• In total there are 29 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 29 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 789 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 5:08 am

Greatest country in the world

A forum dedicated to friendly and civil conversations about domestic and global politics, history, and present-day events.
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.

All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
Niall001
Stupendously Brilliant
Posts: 706
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2003 4:00 am
20

Greatest country in the world

Unread post

World's Greatest CountryDo the Facts Lie?By M. SHAHID ALAMProphet Muhammad said, "He is not one of us who proclaims the cause of tribal partisanship" When asked, what is "tribal partisanship," he an-swered, "[It means] your helping your own people in an unjust cause." [1]"I choose to live in what I think is the greatest country in the world, which is committing horrendous terrorist acts and should stop." Noam Chomsky [2]Interviewer to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: "We have heard that a half a million children have died [because of sanctions against Iraq]. I mean that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And--you know, is the price worth it?" Secretary Albright answered: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it." [3]On March 21, 2003, as I headed home, a day after the United States formally invaded Iraq, I ran into a colleague from Northeastern University--a professor of the humanities--at the Ruggles train station in Boston. I was aware of his political inclinations, and he of mine, from previous encounters. Still, I thought we were on friendly terms."I bet you oppose the war," he greeted me, as I approached him."Not at all," I shot back, " I wish to see Iraq liberated as much as you."Although, it was only the second day of the war, and the bombs and missiles were accurately on target, it appeared that the tension leading up to the war had taken their toll on our colleague's nerve. He snapped at my banter. Agitated, he began to poke his finger in my face, while lecturing me about how "thankful" I should be about living in "the world's greatest country ever." Luckily, my train arrived on time--for which I am thankful--saving me from an unhinged patriot's harangue.This was not my first encounter with the overzealous patriotism that often dominates political discourse in the United States; and not only among members of the zany right. All too often, politicians rally their audience with inflated claims of American greatness. The United States is "the greatest country in the world." At other times, it is "the greatest country ever," "the greatest country ever conceived," or "the greatest country in the history of mankind." When the exuberance soars, America also "kicks ass!"Nearly as often, one hears of the United States as the great Samaritan: second to none at 'civilizing' half-breed races. In the words of Abraham Lincoln, the United States is the "the last best hope of mankind," no less. More frequently, it is "the shining beacon on the hill." Recently, John Kerry, Democratic Presidential candidate, roused students at UCLA, "I believe we can bring a real victory in the War on Terror. I believe we must, not only for ourselves but for all who look to America as the last best hope of earth." I have to wonder if the Vietnamese civilians killed by Kerry and his crew also looked upon them as "the last best hope of earth." [4]Judging from results from polls, quite a few Americans are persuaded by this rhetoric of American greatness and munificence; though my colleague from Northeastern would go into a fit over their 'fewness.' In 1955, according to a Gallup Survey, 66 percent Americans polled believed that "The United States is the greatest country in the world, better than all other countries in every possible way (emphasis added)." In 1991, mercifully, this percentage had declined to 37 percent; five years later, it held steady at 37 percent. (This looks like the proportion of steady Republicans in this country.) But there is a fly in the ointment. In response to a slightly altered question, 55 percent Americans agree that "the United States is the greatest country in the world, better than all others." On the worse reading, then, a clear majority of Americans still subscribe to the thesis of American uniqueness; though that majority is down to 55 percent from 66 percent. Shall we take comfort from this decline in the proportion of hyper-patriots in the US since 1955? [5]In the absence of polls on the issue, I will report results from my own unrepresentative annual surveys on America's civilizing mission. For several years, I have passed out a questionnaire to assess my students' preparation for my undergraduate courses in Development Economics and the Global Economy. One perennial question I ask is about US 'foreign aid.' What percentage of its gross domestic product does the United States annually allocate as foreign aid to Third World countries? I offer my students five choices: (A) One-tenth of one percent, (B) One percent, (C) Five percent, (D) Ten percent, and (E) Twenty-five percent. Incredibly, about half the class chooses C, and most of the remaining half pick D and E. Two or three 'unpatriotic' students in each class pick A or B. The correct answer is A. Perhaps, my students think it proper and patriotic to pick a percentage that makes their country look generous.In a sense, this talk of national greatness is unsurprising. It is the sta-ple of a world organized--as it has been these last few hundred years--into nation states that must compete to survive and stay ahead of the pack. They compete economically, politically and militarily. Often, this competition requires sacrifices--of rights, of leisure, of safety, of lives. The ideological weapon in this competition is nationalism--creating pride and unity grounded in claims of national greatness, and matched by an equal contempt for the low or lower standing of other nations.Perhaps the United States is distinct because of the intensity of its nationalist claims. The standard political rhetoric maintains that the US is the "greatest in the world," "the greatest ever," or "the greatest in the history of mankind." It stands at the top of the food chain. Some older nations--that have survived many cycles of history--might think this strange. Are these upstarts trying to compensate for their late arrival on history's stage? Arguably, older nations have the self-assurance of a long and often distinguished history behind them and, therefore, do not feel compelled to stake out exaggerated claims of national greatness. But there is more to it.Nationalism is for the most part a modern phenomenon, a product of the competition between the new nation states operating in a capitalist world economy. In this competition, success and nationalist obsessions work in tandem. A nation fired with its own greatness is more willing to endure greater sacrifices; conversely, it is also more willing to inflict pain on Others. In the case of the United States, there was no shortage of successes--economic, technological and military--to fuel notions of national greatness. As these successes grew, the American establishment found it convenient to ratchet claims of American greatness. Most likely, by the turn of the twentieth century, if not before, the United States was declared to be unique among nations: the greatest country ever, populated by the noblest breed of humans, the instrument of God, and the greatest civilizing force on earth. Today, no Congressman can disavow American uniqueness and survive an election.I could explore the sinister objectives served by these visions of American uniqueness--how corporate capital has used it to rally Americans behind imperialist wars, to incite fears of white America against Americans of color (and, hence, divide America's working poor), or to dupe American workers into surrendering their rights to corporate capital. Since all this has been done before, I will attempt something a bit pedantic, but I hope still useful. I will examine whether the United States is indeed "the greatest country in the world, better than all other countries in every possible way?" I suspect this is a thankless task, but my work will be amply rewarded if it deflates even a little some of the illusions of American grandeur.By the most widely accepted criterion, America's economic lead looks quite secure. Measured in terms of dollars with comparable purchasing power, the US had a per capita income of $35,080 in 2002, one of the highest in the world. Only two other countries had higher per capita incomes; Luxembourg at $51,060 and Norway at $37,850. But these are small countries, with 444,000 and 5 million people respectively; and the per capita income of the richest 444,000 or 5 million Americans would easily exceed the per capita income of Luxembourg and Norway respectively. In other words, Americans can take just pride in their country's economic preeminence: the United States is the world's richest country.The United States also commands the world's largest economy, though only by a narrow margin. Measured in terms of dollars with comparable purchasing power, the US gross national income adds up to $10,110 billion, a little more than a fifth of the global income. The European Union comes a very close second with a combined gross national income of $9,520 billion. With its rapidly expanding membership, the European Union may soon outpace the US as the world's largest economy. China places third in the world league of major economies, with a gross national income of $5,807 billion. At its present stellar growth rate, China could outstrip both the US and the European Union within two decades if not sooner. [6]Surely the US lead in technological capacity must be larger and more secure. In its 2001 Report, the UNDP published for the first time a Technology Achievement Index (TAI) "which aims to capture how well a country is creating and diffusing technology and building a human skill base--reflecting capacity to participate in the technological innovations of the network age. This composite index measures achievements, not potential, efforts or inputs." According to this measure, the US ranks second--with a TAI value of 0.733--finishing behind Finland with a TAI of 0.744. Perhaps this makes Finland a threat to America's national security; no country that lags in technology can lead the world for long. Conceivably, the likes of Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly might urge President Bush do something about it. After all, Finland is a small country; knocking down its TAI a few places will be much less of a challenge than occupying Iraq. [7]Perhaps the United States might regain the lead when judged against indicators of technological effort, such as R&D spending as percentage of a country's GDP, or R&D personnel per million in the country. However, this only makes matters worse. On the first measure, the United States ranks seventh, behind Togo, Sweden, Israel, Japan, Korea and Switzerland. (Yes, I too am wondering about Togo.) On the second criterion, the United States improves its rank to fourth place, still lagging behind Iceland, Japan and Sweden. [8] (Now what does Iceland do with all those scientists?)In a last ditch effort, to salvage America's position, I decided to extend the technology comparisons to three indicators of educational performance. But this only produced more disappointments. Judged in terms of school life expectancy (the number of years a child is expected to spend in the educational system), the US ranked fifteenth in the late 1990s. In mathematical literacy for fifteen year olds, it ranked eighteenth out of 27 countries. It's performance was only marginally better in scientific literacy, moving up to the fourteenth place in the same group of countries.[9]The United States commands the largest lead where it matters most--in military power. At $396.1 billion in fiscal year 2003, US military spending exceeds the combined military budget of the next twenty countries. In 2002, the US outspent the seven "rogue" states (Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan, Syria and Cuba) by a factor of thirty-seven. [1 With Iraq under occupation since April 2003, and Libya air-freighting the components of its would-be WMDs to the United States, the ratio by which the US outspends the remaining "rogue" states must have risen still higher. Given these gaps in destructive capabilities, the United States should feel safer than any empire in recent memory. So why doesn't it?In personal freedom, most Americans confidently place their country at the top. In a Gallup Poll taken in August 1995, Americans were asked, "how far up or down on a 10-point scale [10 being highest] would you rate each of the following nations in terms of the individual freedom granted to its citizens?" The US came out first, with 74 percent of the respondents giving it a 'high' rating (10-9- . Canada and Britain ranked a distant second and third, with only 63 and 46 percent giving it a 'high' rating. [11]Experts view the freedom rankings a bit differently. The Freedom House, a conservative organization based in New York, publishes an annual report, Freedom in the World, that relies on opinions of experts to rank countries by various indicators of freedom. According to their index of civil and political liberties compiled for 2000-2001, the United States received the highest score of six (on a scale of one to seven), but this was an honor that it shared with fourteen other countries, including Portugal and Uruguay. Britain ranked 34th, well after Poland and Panama. Israel, the world's most touted 'democracy,' ranked 41st, after Bolivia and Benin. [12]Is the United States the world leader, then, in press freedom? That too is misconception. In October 2003, Reporters Without Borders published its Second World Press Freedom Ranking; compiled from a questionnaire with "53 criteria for assessing the state of press freedom in each country." The United States ranked 32nd, behind Hungary, Jamaica, Benin and East Timor. To make matters worse, American-occupied Iraq, only recently 'liberated' from the grip of a tyrant, ranked 135th. There is one consolation: US-occupied Iraq is ahead of Saudi Arabia, our closest ally in the Islamicate world. [13]In many situations, it may be useful to look upon the rates of incarceration as an important indicator of un-freedom and racism in a country. For many years, USSR, 'the Evil Empire," led the world in this field with its Siberian gulags. More recently, the United States has taken the lead with the highest rate of incarceration per capita: 6.41 per thousand in 1999. Russia, the successor to USSR, remains in hot contest, with an incarceration rate of 6.37 per thousand. [14] If we add the prisoners the Bush-Ashcroft regime has taken recently under the Patriot Act inside the United States, those held in Guantanamo Bay, in Iraq and Afghanistan, and those captured at our behest (under 'extraordinary rendition') by torture-friendly regimes, our leading position looks quite secure. The racial composition of those incarcerated tell their own story. Consider the percentage shares, in the table below, of African-Americans in the prison and total populations of four US states in 1996. This disproportion is common to many states. [15]Table One Share of African-Americans in State Prisons State Prison Population % State Population % Nebraska 31 2 Connecticut 46 9 Wisconsin 49 6 Massachusetts 37 6 In his first inaugural address in 1993, President Clinton spoke of the United States as the "world's oldest democracy." [16] Is it? Presumably, this history starts the clock of democracy in 1787 when the Constitution was ratified. But many would consider this problematic, since this Constitution excluded as much as a sixth of the country's population--its slave population--from any of the rights of citizenship. Can we then start the clock of democracy in 1865 when slavery was abolished, or in 1868 when the Confederate states re-entered the Union with a commitment (in their state constitutions) to equal rights for all citizens? That too is dubious.For another hundred years, the United States was not a democracy for all its citizens. At first through terrorist methods, and, later, starting in the 1890s, through amendments in the state constitution, the Southern states pressed ahead in their effort to exclude blacks from the political process. This resulted in "the disfranchisement of nearly all black citizens and the removal from office of nearly all black legislators in the former Confederate states by 1910." [17] Arguably, we might start the clock in the 1960s, when the blacks launched the Civil Rights Movement to regain their political rights. However, this process is far from complete. Under felony disenfranchisement laws, still on the books since the days of segregation, some 4.7 million Americans are denied their voting rights. Under these laws black men are disenfranchised at seven times the rate for all Americans. [18]Considering the salience of sports and athletics in American culture, I would be remiss if I did not document America's ranking in this important field. Since few countries in the world have taken up America's favorite sports (surely a disappointment for a hegemonic power), we will have to examine America's standing at the Summer Olympic games. At first blush, the US appears to live up to its reputation at the Sydney Olympics of 2000, leading the world with a points total of 201, well ahead of Russia (180) and China (131). But is the points total an appropriate criterion? A fair comparison would look at points total per capita. On a per capita basis, the US position slips to 41st. [19]We arrive finally at the compassion derby. In a recent speech, President Bush declared, "We are a compassionate country, and we are generous toward our fellow citizens." It is a favorite pitch with American politicians in both parties. But this just won't wash. In its Human Development Report, 2003, the UNDP measures a Human Poverty Index (HPI) for seventeen developed countries; it measures deprivations in four dimensions. On this index of human poverty, the US ranked dead last out of seventeen countries. [2 If we measure compassion "toward fellow citizens" in terms of income inequality--conventionally measured by the Gini index--we get the same result. The US has the largest value for the Gini index amongst developed countries. [21] By what available metric is the American political system "generous" to weaker segments of its own society?In measuring US compassion towards other countries, I will take the more lenient view, not listing the invasions launched, regimes changed, the bombs dropped, coups instigated or sanctions imposed against the 'salt of the earth.' [22] Instead, I will compare the funds allocated to 'foreign aid,' the index by which Americans most often measure their generosity towards poor countries. The total funds allocated by the United States to 'foreign aid" amounted to 0.11 percent (note the position of the decimal) of its gross national income. That is easily the lowest ratio for the twenty-four members of Development Assistance Committee of the OECD. [23] On the ground, matters are much worse. Nearly one-third of this aid goes as grants (no obligation to pay back) to another developed country, Israel, to buy the most advanced weaponry in the US arsenal.So the United States is not the greatest country in the world, better than all other countries in every possible way. Why have I labored to establish this rather obvious result? There is a deep, two-way connection between these claims of superiority, of uniqueness, and the efforts by the American establishment to obfuscate the inequities inside the United States and to justify the inequities it helps to create and sustain outside its borders.Every time America's 'leaders' speak of the "world's greatest country," behind the backs of their constituents, many, perhaps most of them are scheming to build more prisons and fewer schools, to hire more policemen and fewer teachers, to train more secret agents and fewer scientists, to fund more WMDs and fewer life-saving drugs; they are being wined and dined by Corporations who are monopolizing the media, denuding our rights, placing their profits before our lives, our children, our safety, and the natural beauty of the world we live in. In their myopic pursuit of power, these politicians would rather build the "world's greatest country" (if only they could) but populated with an impoverished, uneducated and unhealthy population, supine and undemanding of their rights.Every time America's 'leaders' boast of the "world's oldest democracy," and of exporting democracy to the world, I can see peasants expropriated; workers shot, tortured and jailed; people's revolutions overthrown, crushed by American force, guile and lucre all across the Periphery; all to protect the unrestrained right of American Corporations to make money. Every time these mandarins proclaim that the United States is the "last great hope of earth," people all across the Periphery take cover, for they know that these words will be followed, as they have been in the past, by napalm bombs, by landmines, by cruise missiles, by daisy cutters, by shards of steel planted in their children's eyes. The people of the Periphery are all too familiar with the rhetoric of the "world's oldest democracy." They will not be deceived.So the United States is not the greatest country in the world, better than all other countries in every possible way. What if this carefully guarded secret were to spill out? What if Dan Rather, America's favorite news anchor, were to open the CBS Evening News tonight with the announcement that some great think tank in Washington, preferably a conservative think tank, after years of carefully investigation, involving the best brains in the social sciences, had discovered that the United States "isn't after all the greatest country in the world, better than all other countries in every possible way?" Would this be another devastating blow to America's self-confidence, greater than that caused by the carnage of 9-11? Would Americans show up for work the next day or the day after? Why bother if you are not living in the "world's greatest country?" How would the President respond to this national catastrophe? What would he do to restore American confidence in their greatness? Invade Canada? Colonize Antartica? Or perhaps, ship the entire population of the Northeast to Mars?Most Americans may well be relieved at this revelation. It was what they had suspected all along, but could never gather the pluck to tell the corporate lackeys--masquerading as leaders--who kept telling them otherwise. And now that this ruse had been exposed, perhaps, Americans will start asking the tough questions, start reclaiming their lost rights, and start rebuilding a democracy of all the people, for all the people and by all the people. Once this questioning starts, perhaps Americans will also start looking into all the ways in which their country--especially their government and corporations--impoverish their neighbors around the world, neighbors they, as Christians, should love, not reduce to poverty, dependency and misery.When the United States, an admirable country in many respects, collectively aspires to inclusiveness, both inside and outside its borders; when the United States places people--people everywhere--before the profits of its corporations; when the United States aspires to be the best country--under a scale of humane values--not merely the greatest; when the people of the United States want for the world what they want for themselves; then, and only then, will the world embrace Americans as their own, a good people, even a generous people, contributing more than their share to the human struggle to make our world a better place for everyone.M. Shahid Alam is professor of economics at Northeastern University. His last book, Poverty from the Wealth of Nations, was published by Palgrave in 2000. He is also a contributor to CounterPunch's hot new book: The Politics of Anti-Semitism. He may be reached at [email protected]. Visit his webpage at msalam.net.
Timothy Schoonover

Re: Greatest country in the world

Unread post

Good read! I just want to highlight and summarize one especially interesting statistic for those that are not going to read the entire article.Quote:The percentage of the Gross National Product given in Foreign Aid by the US is 0.11%. That is easily the lowest ratio for the twenty-four members of Development Assistance Committee of the OECD. Moreover, nearly 1/3 of that figure is awarded in grants (no obligation to repay) to Israel.Intersting, don't you think?Quotation format added for emphasis. The actual content is a summarization of the information contained in the above article. Edited by: Timothy Schoonover at: 3/23/04 4:41 pm
Niall001
Stupendously Brilliant
Posts: 706
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2003 4:00 am
20

Hmmmm

Unread post

What I find most interesting about the article are the insights it provides into American self perception and just how inaccurate it is.Maybe some Americans can help me out here, do Americans really believe that they are as magnificent as they seem to do in this article? Did anyone find themselves suprised by the statistics about America education system, its foreign aid etc.THe article itself is biased. It probably pounds on conservatives a bit unfairly, but you can't really argue with the figures he gives.
User avatar
Dissident Heart

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
I dumpster dive for books!
Posts: 1790
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 11:01 am
20
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Re: Greatest country in the world

Unread post

Quote:The percentage of the Gross National Product given in Foreign Aid by the US is 0.11%. That is easily the lowest ratio for the twenty-four members of Development Assistance Committee of the OECD. Moreover, nearly 1/3 of that figure is awarded in grants (no obligation to repay) to Israel.Mark 12: 41-44 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a fraction of a penny. Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything--all she had to live on." For more critical, dissident hearts- try visiting the American Democracy thread here in the Forum.Likewise, spend a while exploring the Critical Thinking thread.Only someone plagued with self-doubt, terrified of their personal and national worth, and hungry for affirmation from people they find threatening- yet envious of...only such a person would employ a narrative of "National Glory".The same is said for any Tribal, Religious, or Class efforts at using stories of wondrous uniqueness and exclusive superiority.
Timothy Schoonover

Re: Greatest country in the world

Unread post

Quote:Only someone plagued with self-doubt, terrified of their personal and national worth, and hungry for affirmation from people they find threatening- yet envious of...only such a person would employ a narrative of "National Glory".I think the psychological factors involved in the particularly trenchant American narrative of "National Glory" are fascinating. I would like to explore this topic more, although I must admit my first inclination is of partial incredulity toward the above indictments. Surely there is more to it than that? I would suspect it to be something more akin to a Messiah Complex than the fear and self-loathing which you describe; however, I do agree that those characteristics are in some ways major components of the collective American psyche.I must say, DS, that of all the people on this site, I like how you think. I wish that you had been around back when the Alan Sokal Social Text hoax was being discussed along with the validity of postmodernism.
Niall001
Stupendously Brilliant
Posts: 706
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2003 4:00 am
20

Dissident

Unread post

Dissident, I find your psychological analysis of the American Nationalist interesting. I wonder if I could get your thoughts on American Nationalism in general in a little more detail. American Nationalism interests me because it seems to be rather different from other forms of Nationalism. Usually, nationalists belong to an ethnically and culturally homogeneous group. Nationalism is often a reaction to a percieved threat from another group who are ethnically and culturally different. The example which jumps to mind is that of the Basque people. They differ culturally and ethnically from their neighbours. But it took persecution to ignite Basque nationalism. Similarly, Irish nationalisms popularity can be shown to be directly related to the popular perception of persecution by the Other. WW1 lead to an explosion of nationalism all over Europe.American is ethnically and culturally diverse. It is isolated. War is never really a threat. Americans have never been persecuted. Minorities with America have been persecuted, yet generally, even they will identify themselves as American. How is it that these groups are assimilated into the category of American?Why is it that Americans see themselves as American? What is American? American nationalism seems to be driven by the perception that America is strong. It seems to go hand in hand with a resentment towards other countries and a sense of rivalry with the rest of the world. American nationalists seem to believe that America is always right. THe difference between that and the forms of nationalisms that I'm familiar with is that an Irish nationalist for example, will make excuses for Ireland. An English nationalist might make excuses for past imperial actions, but they won't try to justify them in the same way that the American nationalist would. The American nationalist will defend dropping bombs on civilians and using depleted uranium weapons. They'll defend supporting Saudi Arabia, Israel and Iraq.
User avatar
PeterDF
Freshman
Posts: 223
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 5:29 pm
20
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 4 times
Gender:
Contact:
Great Britain

Re: Dissident

Unread post

Niall & ShannonWhat a fascinating thread. And what a pertinent question.Quote:Only someone plagued with self-doubt, terrified of their personal and national worth, and hungry for affirmation from people they find threatening- yet envious of...only such a person would employ a narrative of "National Glory".It is often said that bullys are driven by insecurity. Maybe you are right, Americans might lack a sense of self and national identity because their country is so ethnically diverse. The alternative picture of America as being the equivalent of a brash adolescent loudly proclaiming his recent arrival in the world is equally engaging and interesting. Perhaps this insecurity - for some Americans - feeds into a kind of spiritual vacuum that leads some of them into subscribing to extremism and religious fundamentalism.
Hestiasmissives

Re: Greatest country in the world

Unread post

One reason why I feel pride in my country is that Professor Alam is free and encouraged in the United States to write articles like the one above and teach those facts to students at Northeastern University. My Polish professors fled death sentences for writing or teaching viewpoints contrary to their government. My friends in Latin America begged me to help them come to the United States to escape repressive regimes and/or economic constraints. Those of us who feel no pride in being American are taking for granted some very hard earned rights.Criticism of my government's policies does not equate to lack of pride in my country.
Niall001
Stupendously Brilliant
Posts: 706
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2003 4:00 am
20

Re: Greatest country in the world

Unread post

A right to freedom of expression is a good thing, but it hardly makes the United States unique. It may have been hard earned, but when I hear people talk about things like freedom in this way, I think of Chris Rock's comments regarding niggers. You talk to a nigger and he boasts that he looks after his family and that he ain't ever been to prison. You're not supposed to go to prison. You're supposed to look after your family.Why is it that so many Americans consider the United States to be the greatest country in the world? I really find things like American's ratings of personal freedom in Canada and Britain confusing.
User avatar
PeterDF
Freshman
Posts: 223
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 5:29 pm
20
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 4 times
Gender:
Contact:
Great Britain

Re: Greatest country in the world

Unread post

Quote:One reason why I feel pride in my country is that Professor Alam is free and encouraged in the United States to write articles like the one above and teach those facts to students at Northeastern University.I agree that this is something to be proud of but I think all US citizens should be on their guard against complacency. Some of the writings of Noam Chomski have been supressed by the media.The lurch towards the religious right is a worrying development, and might threaten the freedoms it pretends to support. Witness the remarks of our friend Pastor Robbins (see the "lets talk about the bible" thread) - disabled people are supposedly denied the freedom to worship in his church because they are "sinners". What freedoms would Pastor Robbins guarantee to non-believers, non-whites, and what he calls papists. I think freedom is under more threat in the US now than it has for decades and in a way that it probably isn't in countries like Britain - I can't speak for Canada. But I could be wrong because I can only say how it looks from here in Britain.
Post Reply

Return to “Current Events & History”