Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Define "great". If you mean in terms of military/economic power, then yes - unquestionably. But if you're implying that American society is morally or ethically superior to that of other countries, then I would respectfully disagree.
As the Trump phenomenon clearly shows, a large minority of Americans are willing to put a demagogue with fascist tendencies into the presidency. Racist ethnonationalism, sexism, and religious fundamentalism have a strong hold on large segments of the population. The unholy alliance between white supremacists, the wealthy, and big corporate interests means that the government at all levels works for moneyed interests and not for the average citizen. The level of militarization in society and of police brutality is astounding. The US is well behind other countries, including Canada and most of Europe, in the protections it affords minority communities - hell, the republican party is assiduously working to disenfranchise people of color, and it still tries to demonize gays at every opportunity. I could go on...
If you want to talk about countries that are "great" in terms of moral example, I'd say Canada is right up there at the top, along with many countries in Western Europe (Netherlands, Scandinavia, arguably even Spain and Ireland), New Zealand, maybe Uruguay. All of those places treat their citizens more equitably and justly than does the US.
Why not compare to European countries that have made no effort to integrate their immigrant minorities. And don't say they'd be integrated if they tried. The Jews banged at the door to be integrated. Didn't end well.
Define "great". If you mean in terms of military/economic power, then yes - unquestionably. But if you're implying that American society is morally or ethically superior to that of other countries, then I would respectfully disagree.
As the Trump phenomenon clearly shows, a large minority of Americans are willing to put a demagogue with fascist tendencies into the presidency. Racist ethnonationalism, sexism, and religious fundamentalism have a strong hold on large segments of the population. The unholy alliance between white supremacists, the wealthy, and big corporate interests means that the government at all levels works for moneyed interests and not for the average citizen. The level of militarization in society and of police brutality is astounding. The US is well behind other countries, including Canada and most of Europe, in the protections it affords minority communities - hell, the republican party is assiduously working to disenfranchise people of color, and it still tries to demonize gays at every opportunity. I could go on...
If you want to talk about countries that are "great" in terms of moral example, I'd say Canada is right up there at the top, along with many countries in Western Europe (Netherlands, Scandinavia, arguably even Spain and Ireland), New Zealand, maybe Uruguay. All of those places treat their citizens more equitably and justly than does the US.
"Great" in terms of collective achievements: technological, R and D, medical, economic, etc.
Yes, in terms of providing an equal level of prosperity to all of its citizens the U.S. is not at the top of the class, and several other countries including Canada would rank higher.
In its pursuit of excellence and being number one, the U.S. has always left some of its people behind if they can't keep up.
Define "great". If you mean in terms of military/economic power, then yes - unquestionably. But if you're implying that American society is morally or ethically superior to that of other countries, then I would respectfully disagree.
As the Trump phenomenon clearly shows, a large minority of Americans are willing to put a demagogue with fascist tendencies into the presidency. Racist ethnonationalism, sexism, and religious fundamentalism have a strong hold on large segments of the population. The unholy alliance between white supremacists, the wealthy, and big corporate interests means that the government at all levels works for moneyed interests and not for the average citizen. The level of militarization in society and of police brutality is astounding. The US is well behind other countries, including Canada and most of Europe, in the protections it affords minority communities - hell, the republican party is assiduously working to disenfranchise people of color, and it still tries to demonize gays at every opportunity. I could go on...
If you want to talk about countries that are "great" in terms of moral example, I'd say Canada is right up there at the top, along with many countries in Western Europe (Netherlands, Scandinavia, arguably even Spain and Ireland), New Zealand, maybe Uruguay. All of those places treat their citizens more equitably and justly than does the US.
Please do a little bit of research on Canadian own indigenous population - probably, a kind of "moral example" redefined...
No worries mate, this too shall pass and get flushed into obscurity.
I would opine that Americans have reached a point of no longer tolerating the status quo in their political structure. The change long promised by many fraudsters has never been so close to actually happening.
It won't be pretty but it will darn sure be cathartic.
Your right that many of us are done with tolerating the nonsense in our political system but we are at a loss as to how to fix it. The only thing we all can see plain as day is that it's broken. Thank goodness it will be over soon, at least this election. We will hopefully have some time to get some sensible reforms in place before the next election. The founding fathers never intended the lowest common denominator to be the determining factor in the running of our government.
Your right that many of us are done with tolerating the nonsense in our political system but we are at a loss as to how to fix it. The only thing we all can see plain as day is that it's broken. Thank goodness it will be over soon, at least this election. We will hopefully have some time to get some sensible reforms in place before the next election. The founding fathers never intended the lowest common denominator to be the determining factor in the running of our government.
When your founders were framing the constitution and setting up the political system, the population of the country was less than 3 million and no one had any idea how vast the geographic area of the country would become. Even by the start of the civil war the population was only about 32 million.
It's not surprising your political system, designed for a tiny united-in-battle population, doesn't function well now.
Tell you what; I'll feel more guilt over the past lack of integrity shown to aboriginals by governments when they demonstrate they have any present day integrity based upon anything other than pointing a crooked finger and demanding cash...
does not define our country
...
or French citizen Michaelle Jean.
How might you yourself suppose her Haitian origin unworthy of mentioning as bearing any affect on who or how that woman's come to be? The NYT article serving as your introduction of this otherwise interestingly worthwhile thread is daftly corny.
How might you yourself suppose her Haitian origin unworthy of mentioning as bearing any affect on who or how that woman's come to be? I really dislike appointments made for the purpose of being ethnically or politically correct. What were here accomplishments or achievements making her worthy of a vice-regal position? Also I doubt strongly that she supports the concept of constitutional monarchy in any meaningful sense.
I will give her credit for handling the December 2008 "end-around coalition" well, particularly since it involved placing a separatist/treasonous party into a coalition. I am saying that even though I think Gilles Duceppes is one of the smartest politicians of whom I have read.
The NYT article serving as your introduction of this otherwise interestingly worthwhile thread is daftly corny.
Are you saying the article was corny or my citation of the article? And what of that quotation of one of my posts without a comment? I'm lost.
Tell you what; I'll feel more guilt over the past lack of integrity shown to aboriginals by governments when they demonstrate they have any present day integrity based upon anything other than pointing a crooked finger and demanding cash...
Thank you for taking my intended post away. I gave you rep though since I thoroughly agree. As I have posted in To the United Nations: Time to Call it a Bad Day and other places, I think that any giving of aid without strings to organizations that have not demonstrated reliability or selfless dedication is mistaken.
I wote in the contest of the U.N., "(e)ven worse, the aid does not reach the people.Do you really imagine that those pitiful people waving their arms in UNICEF posters really get a penny? No, the money is in their dictators' Swiss bank accountsor at best wasted in the not-for-profits' bureaucracies. The UN is wasting money that ought to benefit the unfortunate."
In the case of Attawappiskat, the band leaders live like kings. New ice rinks complete with Zambonees are the order of the day. The school for the children had to be evacuated and shut down because of fumes.
Giving money to the "First Nations" or "the world" assuages peoples' guilt. It does no one worthy any good.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First Nations band leaders and UN trhive on subsidies
