. As progressives and radicals in the 60s started challenging traditional values the religious Right became even more vocal in defending their views on gays, abortion, drugs, anything they felt was threatened.

[spice756]

The moral causes that won were influenced by money. In 1913 the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act passed against cocaine and opiates. The Hemp/Cannabis Industry, Alcohol Industry, Caffeine Industry, and Tobacco Industry were able to lobby to prevent it from being extended to their substances. In 1937 the Marihuana Tax Act would effectively ban marijuana. During that time the Paper Industry felt threatened by hemp and were able to use anti-Mexican racism and media sensationalism to their advantage.


I will need you or some one here to explain more on how this Harrison Narcotics Tax Act was for and why the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act .And what was this Hemp/Cannabis Industry, Alcohol Industry, Caffeine Industry, and Tobacco Industry for?




This moralism helped shape the religious Right of today, but the main reason the right is so rabidly dogmatic religious today also has to do with the officially atheist USSR. This opposition to religion was easily used as anti-USSR propaganda so it became useful for the ideological state apparatus to emphasize religion as important. As progressives and radicals in the 60s started challenging traditional values the religious Right became even more vocal in defending their views on gays, abortion, drugs, anything they felt was threatened.


Can you say more on this and why separation of church and state before but this is not the case now.

[Comrade Gwydion]

First, for those of you that doubt that America is conservative (ie: is right of centre on most policy issues) at all, some thoughts: Americans tolerate lower levels of government spending than any other advanced country; Americans tolerate high levels of social inequality: 1 in 6 US households earns less than 35% of the median income with the nearest rival being the UK with 1 in 20; America is the only developed nation to not have a full government supported health-care system and the only Western democracy that does not provide child support to all its families; America does not provide paid maternity leave; America upholds the right to bear arms and still uses the death penalty; the US is far more willing to use force and is suspicious of International treaties; American citizens are far more religious than their European counterparts and more traditional in their moral values; the United States is one of the few developed countries where abortion is still a galvanising issue and where the majority of people say grace before their meals.

One of the leading political-scientists on this subject is Robert Kagan, although I don't agree with him, basicly every European scholar has been trying to counter his theory but I haven't heard any significant alternative, but still his theory sounds flawed to me.
What he basically says is that the USA acts like the international bully because it can. The only reason, according to him, that Europe so desperately wants international law is because Europe is to weak to be an international bully by itself. Further more, he says we Europeans should shut up and be happy with the fact that the USA solves our problems.

Kagan is a dick.

[Bud Struggle]

What he basically says is that the USA acts like the international bully because it can. The only reason, according to him, that Europe so desperately wants international law is because Europe is to weak to be an international bully by itself. Further more, he says we Europeans should shut up and be happy with the fact that the USA solves our problems.

Kagan is a dick.

He may be a dick--but he's right. Except about the last sentence. America does what it does because it can and there's no one out ther to stop it. The SU when it was around did just about the same thing. Powerful countries act in a way that shows off their power. Week countries run to their mothers.

There is not much difference between a major world powers and an eight year old boys.

[Comrade Gwydion]

Well, I think he's right about the first sentence only: America acts like it acts because it can. But 'weakness' isn't the only reason that Europe condems it. There is, perhaps not 100%, but at least some genuine idealism in the wish for international rules and rules of conduct

[RGacky3]

All nonsense.

America is conservative because we have it good. Not all of us, to be sure, but enough of us to see something worthwhile in the way we are living life now.

I don't want to see any change. We have it good.

Would you consider places like France, Canada and Sweeden conservative? If not then I just showed your theory wrong

[Lloyd Love]

Its funny, the WHITE NATIONALISTS SAY AMERICA HAS GONE TO THE LIBERALS AND THE JEWS

AND YOU SAY THAT WE ARE WAY TO CONSERVATIVE.

with that in mind i think we as america are somewhere in the middle of the left right spectrum

[Bud Struggle]

Would you consider places like France, Canada and Sweeden conservative? If not then I just showed your theory wrong

Of course. It depends on the scale--they are Social Democraticish--which I don't feel is a bad way for governments or societies to exist. Not my personal choice, but it certainly isn't way off down the progressive scale like Socialism, Communism or Anarchism.

[RGacky3]

In france syndicalism (a very revolutionary movement) is quite popular, there the Capitalists are afraid of the workers and the government is afraid of the people, rather than the other way around.

[Bud Struggle]

In france syndicalism (a very revolutionary movement) is quite popular, there the Capitalists are afraid of the workers and the government is afraid of the people, rather than the other way around.

Racism is pretty popular in France these days too. Actually unionism is starting to become less popular these days in France because it seems that the unions are acting like a bunch of clowns.

[RGacky3]

You did'nt refute what I was saying ... they are NOT conservative (racism is'nt about being conservative or liberal).

[Bud Struggle]

You did'nt refute what I was saying ... they are NOT conservative (racism is'nt about being conservative or liberal).

No they are doing French stuff like French people alway have--a little bit of this and a little bit of that. I can't believe that you think that France is going Anarchist. It's more like "acting out" than any serious movement. Just like those Anarchist demonstrations in Greece last year--there wasn't a trace that any of that happened when I was there a couple of weeks ago.

[spice756]

No they are doing French stuff like French people alway have--a little bit of this and a little bit of that. I can't believe that you think that France is going Anarchist. It's more like "acting out" than any serious movement. Just like those Anarchist demonstrations in Greece last year--there wasn't a trace that any of that happened when I was there a couple of weeks ago.

so Bud Struggle what are they if they not conservative ?

[spice756]

Okay this makes me very sick how barbaric the US really is.

Justice stands by refusal to give interracial couple license to wed

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/10/17/interracial.marriage/

How barbaric.Never mind other things we do not know about like the old 60's sodomy law and heterosexual laws.

What the hell is wrong with US .There ultra conservative views just stink of vomit.

Go back and read your dam bible it preaches to help the poor and needy and it preaches the right for life so when you piss on socialism and universal healthcare you piss on your bible .

Why can't the dam priest talk about politics we have is ****er- to bible .

Now point out where in the bible it preaches sodomy , heterosexual or interracial couple are bad?

What right does state have to tell people what to do I thought that was fascism. Why is the UN not up in harms over the US that brakes internal law on civil liberty.

The US is not prograssing but going back in time.

[RGacky3]

No they are doing French stuff like French people alway have--a little bit of this and a little bit of that. I can't believe that you think that France is going Anarchist. It's more like "acting out" than any serious movement. Just like those Anarchist demonstrations in Greece last year--there wasn't a trace that any of that happened when I was there a couple of weeks ago.

What I was saying was that in France, it is the way it should be, the ruling class is afraid of the people, I did'nt say it was a revolution, and it has nothing to do with "french people doing french stuff" its workers standing up for their rights, and they can do this because of the strong history of syndicalism,

[spice756]

The 60's , 70's and 80's was called the progressive years around the world and do to the growth of communism and socialism not to say Unions and workers protesting lots of capitalists and government got scared.So wages ,benefits and social programs like food stamps ,warfare , subsidized housing ,free healthcare so on.

Much of what you so call social programs in Canada and more so Europe was capitalists and government got scared of this strong movments around the world. The 90's to now is the dark age. Lack of communism and socialism around the world along with lack of Unions and worker movments . And with this dark age the capitalists and government are not scared to cut social programs .

[RGacky3]

Much of what you so call social programs in Canada and more so Europe was capitalists and government got scared of this strong movments around the world. The 90's to now is the dark age. Lack of communism and socialism around the world along with lack of Unions and worker movments . And with this dark age the capitalists and government are not scared to cut social programs .

But I think thats turning around now, but this time maybe the people will try for the whole pie.

[Mo212]

Yes, let's ignore the material development of an entire country and blame its conservatism on a stereotypical personality trait and religion. That must be it. Thank you comrade Radical! I'm so glad that you solved it for us!

Don't underestimate religion, before the era of nation states religous populations are like free floating nation states, this is why there is conflict when one population based religious civilization encounters another.

You have to think about the populations lineage historically, when people are born they just don't appear without any kind of history, the lineage of all people alive today have some historical roots and anyone who denies religions power overmankind historically and in the world is quite insane, even the Japanese and Chinese have religion in terms of philosophy and semi-mystic nature worship.

[SocialPhilosophy]

I'm busy with study science so I do not have that much time to read books , but is the US always going be conservative ?

The big quetion that gets to me everyday is why the US is so conservative and more important why the US is so slow at changing.From the 60's to now there has not been that much change and in the past 35+ yaers there has been no change.

When you look at Europe or South America they are more progressive.Why is the US so slow at changing ?

Do you see any progressive in the next 10 to 15 years in the US? To me only the 60's and 70's and little in the 80's in the US history seems to be the time when people thought out side the capitalist box to rebel and be diffrent like hippies ,punk ,anarchy and left movements !! But the 90's to now nothing but sheep to the system and lack of thought and will.

Here is the snip I found on the US make up.

+++++++++++++++++++++++


+++++++++++++++++++++++


Maybe it has something to do with the fact that we came out of the civil war Swinging on the international front, exerting our presence where ever we wished. It is true enough that Tyrants everywhere create their enemy.