The latest failures at the UN are a strong reminder that it may be an organization which has outlived its usefulness.
Earlier this week the House of Representatives passed a resolution urging the UN Security Council to charge Iranian President Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with violating the UN convention on genocide for recent comments in which he declared that Israel should be "wiped off the map." Prior attempts to condemn Iran in the Security Council have consistently failed, including one introduced by France earlier this month in response to similar comments made by the Iranian president in the end of May which had even been endorsed by Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments76 - moonraven
I don't know if Chavez can save the world--given the infantile folks living in it (cross section of fascist fuddleheads on this site is a good example of the challenges out there)--but he already offered to save the UN by moving the HQ to Caracas.
I would be more supportive of that if the food here was better....
77 - Zedd
I do think that it would be beneficial for the world if the UN was moved elsewhere. We have a very shallow understanding of the world in this country and should not be the hosts of such an important organization.
It was our destabilizing attempts that rendered the UN almost inapt as of several years back. Since Bush1 we set forth a campaign with the uninformed in this country to dismiss the UN. We had intentions to do what we have since done in Iraq but didn't because at least Bush1 was smart enough to know that it wouldn't fly. The military personnel were poisoned against the UN and were pumped up with the notion declaring that they would never fight under the UN flag.
If you remember properly, we stopped paying our dues and were pushing poor countries like Lesotho up against the wall for missed dues. Some even think that the misdeeds in the UN were planted by us. Remember the Butros Butros Gali incident with Bush1, it was designed to belittle the institution so that we could have our way. The manner in which his names was pronounced by Bush was designed to highlight his "unAmericanness" because we are known for our ignorance towards forrrrrreigners and our obscenely over inflated egos. All this so that they could eventually manipulate the world to get what they want.
The UN is lead by us. The UN sucks because America needs for it to suck. Its how we roll.
78 - sr
Zedd#48. Did you say only 600,000 Iraqis or 6+million Jews. I sure the hell wont lose any sleep for a few dead Iraqis or millions of muslims. The nukes will start falling in two hours. Sincerely, Mr and Mrs Moonbat.
79 - Zedd
sr
Sorry. You bore me. You are not entertaining nor are you diabolical enough to invoke intrigue. You know what I think about your acumen so don't bother.
I entertained you for a couple of days but you never responded in a clever enough way to keep me interested. It was all so out dated yet not retro enough to cause reminiscence. Just bland.
Its clear that you are too afraid to make a serious contribution because you don't feel secure in our competence. I say take a leap. You are no good at being a smart alec. It takes smarts and uhmmmmmm, well you know....
Sorry kid.
80 - alessandro Nicolo
Zedd, if the U.S. is as shallow and petty as you depict, I shutter to think of that state of other nations.
After WWII, it was American leadership that mended the world after a mad war begun by others. If some could, they would have loved to find a way to pin the Great Wars upon America.
More than any major power, America - in all its imperfections - played by the UN rules for the longest time. Look at the security council and compare the records. It's plain for all to see. Interestingly, they did so when their relative power was possibly at its zenith. Compared to all the great empires and superpowers of the past, America is a pussycat in many ways.
Personally, I cut America some slack. Blemishes and all.
If this makes me an indoctrinated stooge, so be it. Happiness is warm gun, mama....
81 - Zedd
Alessandro
Americas successes and strengths both past and present should not be used as a forgive all token for perpetuity.
Just as every individual has her strengths, so do countries. America is horrible with foreign policy. America has never been fully committed to participating internationally. We have always engaged reluctantly. Yes our economic engagements have been without reservation but the vision of ourselves as a part of a larger global entity, is and has always been difficult to accept. We have a slight adversarial relationship with the rest of the world. Our take is, its our way or we will make it our way regardless of the results.
We the people are VERY shallow when it comes to understanding the world. Perhaps your physical detachment contributes to your more optimistic view point. BELIEVE ME, you have no idea just how bad it is. Americans barely know about their own system of governance and fellow BC contributors, posters and observers will corroborate this.
Truthfully we don't deserve the role that we continue to take internationally. We lack maturity. Like all adolescents, we are strong, energetic, impatient, judgemental, impetuous, wrong a lot of the time without knowing it or acknowledging it and certainly not qualified to lead ancient civilizations. We don't have the chops.
82 - Zedd
Alessandro
This is not to say once more that America is not a great nation. We are. We are great at a lot of things many of which occurred because of factors like our geographic location and the political situation in Europe at our conception. We are great because of our diversity and the brain pull from other nations. We are great because we have a genetic pool of the adventurous of the world. We are great because of our spirit and our self confidence. We are great because of our might and innovation.
We are not great for our foreign dealings outside of economics and militarily.
83 - Dave Nalle
I do think that it would be beneficial for the world if the UN was moved elsewhere.
I agree, but for different reasons. Ones that make sense.
We have a very shallow understanding of the world in this country and should not be the hosts of such an important organization.
This would be the definition of twaddle. To suggest that an entire nation of 300 million people has a shallow understanding of the world is patently ridiculous. We don't have beet farmers from Idaho representing us at the UN or running our foreign policy. We've got plenty of people as experienced and as knowledgable of the rest of the world as anyone IN the rest of the world, and those are the ones who are generally drawn on to deal with the UN or other foreign powers. That you should suggest otherwise is ridiculous.
It was our destabilizing attempts that rendered the UN almost inapt as of several years back. Since Bush1 we set forth a campaign with the uninformed in this country to dismiss the UN.
Except that it's not the 'uninformed' who are displeased with the UN, it is many of those who are most knowledgable about it and aware of its failures to live up to its mandate. That includes many of its own leaders like the current Secretary General.
We had intentions to do what we have since done in Iraq but didn't because at least Bush1 was smart enough to know that it wouldn't fly. The military personnel were poisoned against the UN and were pumped up with the notion declaring that they would never fight under the UN flag.
They were 'poisoned' agains the UN by the actions of the UN in places like Bosnia, and they were also unable to stretch the first gulf war out any longer because the military just wasn't in the shape it needed to be in after 8 years of neglect under Clinton.
If you remember properly, we stopped paying our dues and were pushing poor countries like Lesotho up against the wall for missed dues. Some even think that the misdeeds in the UN were planted by us. Remember the Butros Butros Gali incident with Bush1, it was designed to belittle the institution so that we could have our way. The manner in which his names was pronounced by Bush was designed to highlight his "unAmericanness" because we are known for our ignorance towards forrrrrreigners and our obscenely over inflated egos. All this so that they could eventually manipulate the world to get what they want.
You really do live in a fantastical world. The reason we cut off dues to the UN is that they don't do what they are supposed to do and the only leverage we have is money. If they don't like us using that leverage they should boot us out.
The UN is lead by us. The UN sucks because America needs for it to suck. Its how we roll.
If it's led by us why are groups like the Human Rights Council dominated by a bunch of dictators and terrorists?
Dave
84 - Zedd
Dave
Your disingenuous approach can be taxing.
You know full well that Americans don't know about our own system of governance let alone foreign policy. Should we even discuss this to the further illumination of our own gross ineptitude?
Its childish for you to be so literal is to infer that I meant all 300K. I will respond to you the way that I had to explain to my children when they were around nine years old and say, honey adults typically don't speak in literal terms. They speak in averages and approximations. When its 3:46, we typically say 3:45.. Perhaps your aspergers is acting up again.
As to the rest of your comments, its clear that you are among those who were taken by the propaganda against the UN. If you had been aware of what was going on politically at the time, you would have understood the PR assault that was taking place. This was a successful attempt to produce the attitude that you have.
Dave wake up, we cant lead if we are reluctant to participate. If the leader is not engaged, the mission WILL fail. The UN failed because of our sabotage and manipulative, uncommitted destructive, leadership strategies. The UN has to put a great deal of energy time and resources on just us, in order to get the real work done. They have to maneuver around us first in order to be productive. We stifle the UN, as a result we need to get out of the way. This should address the rest of your comments. Let it sink in.
85 - alessandro Nicolo
Zedd,
"BELIEVE ME, you have no idea just how bad it is. Americans barely know about their own system of governance and fellow BC contributors, posters and observers will corroborate this."
As a former honours student of history, believe me when I say I do. I am not protected by distance. I am very close to America because of friends and family. I am all too aware of the failures, weaknesses and yes shallow parts of America.
The truth is, from my experiences, I have met both incredibly thoughtful and enlightened Americans and those you describe. The same negatives you attach to Americans can be attached to what I have seen in France, Canada and Italy - three countries I know very well. I would have to agree with Dave on this front.
"America has never been fully committed to participating internationally. We have always engaged reluctantly. Yes our economic engagements have been without reservation but the vision of ourselves as a part of a larger global entity, is and has always been difficult to accept."
Perhaps. However, while isolationism and exceptionalism have confused matters, American leaders and diplomats have been skillful and willing to be part of the international community in the past. Mind you, given the tin pot crackheads who run some countries, I would not blame America if it would ever shut down its borders and doors. Then I would love to see the world....
"America is horrible with foreign policy."
I reject this outright. Though it would be helpful to know which periods are you talking about specifically. It's easier to run the foreign policy of many countries who do not face the responsibilities the U.S. must face.
86 - Zedd
Alessandro
We have crackpots too. The problem is that we 1) don't realise it because we don't care to know about our real politics 2) We are PR'ed to the ying yang. Artifice rules in American politics. 3) We don't want to know that our politicians are human. We want our malaise. 4) Our wealth and brawn and power, masks some of our inaptitude. ex Bush and his nominees.
I have traveled to other countries and the average Joe in this country is clueless. There is absolutely no comparison. If the news item hasn't been choreographed by some producer (PR, spin pro) and beaten into their subconscious with all of the jazz hands, Fossey moves, it just doesn't stick.
I chose not to use the term isolationism because we have to face what that really means. It tends to have a ring of steadfastness, resolve and brave face. Its important to understand how that approach affects the world especially if you want to lead. You cant be reluctant in your engagement and expect to lead producing a good output. It cant happen. Its not happening.
Please explain to me if you will why it is that you believe that without the leadership of the US, the UN would crumble? What specifically do you think we contribute that cant be rendered by others?
In the case of the UN, I would say, it prevails despite the US.
87 - Dave Nalle
Your disingenuous approach can be taxing.
I guess I just find it hard to believe you're really as utterly clueless as you seem.
You know full well that Americans don't know about our own system of governance let alone foreign policy. Should we even discuss this to the further illumination of our own gross ineptitude?
Again, gross generalizations trip you up. Running the country does not require ALL Americans or even more than a handful to be politically savvy and internationally aware. The mental state or level of knowledge of beet farmers and soccer moms is largely irrelevant.
Its childish for you to be so literal is to infer that I meant all 300K.
If you don't mean something, then don't say it.
I will respond to you the way that I had to explain to my children when they were around nine years old and say, honey adults typically don't speak in literal terms. They speak in averages and approximations. When its 3:46, we typically say 3:45.. Perhaps your aspergers is acting up again.
So you teach your children that adults lie?
I do see what you're saying here, but what you seem not to understand is that the general ignorance of the public is irrelevant in issues of state, so long as the people put in positions of authority - our diplomats and jurists and legislators are not equally ignorant. And in the case of the legislators their ignorance is generally countered by a knowledgable staff.
As to the rest of your comments, its clear that you are among those who were taken by the propaganda against the UN. If you had been aware of what was going on politically at the time, you would have understood the PR assault that was taking place. This was a successful attempt to produce the attitude that you have.
Actually, I just look at the history of the UN and can see that it is obviously fundamentally flawed by design. And I do agree it's largely the fault of the US for not thinking the insitution through in a more long-term way from the very beginning.
A very large part of the problem is the general powerlessness of the UN, but that powerlessness exists largely because the institution can't be trusted and has proven that over and over again. This is why I think the UN ought to be disbanded and replaced by a completely different sort of international peace organization which would actually be capable of having and weilding power responsibly.
Dave wake up, we cant lead if we are reluctant to participate. If the leader is not engaged, the mission WILL fail. The UN failed because of our sabotage and manipulative, uncommitted destructive, leadership strategies.
No, the UN failed because it didn't work the way that it ought to, causing us to have little choice but to undermine it.
We are at fault for designing it badly, but the way it's been dealt with since that time is only a symptom of the larger problem.
The UN has to put a great deal of energy time and resources on just us, in order to get the real work done. They have to maneuver around us first in order to be productive. We stifle the UN, as a result we need to get out of the way.
No, we need to get rid of the UN and start over with an institution which will not behave in such a way that nations like the US cannot support it.
Dave
88 - Dave Nalle
We have crackpots too. The problem is that we 1) don't realise it because we don't care to know about our real politics 2) We are PR'ed to the ying yang. Artifice rules in American politics. 3) We don't want to know that our politicians are human. We want our malaise. 4) Our wealth and brawn and power, masks some of our inaptitude. ex Bush and his nominees.
You need to stop saying 'we'. Speak for yourself. Admit you're clueless. And yes, many other Americans are too, but as I said before, having a clueless populace is NOT the same as having clueless leaders and representatives.
I have traveled to other countries and the average Joe in this country is clueless.
I'd bet I've travelled to more other countries than you have, and the average joe in every one of them is just as clueless as the average joe in America.
Dave
89 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Zedd writes,
I do think that it would be beneficial for the world if the UN was moved elsewhere.
And I agree! The bottom of the East River would be the perfect place for all these useless paper-pushers - building and all. Actually one of the deeper Atlantic trenches would be more useful - except for polluting the water with huge amounts of lies... The shits have the balls to quote OUR prophet (Yeshayá) while they continually condemn us! Typical goyim; trying to steal Jewish wisdom while pushing us Jews off the cliff...
And Marthe - every Persian speaker I know - and I know quite a few - translates Ahmadinejad as wanting to kill us off here. You can listen to all the bullshit you want and spout it too. But it is still bullshit.
It must be painful though - pushing bullshit out of a raven's beak...
90 - MCH
"No, we need to get rid of the UN and..."
- Dave Nalle, 00:00
"You need to stop saying 'we'. Speak for yourself..."
- Dave Nalle, 00:03
------------------------------
Am I the only one who sees the hypocrisy there, only three minutes after his first statement?
91 - Zedd
Dave
having a clueless populace is NOT the same as having clueless leaders and representatives.
No argument here. Its dangerous to have clueless leaders. However, we do have clueless leaders.
Dave you wouldn't know how to engage anyone to the extent of having an intellectual discussion, within or without our boarders. You are so wrapped up in Americania that no one would know what the heck you are talking about outside of the US. The shallow scope of your discourse would bore the heck out of anyone with half a brain. Your inability to conduct discourse beyond the propaganda of our time would render you smiles and questions about Hollywood in foreign lands.
Rude yet truthful remarks deleted by author...
The average Joe with an education around the world is not the same as us Dave. Heck if you went into most large corporations and tried to engage a person at VP level in an intellectual discussion, the best you would get is patriotic drivel and something about the free market, full stop.
We actually have disdain towards intellectuals in this country. Academia is loathed. In other words having a real grasp of cause and affect for social phenomena is hated. We want to feel good and to be patted on the back constantly. Hence a shallower populous.
Amazing how upon reading Alessandro, one knows that he is not American. Wonder why?
92 - Zedd
Dave
On the "we" comment. I take full responsibility for my environment. Much like MCH who I adore and believe he has hit the crux of what is wrong in our society, I believe that you've got to own it. Talking a bunch of smack then distancing yourself when it counts is cowardly. I am an American and a love many aspects of this great nation. We are however shallow people. Loving, engaging, hard working, generous, yet shallow as a people.
93 - Christopher Rose
Dave, calling people clueless when you disagree with them is not in line with the community spirit we seek here in the Blogcritics environment, so fucking stop it, you cracked pot! lol!!
If you can't make your case without belittling people, it entirely undermines your, er, interesting perspective...
94 - Lumpy
Zedd adoring MCH pretty much tells us we no longer need to take anything she says seriously.
Why someone so radically anti-american would choose to live here is a conundrum, but I guess it explains her ignorant elitism to some degree. She ought to get out and meet some real Americans. She might be surprised.
95 - Zedd
Lumpy
Aaaaah yes! Shallow statement produced for evidence. I don't know whether to thank you or to sigh or weep. I know, you don't get what I'm saying..... I guess I'll sigh..... SIGH!!
I have stated just how great I think this nation is, being clear in what I admire about it. Naming far more things that are great about it than not.
You in your littleness would only pick up on what I consider to be the negative as I engaged in an act of self evaluation, and ride that. You didn't think this through. You just went with the SHALLOW "America, love it or leave it" mantra, which makes no sense. Without self examination, you cant improve.
Sorry bud America is not perfect. Put the gun down from your temple. We should be working towards being a more perfect union but some SHALLOW people stifle that process by not wanting us to improve, wanting to sing our own praises regardless of what.
Also, I am just as much of an American as you. SORRY.
96 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
"We actually have disdain towards intellectuals in this country. Academia is loathed. In other words having a real grasp of cause and affect for social phenomena is hated."
Zedd, this wasn't always true in your country. Eggheads (now known as nerds) always got serious ribbing, but academics were always respected. When academia fell into the hands of the juvenile left - the now aging hippies who have no tolerance for the free speech they once demanded as children, who fail people for not having the right "community attitude" to pull a phrase out the air, and who criticize people with the same politeness as a woman with ravenous wings and a nasty caw, just to pull an example out of the air, they are loathed by the average Joe - and by a lot of the not so average Joes in America. They have earned the loathing they get.
On another thread, I've seen your unstable grasp of cause and effect with so simple a subject as history. There, you repeated the patriotic drivel one finds in a history book for children. And you repeated it nauseam (sp?). How do you differ from those average Joes you excoriate, my dear?
97 - moonraven
Escuse me, underachievers: The only REAL Americans are Native Americans--like myself.
Interesting how many of us choose to live in Canada and Mexico....Just might have to do with the fetid stench of genocide, still rancidly rampant on this site.
98 - Zedd
Ruvy
I agree that in the past we have had a different relationship with eggheads.
What has changed actually are not the eggheads as much as society.
In the past, the learned were revered because we didn't have access to information as we do now. Also the learned placated the pubic. Many elixirs (physical and intellectual) were administered in order to ease the public knowing that the truth would be difficult to swallow.
After WWII as we know, Hollywood became king and framed our collective unconsciousness. Those beautiful MGM movies about us and our greatness, happy endings, cowboys (us) vs indians (not us) formed our views of the world.
What academia does is seek and evaluate reality. They discovered that "savages" weren't savage and that our myths weren't so different than other people's myths. They discovered that we weren't good and that we had contributed to a lot of suffering and they delved into that. We didn't like it.
Coming from insulated subcultures in our past to a world where difference isn't bad was difficult and still is. Social Scientist were thought to be bad. They wanted to shatter our cowboys vs indians views and that was unAmerican. Hence the views that you have.
On my interpretation of history, your explanations of the obvious which I chose not to deal with or skated quickly passed revealed your wrong assumptions about what I understood. You would be surprised to realise that I think that it is you with your sequential knowledge of events that doesn't have a grasp of what the sequences reveal; the depth beyond the dates.
However, my point is not that nonAmericans know everything, my point is about the shallowness, lack of depth that we possess because of the world view that we have adopted.
99 - Zedd
Ruvy
I agree that in the past we have had a different relationship with eggheads.
What has changed actually are not the eggheads as much as society.
In the past, the learned were revered because we didn't have access to information as we do now. Also the learned placated the pubic. Many elixirs (physical and intellectual) were administered in order to ease the public knowing that the truth would be difficult to swallow.
After WWII as we know, Hollywood became king and framed our collective unconsciousness. Those beautiful MGM movies about us and our greatness, happy endings, cowboys (us) vs indians (not us) formed our views of the world.
What academia does is seek and evaluate reality. They discovered that "savages" weren't savage and that our myths weren't so different than other people's myths. They discovered that we weren't good and that we had contributed to a lot of suffering and they delved into that. We didn't like it.
Coming from insulated subcultures in our past to a world where difference isn't bad was difficult and still is. Social Scientist were thought to be bad. They wanted to shatter our cowboys vs indians views and that was unAmerican. Hence the views that you have.
On my interpretation of history, your explanations of the obvious which I chose not to deal with or skated quickly passed revealed your wrong assumptions about what I understood. You would be surprised to realise that I think that it is you with your sequential knowledge of events that doesn't have a grasp of what the sequences reveal; the depth beyond the dates.
However, my point is not that nonAmericans know everything, my point is about the shallowness, lack of depth that we possess because of the world view that we have adopted.
100 - moonraven
Excuse me, again: We have never "revered" eggheads.
The most obvious case in point was Adlai Stevenson, the Democratic party's presidential candidate in 1950 and 1956. He didn't win--not because Ike was such a great candidate, but because Stevenson was not to be trusted because he was seen as an intellectual.
It probably didn't help that he was pretty close to bald and his head was actually shaped like an egg....
101 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Excuse me, underachievers: The only REAL Americans are Native Americans--like myself.
Interesting how many of us choose to live in Canada and Mexico....Just might have to do with the fetid stench of genocide, still rancidly rampant on this site.
Marthe, I would suggest "first Americans" rather than "native" Americans. To my knowledge NO humans are native to this continent. Your ancestors likely journeyed over the Bering Land Bridge when it still connected Alaska with Siberia. How did FDR phrase it when he spoke to the Daughters of the American Revolution seven decades ago - "welcome immigrant."
The fetid stench of genocide is found all over the planet, except perhaps in New Zealand (but don't quote me on that - to my knowledge, there was a mysterious race that lived there before the Maori arrived, and this race killed off most of a giant wingless bird there, the moa).
There hasn't been genocide here since the Crusaders were driven from these shores by the Turks. Bu scratch under the surface, and the fetid stench of genocide arises from its depths here too. The Romans, and their successors, the Byzantines, shed much Jewish blood for six centuries, until the Arabs drove them out.
OH, by the way, I fixed your spelling in quoting your comment: you're welcome.
102 - alessandro nicolo
"I'd bet I've travelled to more other countries than you have, and the average joe in every one of them is just as clueless as the average joe in America."
Same here. I agree. Zedd, it's a specious argument you put forth. I have bumped into some winners in Europe and the streets of Canada and Newfoundland*. Clueless.
Hey, Chicomecoatl (MR); yeah, Canada treated the Natives real well...oi. MR is an over-achieving Aztec goddess. I bow...
*To the people of Newfoundland - easily the most beautiful and friendly province in the Dominion: I know that you have had your fair share of being butt ends to jokes and for this all I can say is: Once there was a Newfie driving to Montreal. Along the way, the road sign read "Montreal Left." Dejected, the Newfie turned his car around and headed back home.
Whoa!
I digress.
103 - Zedd
Alessandro,
Like I said, you have NO IDEA. We will let this go......
104 - Zedd
Ruvy
The word native refers to the first inhabitants. They were the first inhabitants. If we follow your reasoning, only Africans are native to that continent because everyone else came from there according to the science that we know so far.
105 - Clavos
"Marthe, I would suggest "first Americans" rather than "native" Americans. To my knowledge NO humans are native to this continent."
Quoted for Truth.
Jared Diamond places the initial colonization of Mesoamerica from Asia at around or before 11,000 B.C.
106 - Zedd
Sigh!
107 - alessandro Nicolo
Zedd, spare me.
A few things you have written have my eyebrows raised but I refrain from using such presumptuous language. Best to engage than dismiss someone...
And you are flat out wrong on this one.
108 - sr
Which one of you comment editors removed my comment responding to Zedd#79 and why? Stop trying to be the polical correct police and what did I say to be edited. I think I know, maybe the lesbo word. You let bat shit fly all over the place. Think it,s time for you guys to 86 me from BC because as sure as shit stinks I dont change. Your choice and I'll miss the BC litter box.
109 - troll
Zedd - perhaps it would help if you told us where you encountered a knowledgeable and enlightened citizenry...
110 - troll
and sr - don't get your panties all in a twist...Chris doesn't seem to mind cleaning up after you
111 - alessandro Nicolo
Let me amend the above. Let's just say we come from different backgrounds and experiences.
112 - MCH
"Marthe, I would suggest "first Americans" rather than "native" Americans. To my knowledge NO humans are native to this continent."
- by Ruvy, regurgitated by Clavnalle
I think 12,000 years of occupation qualifies for "native"...
113 - Zedd
troll
You are really being defensive unnecessarily.
What is strange is that what I have stated is nothing new or unheard of. You've heard it before, spouted by foreigners and Americans alike.
Perhaps you should figure out why people say this instead of getting mad because they say it.
Alessandro
With all due respect, you don't live here. What else can I say. Having communicated with you on several topics, I respect your reasoning skills and i am telling you that you would be shocked. You saying that you would not is fine. I responded by saying that you just have no idea how bad it is. I don't see anything insulting or condescending about that.
Did it not surprise you that I asked you if you were from here the first time we conversed? Why did I and why was I right? Could I have a certain insight in this matter?
Also, I am confused as to why it is that America can not have an area that we are not strong in. Why is that so shocking and problematic for you? We have many strengths. This is not one. In the past 50 or so years we have not been good stewards of our status as top dog. The past 20 years have been even more of a decline....
Why is acknowledging that so horrible? How do we fix it if we don't face it.
I've grown up here and talk to immigrants of all shades, cultures. You would be among the chorus of those who sing the same song "geeez pick up a book or something".
114 - Clavos
"I think 12,000 years of occupation qualifies for "native"..."
But, since you're not an anthropologist (or even a college graduate), what you think counts for zero against the scholarship of Professor Diamond.
Clavnalle
115 - Clavos
Oh, and BTW 11,000 plus 2,000 is 13,000, emmy.
Did you ever get that GED?
116 - Zedd
You love birds.
117 - troll
Zedd - you interpret a straight forward question as defensiveness and anger...proving once again that we speak different languages together
118 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
The word native refers to the first inhabitants. They were the first inhabitants. If we follow your reasoning, only Africans are native to that continent because everyone else came from there according to the science that we know so far.
Zedd,
The word native refers not to who is first, but who is BORN in a place. With respect to the Republic of South Africa, you are a native. With respect to America, you are an immigrant. Logic dictates that you lived in South Africa first, as you were born there.
I, like Marthe Raymond, am a native of the united States. Here, I'm an immigrant. So are my children. G-d willing, my grandchildren will be natives.
The phrase "Native American" is a euphemism for what folks living in the USA used to call "Indians". But as euphemisms go, it is inaccurate. If I must use these damned euphemisms, I prefer that they at least be accurate, instead of politically charged, as is "Native American".
119 - moonraven
Clavos is just envious because someone did get that GED he keeps failing the exam for.
Why not just call cockroaches the Real Americans, Real Europeans, Real Asians, Real Oceanicos and Real Asians and let it go at that? Happily, our genocidal species will soon be history.
Good riddance. But especially to the rednecks.
120 - Zedd
Ruvy
The connotation that the word native is used in is to indicate, an aboriginal connection.
If you said you were a Native American no one would think you were a Jewish guy. You are an American native, YES, but you are not a Native American. That phrase HAS a meaning.
Let MR call HERSELF what she wants to call herself.
Hey why don't we argue with the next guy whose last name is Johnson. Lets lecture him on why his Dad's name is not John.
121 - Zedd
troll
I was trying not to say that your question was petty and childish and would veer the discussion to a tit for tat one-upmanship that I am not comfortable participating in with you actually. Do forgive, I get embarrassed easily and sometimes will go around things so as not to be too rude.
Also your request did reveal a defensive stance. Surely you aren't participating in a study to evaluate the depth of discourse by nation. You were simply waiting to say naaah-uh-haaaa in some way or another.
Let it go bud.....
122 - troll
well actually Zedd I thought a comparison based on your experiences might progress the 'debate' from the rut of 'Americans are comparatively shallow' ...no they aren't...yes they are...no they aren't
that said I acquiesce to your request to 'let it go'
and don't worry about being rude when you address me
123 - alessandro Nicolo
Zedd, with all do respect - I know. I am an impartial and well-informed observer of America - again, thanks to my fortune of having friends and family in several states.
I have encountered those you describe but you seem all too ready to go with that painting. Lord, I can assure the comments about Canada have been truly remarkable. Put it you another way, can you build a sure model that stipulates other nations are not just as shallow or ignorant? You can't.
I have heard just as many ridiculous comments made about America in my own country as well as abroad. My point is to merely suggest that it is an impossble game to claim a society is "shallow." We can apply this to many countries.
While I agree to a certain extent on what you are saying, I do feel there is another side that merits consideration.
Again, I get what you're saying. I have seen this. But I am not prepared to go to the lengths you go. That's all.
124 - alessandro Nicolo
And by the way, do I have a choice? All the fun threads deal with America. I write about Canada but no one gives a rat's ass - I'm not sure I even do sometimes. Besides, I've seen you comment on countries you're not a citizen of. America is a noble and brilliant experience that intoxicates and transcends nationality sometimes. Americans should be proud. It's my admiration for it that keeps me involved.
Ok. My French speaking neighbours are beginning to look at me funny waving Old Glory as a type. So I'll stop here.
125 - Zedd
Alessandro
We will have to let this discussion go because I believe that it is neither all that important to you nor is it to me.
Just as we can place this nation on a hierarchical scale for wealth or military might, we can also place it on a scale for various attitudes. Americans as individuals are generous monetarily. Much more so than all other people of the world. Just as we can say Los Angeles is, well, shallow compared to most other cities in the country, while I am sure that there are thousands of deep thinking individuals in LA but it falls high on the airhead scale comparatively speaking. We can say America lacks depth compared to a lot of countries in the world. That is all.