T Nation

Anti-american?

Why do people think I’m anti-american just because I strongly disagree with this administrations foreign policy and obviously am against this war?

Because this war and this administration’s foreign policy are both aimed at protecting America. No other interest should come before that.

Agree 100% with doogie. I supposed you wanted peace and harmony for the terrorists as the World Trade Center was burning.

To doogie: I maybe against the policy but not against the people of this country or the ideas in which it was founded upon. So again, how is that anti-american? Are the Gulf War and Vietnam veterans who are protesting aginst this war also anti-american?

To RougeRat: What does the 9/11 attack have to do with a war on Iraq? Yes I do think the people who carried out the the WTC disaster ought to be brought to justice. So why has most of the focus shifted to Saddam? It is circumspect to say the least.

It’s for the same reason it’s unpatriotic to dissent & ask questions. Anyone who doesn’t march in rank & file with the Americans is anti-American. I guess it’s their way of getting support.

Just a thought–

The best way to protect America is to treat the world as her children. Feed them, take care of them, and figure out a more equitable way to distribute capital.

In other words, to quote a Chuck Norris commerical: “The best defense is not to offend.”

The rich are not better than you or me. They don’t work harder. They aren’t neccessarily smarter. Many of them were born into their positions of extreme wealth: why should the rich be allowed to prosper when the poor should be allowed to flounder?

Most of the wealth belongs to people in America. Most of the wealth IN America belongs to just a few people. How much would Billy Gates really LOSE if he had to throw away a dollar? Ten? A hundred? A thousand? A hundred thousand? A million? A billion? Half of his money?

At what point does the quality of his life go down?

While that dollar could make a big difference in certain parts of the world–it might as well be toilet paper while it’s at Bill’s house.

I’m not saying that economics is the complete explaination for the current situation–clearly, it’s more complicated than that. But if we could figure out a better way to distribute wealth (after all, we already DO distribute it) then a lot of our problems would be solved. Not magically, and certainly not right away. But the best way to protect the US’s interests… is to look after the interests of everyone else.

“Dem belly full/but we hungry/a hungry mob is an angry mob…”

d/c

“The rich are not better than you or me. They don’t work harder. They aren’t neccessarily smarter. Many of them were born into their positions of extreme wealth: why should the rich be allowed to prosper when the poor should be allowed to flounder?”

Bullshit. See: trailer parks, chosen ignorance.
See: self-made millionaires, people who grew up poor and w/ nothing but worked hard and made something of themselves.

To say that rich people “don’t work harder” as a blanket statement is absolutely incorrect. And also has very little to do with the war on Iraq, unless you’d like to point out the perverted distribution of wealth in Iraq. That is, Saddam has all of it.

I agree completely with Mark. The right to respectively disagree with your democratically elected government’s policies is the cornerstone of democracy.

Today, when the voice of the oppoosition is not given fair hearing because it is quickly lambasted as “anti-American”, we are merely regressing into McCarthyism. Its downright sad how similar the conditions are now as it was during McCarthy’s communist witchhunts.

dogchild you sound like the Boulder Bolshevik, I like it! :smiley:

mark, would you be against “this administration” if gore was in office? also, when you say, “I maybe against the policy but not against the people of this country or the ideas in which it was founded upon.” can you clarify what ideas you are referring to please? and on the subject of terrorists, are you implying that iraq does not harbor terrorists? most people consider hussein himself to be a terrorist. your comments please.

So, we should give everyone money so they’re not mad at us? That sounds a little odd. Why do we have to pick up the tab for everyone else? We don’t have the money for that, and I don’t think it is wise in the first place. The job of every country is to fend for itself, protect itself and watch its own back first; then everyone else second. Hand outs are not a good idea in general.

To dogchild: The absolute best way to protect America would be to turn the rest of the world into a parking lot. I feel that option is only slightly more extreme than your communism approach.

The problem with communism is that it’s impractical on a large scale – takes away all ambition. If there’s no way to “get ahead,” then there’s no reason to try. You know you’ll get “your share” regardless.

We’re currently in the first full-generation welfare state, meaning the children of parents who knew nothing but welfare. These children are learning to live on the dole. Sad. If we did away with these hand-outs, people as a whole would be a lot better off. I’m not against helping some one out when it’s needed, but I AM against that becoming a government program that pays people to be lazy.

There’s a thing called Pareto’s Law (also known as the 80/20 rule) that states that 80% of the wealth is controlled.owned by 20% of the people. They have it not because they inerited it, but because of how they think. Even if they DID inherit it, if they thought wrong, they’d quickly lose it (common problem amoungst lottery winners too). If the wealth of the world were evenly distributed amoungst all the people, within 10 years you’d be back to the same 80/20 situation. (BTW, it also applies to people at virtually any task – jobs, 80% of the work is performed by 20% of the people; NBA, 80% of the points are scored by 20% of the players, etc.)

To dogchild…I aggree you should redistribute your wealth to me. I however will spend the money I earned the way I see fit. Not watch the money I make be given to people who choose not to work. Those of you who like communism have never lived it. Guess what? in communism there are are still three classes, the rich (governemt employees and supporters), the poor (the average citizen), and the very, very poor (the rest of the average citizens). I can’t believe that there are still people who believe communism can still work when every single, solitary example of communism has or is failing. I think some people are hopelessly stupid.

I guess I should post something since I’m so involved in other war/policy threads.

I have no problem whatsoever with an American disagreeing with the current administration or myself. I don’t consider that at all un-American and anti-American. Actually, that’s the essence of being an American. We’re free to dissent.

What I have a problem with is people who are dogmatic in their dissent and give no valid reasoning or facts to back up their opinion. They hate Bush, they hate conservatives, they hate this administration no matter what it does. The simply hate with no rhyme or reason to it.

DocT wrote:

What I have a problem with is people who are dogmatic in their dissent and give no valid reasoning or facts to back up their opinion.

Logically speaking then, you’d have the same issue with those ‘pro-americans’ who do the same thing - they’re just as bad and just as prevalent.

Let’s face it, this topic is always going to revert to a series of binary oppositions.

To the person who said that another poster’s hatred of the administration would be different if Gore was in office

At best this is specious. Since such an administration didn’t/ doesn’t exist, you can’t predicate approval/ disapproval of said administration’s actions. The here and now is Bush’s administration, don’t throw in red herrings.

Iscariot, you’re quite correct that I don’t like those in support of war who have no reasoning or logic behind their opinion.

“Just bomb em” is just as bad as “Flowers and bunnies.”

Guys, I?ll try to respond as best as I can to each of your arguments in turn.

Bullshit. See: trailer parks, chosen ignorance.
See: self-made millionaires, people who grew up poor and w/ nothing but worked hard and made something of themselves.

I have nothing against those people, but what about the people who work hard for next to nothing in capitalist sweatshops around the world? They?re not getting the fruits of their labor, are they? No, because the multibillonaire is exploiting them for profit. The truly, truly rich in this country do not have to work. A self-made millionaire is a different story?s/he worked for their money, s/he made their money. And a million dollars? Come on, that?s upper middle class. They have nothing compared to the ultra rich. As for people who ?choose ignorance? I hate ignorance more than anything.
This goes back to my main point: we need to look at the way that our economic theories work and the assumptions that underlie them. My first point was that why do we think that one can ?never have enough profit?? isn?t there a point at which extra profit is just specious? My point was, and is, the difference between giving a dollar to the rich, and giving a dollar to the poor is, the poor will spend it?use it. The rich may (or may not) invest it, but it certainly won?t be paying for essentials like food and shelter.

To say that rich people “don’t work harder” as a blanket statement is absolutely incorrect. And also has very little to do with the war on Iraq, unless you’d like to point out the perverted distribution of wealth in Iraq. That is, Saddam has all of it.

Yep. That?s pretty much the long and short of it. It is a blanket statement. But the point is, that rich people aren?t being rewarded because they work hard, they?re being rewarded because they made smart investments, or their parents were rich, or a number of other reasons. Being a rich person in a capitalist society, if you?re playing the game right, is like being a capital collector?you?re the one getting all this cash. The statistics are there to back me up, too. It?s like this in every country, even Iraq. Very few people have all the money. This money flows into the west, where even fewer people have all the money to control.

I think we have an ethical obligation to feed other people. We have the money. It doesn?t seem that out of line to me.

Anyway. More in my next post.

dogchild you sound like the Boulder Bolshevik, I like it! :smiley:

Oh jeez, I hope I?m not coming off that extreme. I?d like to think that I have a reasonable position.

So, we should give everyone money so they’re not mad at us? That sounds a little odd. Why do we have to pick up the tab for everyone else? We don’t have the money for that, and I don’t think it is wise in the first place. The job of every country is to fend for itself, protect itself and watch its own back first; then everyone else second. Hand outs are not a good idea in general.

The thing is, we DO have the money. Look at all the cash we spend on ?defense?. If we gave a little bit away, I think we could defend ourselves more effectively than by buying MORE missiles, MORE bombs, MORE death.

To dogchild: The absolute best way to protect America would be to turn the rest of the world into a parking lot. I feel that option is only slightly more extreme than your communism approach.

We couldn?t very well exploit the resources of the rest of the world by turning it into a parking lot, now could we? Those Nikes you?re wearing? Yeah. Those. Stitched in Korea, probably. We love to plunder and steal the resources of the rest of the world, labor in China, Oil in the middle east, rainforests in South America. All of that delightful stuff Americans love to have would just go away. Then we?d just have to start exploiting each other, now wouldn?t we? And we can?t have that.

And who said anything about communism?

The problem with communism is that it’s impractical on a large scale – takes away all ambition. If there’s no way to “get ahead,” then there’s no reason to try. You know you’ll get “your share” regardless.

I?m not saying that we should give people enough to sate their every need, I?m saying that we should give them enough so that they don?t have to work 12 hours a day at a job that doesn?t pay anything. The minimum wage, at minimum, should be doubled. ?Your share? should be enough to keep you from starving, and not much else.

We’re currently in the first full-generation welfare state, meaning the children of parents who knew nothing but welfare. These children are learning to live on the dole. Sad. If we did away with these hand-outs, people as a whole would be a lot better off. I’m not against helping some one out when it’s needed, but I AM against that becoming a government program that pays people to be lazy.
What I?m against is that you can?t get ahead?the system conspires to keep you down. Where do you go if you don?t have access to proper education, or a job better than McDonalds? Well, you can go into the military, so you can go die for the rich, or you can sell crack, and get hunted down by the rich and imprisoned. Then what choice do you have? You?re an ex-con with no job opportunities better than McDonalds. The system propagates itself to deny people the opportunity to climb the ladder.

I?m on welfare right now. That?s right. I?m a state college student. That means that the people of the state of Colorado are paying for my education?at least, in part.