"If I Wanted America To Fail..."

>>What do you think classifies a nation to be a "superpower" and how would *you* have the world run on a global scale? If we're doing it wrong (and maybe you're not saying we are, but let's assume we are) how would you do things better?<<

Well, I think everyone is agreed that the US is a fully-fledged superpower, and nearly everyone is agreed that there's no one else out there that is (though we probably agree there are some semi-fledged ones).

I don't personally see anything wrong with the US being a superpower, and it's certainly one of the more benign ones the world could have hoped for. Also, we're lucky that the vast majority of Americans are decent people, which is reassuring. Even if things are badly conceived or executed, the general intentions were most likely good, and improvements will be made for the next time.

That said, I obviously don't agree with everything the US does, but that's only natural, and I don't get overly riled up about it :-). I'm sure it wouldn't be productive to get into making lists and counter-lists, though; and in any case, my opinion is sort of irrelevant.--Although ... my wife is American, and I guess I could try to indoctrinate her with my views, so that at least 1 US voter thinks exactly like me :-)

In a very general sense, the one advice that I'd give the US is to focus harder on being liked. Most sane people want to like the US (it's really an incredibly awesome experiment gone well), and they do--until something dumb reminds them that "America is a bully," and whatever that dumb thing was erases all the goodwill that the States has patiently built up. Making others feel included (whether they really are or not) and needed (whether they really are or not) would go a long ways toward making the world a happier place.

People don't want America to be the world's policeman, but very often that's precisely what we are -- a big, dumb flatfoot forced to confront the situation every cop dreads most, a Domestic Disturbance call.

>>That's not by any means to say that the US shouldn't have got involved or that we didn't need help! That would be insane! We definitely did, and it was definitely the right thing to do.<<

And, personally, I think we waited too long to do it. I don't like American isolationism, because it's going to make things harder when the problem *does* reach our shores. If your way of life is threatened by a fascist, I say we step in right away and help. But that's just me. I feel that, as the biggest kid in the playground, we have a responsibility to help the smaller kids.

>>I agree, reservedly, that the US sometimes helps the defenseless. I also agree that other nations that aren't superpowers sometimes help the defenseless. IOW, it's not necessary to be a superpower to do so.

I also don't think anyone needs to be a superpower to feed the hungry or provide them with medicines and supplies.<<

See, now that's an interesting take. What do you think classifies a nation to be a "superpower" and how would *you* have the world run on a global scale? If we're doing it wrong (and maybe you're not saying we are, but let's assume we are) how would you do things better?

>>I think you're missing the obvious alternative ;-). Most of the people who resent the US' leadership in the world think that *they* could do a better job--they don't think the Chinese or Russians would (unless they're Chinese or Russian themselves, I guess). French want to export their "third way" model to the rest of the world, Scandinavians or Germans want everyone else to do things in the (successfully Socialist, I might add) way they do things. Fundamentalist Islamic militants probably genuinely believe the world would be a better place if they could run it, etc, etc. Of course, some of those are laughable ideas, but they're still where these people are coming from IMO.<<

I think you're missing the underlying point here. And this is why Ron Paul can't be President of the United States: the world needs us. There are no 2 ways about it. We tried to stay neutral twice in wars that were deemed "Europe's War". Now, let's discuss a little alternate history here. Let's say the Japanese hadn't attacked Pearl Harbor, what would have happened? Maybe Hitler would have left the US alone (I doubt it, but maybe) and we wouldn't have gone there. Do you think Europe could have handled that themselves? Hitler had already conquered most of Europe and was targeting the UK. Who will defend the defenseless if not for us? If there is no superpower, who will feed the hungry? Who will send medicine and supplies and relief to starving, diseased nations? If no superpower, then who? Obviously they can't take care of themselves or they would be.

I'm not trying to sound like an arrogant American here. I'm not. But that's an important question the world needs to ask. Sure, America is kind of imperialistic, but we're a benevolent empire. We give and give and give and ask nothing in return apart from friendship and loyalty. We let you govern yourselves and do what you think is best for your own countries. If you don't need our help, then stop asking for it. We don't force our food or medicine or blankets or warriors or money on anyone. You ask, we give. We ask for nothing back.

The question is, if not the US then who? And if the answer is no one, well what happens to the rest of the world then?

Thank you. And thank you to everyone who does his part to make America the greatest country in the history of the world.

Europe tore itself apart in two world wars in the first half of the 20th Century, and America took over as the world's leader in industry, commerce, and cultural influence. I think that makes everybody else kind of jealous.

Americans act as the world's police force, but when America goes in and conquers a place, they usually hand the place back to its people along with a very generous stipend to rebuild and be our friends. It hasn't always worked, and in many cases we need to leave some troops behind "just in case," but we are one country that hasn't kept what we conquered.

(Yes, you can debate this on a case-by-case basis. But compared to everybody else, we're pretty generous in this respect.)

So the rest of the squabbling, imperialistic, martial, failed-top-dog world and their impoverished ex-colonies looks at America and wonders how in the hell we do it, why are there McDonald's and Starbucks on every corner, why American cinema makes billions of dollars with pap, why our poor people not only have shoes, but television sets, roofs over their heads, cars, health care services, free education, food, clothes, and lifestyles to which many folks among the poor of foreign lands can only dream about.

They think there's got to be some sorcery in this, so they say that Americans are horrible, gluttonous cads who don't deserve the half of what they've got. And they look at the things that gave America its prosperity and status--industry, commerce, military strength, entrepreneuralism--and they say, "Those are the tsars and the kaisers and the robber barons of America! They and their class must be EVIL! America has poor people too! Poor disenfranchised people relegated to slums and substandard living!"

Never mind the fact that many of those poor people were solicited by a tall green lady standing in a harbor, and arrived on these shores trying to escape an even worse existence back home. Never mind that a lot of those immigrants learned the language, got jobs, started companies, and contributed to the rich fabric of this nation. No, they've got rigid caste systems, so therefore America has to have one, too.

After decades of this drumbeat, a lot of people--abroad and at home--came to believe it. No matter what advancements were made to improve the lives of the less fortunate, it is never enough, just like no matter what has been done to clean up the factories and the environment, we're still told that we're on the verge of devastation if we don't get even cleaner. Ignore the successes, dwell on the problems, and if the problems are small, inflate them to crisis proportions.

Instead of encouraging growth, innovation, and aspiration, these doomsayers and their allies and supporters put regulations and restrictions in place which hamstring the very people upon whom the economy depends, and then triumphantly proclaim that the economy is broken, and only they know how to fix it. Well, their tinkering over the past forty to fifty years has gotten us into this mess--and I mean ALL of us, because the economy of the world is as interconnected as they say the ecology of the world is. Those people who want to "punish" Big Oil don't realize that their 401(k) plans probably include stock in an oil company. The people promoting the use of electric cars never stop to think about what generates the electricity they'd need to recharge their cute little toys. But then we may not need cars at all soon: If we shut down all the corporations, who will we work for?

Those people who wouldn't mind if America fell off the pinnacle of World Power don't stop to think about which country will inevitably step in to take her place. China? Russia? Do they sincerely think they'll get a better deal with either of them?

>>Somehow, I don't think people who don't live in America have any grounds to tell those of us who do live here how the situation here really is. Yeah, we're guilty of presuming how life is in other countries too, but there's something ineffably annoying to be told that if anything is wrong with America, it's the fault of the evil capitalistic Conservatives--by people who live in Germany and Australia.<<

I really don't understand the allure of communism, or socialism if you want to be polite about it. Don't these people pay attention? In every communist/socialist/pinko country, the people are poor and the elite in the government have the money. It's like that in any dictatorship, no matter what their economic philosophy. Look at medievel England. Poor people, rich monarchy. Robin Hood is credited with robbing from the rich and giving to the poor, which is true but it isn't accurate. Robin Hood took from the government and returned the money to the overtaxed people who rightly earned it. Oh man, it cheesed me off to no end when people were comparing Obama's redistribution of wealth policies to Robin Hood. Anyone who says that has never read The Merry Adventures of Robin Hood. Obama is more like Prince Prospero. If you've never read Masque of the Red Death by Edgar Allan Poe, he was an elitist prince who locked himself and his friends up in his palace where they would all be safe from a plague that was ravaging his kingdom, all the while watching the people outside die horrible, horrible deaths at the hands of this plague. Read it, that's Obama. Obama is living high on the hog while watching the rest of America die horribly in an economic plague. Doesn't keep him from his vacations or his tea parties or state dinners or private concerts with Paul McCartney at the White House. Whotta douche

What is happening now is what happens when an empire reaches its limit. We do not want to decrease our military empire so we cut science and technology. The other thing is the political class realizes that power is slipping from there hands so they come up with a kabuki dance of issues that in fact mean nothing but clouds the minds of the electorate.