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.
I'll go to my grave with one of my never-ending meditations: no animal can be so cruel to its own kind than the human being. And yes, I admit to the potential cruelties in myself!
But there's a ray of hope for the world: the lowering of the fertility rates around the world. One of the most silent praiseworthy revolutions taking place. Yes, there's still a band of high fertility rates in Sub-Sahara Africa, but how many of them will make it through their childhoods?
Let the robots take their places and torture them! Then? Less atrocities to report/commit!
It's understandable that the U.S. should be picked on more, a country that loves to point a finger, not realizing that when you point a finger at someone, or another country, you're pointing 4 fingers at yourself!
Ok I agree, but lets not forget the Russians (and the French?) propped him up for even longer! Also, lets not also forget the Russians are right now helping prop up the Syrian dictator.
See what I am saying? Its not that the United States has not done wrong things. No country is perfect and the bigger countries like the USA and Russia have many skeletons in the closet. But some people are just attacking the USA over and over and over - and over again while not mentioning anyone else.
I don't know if people are just trying to PC or if they simply do not know about history or foreign affairs. The American media does a horrible job reporting on foreign affairs. There could be a volcano going off in the Caribbean affecting thousands of people or there could be a famine in Africa while the American media will be talking endlessly about a murder trial of a single person.
While this entire thread has become a rather meandering cluster, I just wanted to clarify the reason that the United States was even mentioned here to begin with.
The OP made a statement/asked a question that certain nations/cultures/people were barbarous and predisposed to committing atrocities. He basically named Muslims and the Japanese as his foremost examples. As in there is something about their culture that allows them to commit these acts. The counter argument that I presented was that all nations have committed such acts and/or are capable of doing so. I used the example of things the United States has done precisely because the United States is, IMO, among the most progressive on Earth in terms of human rights and taking a critical view of our past mistakes. Ergo, even the most progressive nation has committed atrocities, so it is not something simply inherent within particular cultures, but within humanity itself.
I also used the example of Nazi Germany as Germans are generally considered to be an advanced, progressive and enlightened people, yet they have committed arguably one of the worst atrocities in recent human history. I also named the actions of the Red Army in the final months of WW2 as they invaded German territory as examples of depraved barbarity from a people the OP would consider to be above such things.
Certainly others decided to focus far more on the US than the macro point of the thread and what was used as an example to disprove an assertion by the OP has now apparently become the central debate.
Our prejudice against Blacks, Jews, and most minority groups was shameful.
The key word 'was' as people like Barack Obama, Bill Gates, Sergey Brin, Mark Zuckerberg etc. are among the most powerful and rich people in the States.
While I agree that genocide was never a policy of the US, you must remember that the US govt did want to destroy the culture of the Native Americans. There was a program of forced assimilation that was really a form of trying to "wipe out" a native culture. The US treatment of Native Americans is very shameful indeed and something all Americans should be ashamed of.
I suggest to discuss the atrocities of the 20th century and of these years. There is no sense to go back very far. I think we should pinpoint the era, choose the one we know best of all and we live in. Otherwise, it will be a useless and endless discussion.
"While this entire thread has become a rather meandering cluster, I just wanted to clarify the reason that the United States was even mentioned here to begin with."
"Certainly others decided to focus far more on the US than the macro point of the thread and what was used as an example to disprove an assertion by the OP has now apparently become the central debate."
That's why I've asked the OP why he was asking Russian questions on American forum, lol.
Didn't I know how it was all going to end up ( double lol)
Quote:
The OP made a statement/asked a question that certain nations/cultures/people were barbarous and predisposed to committing atrocities. He basically named Muslims and the Japanese as his foremost examples. As in there is something about their culture that allows them to commit these acts. The counter argument that I presented was that all nations have committed such acts and/or are capable of doing so. I used the example of things the United States has done precisely because the United States is, IMO, among the most progressive on Earth in terms of human rights and taking a critical view of our past mistakes. Ergo, even the most progressive nation has committed atrocities, so it is not something simply inherent within particular cultures, but within humanity itself.
I also used the example of Nazi Germany as Germans are generally considered to be an advanced, progressive and enlightened people, yet they have committed arguably one of the worst atrocities in recent human history. I also named the actions of the Red Army in the final months of WW2 as they invaded German territory as examples of depraved barbarity from a people the OP would consider to be above such things.
Again NJ, you being an American ( not in degrading sense of it, just stating a fact) perceive the world in a different manner comparably to people in the old world - Russians in particular.
There is no such thing as "national character" in your train of thought ( since according to you "all nations committed such act,") but it's definitely not a case, because all nations commit "such acts" in different manner, according to their national character.
It's one thing calculating how to get rid of your adversary while distributing blankets en mass that spread the disease, it's another thing to come up with scientific data classifying humans and painstakingly measuring their skulls. It's one thing to drop the bomb on collective head of everyone who happened to be under the plane, and it's another thing to make your soldiers to rape/torture the hapless victims on a personal basis. Yet again - it's one thing to victimize/kill someone with the sole intent of converting that someone to different ideas ( Russians) and it's another thing to never take any ideology seriously enough to go to such length. ( The British.)
You simply project your "American goodness" on everyone else in the world, without really knowing what the rest of the world is all about in spiritual sense of it. ( Americans have their perks of being a kinder, gentler civilization than the "old world," but on another hand they are lacking in spiritual department as well.)
So I'll reiterate it yet again - it's not that some nations are completely deprived of evil, ( after all as many dutifully noticed that eugenics and extermination of "undesirable race" took roots in America first,) but overall every culture still differs from another, including to what extent people in that culture are willing to go and how exactly, in order to achieve their goals.
Sorry to say Maslow's hierarchy of needs (as nice as the theory sounds) in really simply is not true.
The needs of human beings are not universally the same ( that's why some can feel much happier even in wretched poverty than the other,) and as humans are different, they comprise different nations, that define the "national character."
Napalming Vietnamese villages was a common practice. If planes and helicopters do it, it's much more civilized death, as we all know. Those Japanese savages. Don't forget A-bombing of two Japanese cities of zero military importance. Fire bombings of Japanese and Germans cities was even more murderous. And starting from 1990 until now it's just one big war crime hell knows in the name of what.
Yes, a lot of innocent civilians were killed. This is bad. However, what is your suggestion on how America had to calm down the insane enemy? Do you think it would have been a good idea if America had dispatched several millions of innocent Americans to fight and die in Japan?
Again NJ, you being an American ( not in degrading sense of it, just stating a fact) perceive the world in a different manner comparably to people in the old world - Russians in particular.
There is no such thing as "national character" in your train of thought ( since according to you "all nations committed such act,") but it's definitely not a case, because all nations commit "such acts" in different manner, according to their national character.
It's one thing calculating how to get rid of your adversary while distributing blankets en mass that spread the disease, it's another thing to come up with scientific data classifying humans and painstakingly measuring their skulls. It's one thing to drop the bomb on collective head of everyone who happened to be under the plane, and it's another thing to make your soldiers to rape/torture the hapless victims on a personal basis. Yet again - it's one thing to victimize/kill someone with the sole intent of converting that someone to different ideas ( Russians) and it's another thing to never take any ideology seriously enough to go to such length. ( The British.)
You simply project your "American goodness" on everyone else in the world, without really knowing what the rest of the world is all about in spiritual sense of it. ( Americans have their perks of being a kinder, gentler civilization than the "old world," but on another hand they are lacking in spiritual department as well.)
So I'll reiterate it yet again - it's not that some nations are completely deprived of evil, ( after all as many dutifully noticed that eugenics and extermination of "undesirable race" took roots in America first,) but overall every culture still differs from another, including to what extent people in that culture are willing to go and how exactly, in order to achieve their goals.
Sorry to say Maslow's hierarchy of needs (as nice as the theory sounds) in really simply is not true.
The needs of human beings are not universally the same ( that's why some can feel much happier even in wretched poverty than the other,) and as humans are different, they comprise different nations, that define the "national character."
It sounds like a cry of teenage ego. In fact it's all about struggle for the people control: who will brainwashing them, national or foreign elite.
Cain was the first human born and Abel was the first human to die. Cain committed the first murder by killing his brother. According to the Bible world population has shrunk 50% right then. We have to account for the size of population at the time of war atrocities.
References to the Bible, the Quran or any other religious literature as a source of facts can't be considered seriously.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee
Losing 10-50% of nation' male population (not speaking of civilian deaths) during a good ancient war was rather a norm. It was customary for the late Middle Age England to cull its undesirables population 50-70,000 each year by means of draconian anti-vagrancy laws. Compare that number to the total population of 5,000,000 circa 1500. Yet, as we all know, it's Ivan the Terrible is the bad guy (despite him being far less murderous) and so on.
Let's not get carried away. It is the 21st century now. It is more practical to discuss these days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee
By destroying life supporting web of life we prepare ground for the world wide atrocities with billions of dead after everything will settle down, hopefully somebody will survive.
Let's hope we will terraform and colonize Mars or other planets by that time. Yes, chances are we will have to kill the Native Marsians though as they are not going to be particularly happy about newcomers.
References to the Bible, the Quran or any other religious literature as a source of facts can't be considered seriously.
May be not, but at the same time you can't talk about such things as difference in national characters ( which implies spirituality) without making references to religion ( or rather existence of god/gods)
Quote:
Let's not get carried away. It is the 21st century now. It is more practical to discuss these days.
Again, you can't talk about present without examining the past, so you are cutting your own discussion short.
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.
