A reply to Jerome by a fellow European

A reply to Jerome

As a European I feel obligated to reply to Jerome's recent 2 posts. I'm Swiss and my country is not part of the EU, so I guess I can be considered to have a 'neutral stance'. Yeah pun intendend.

I'm pro EU and hope my country once will join 'the club', but this does not prevent me from having a critical view on both the current 'European' and American leadership. Being surrounded by 3 big European countries, and as a bilingual speaker, I consider myself to have at least some insight into France, Germany and Italy. This is not about America vs. Europe. This is about the hypocrisy of the west in general.

Mediocre European leaders? - it would be wonderful if they were just mediocre. Your country's head of state, monsieur Chirac is in my oppinion one of   the most disgusting political bastards of the last decades. He shook hands with the devils of this world more than any political figure, he was the main driving force behind OSIRAK, he was directly involved in several political corruption scandals including several french OIL companies, such as Total and Elf-Aquitaine etc

- Europe likes to blame America for Big Oil? Well, we're no better.

Now to Italy, Berlusconi. A mafioso, a wise guy, chief of media, currently taking down the foundations of democratic Italy. A guy abusing the law in order to get a white vest for his criminal past. He's as corrupt as Chirac, he's having a coalition with the neo-fascists. Btw, Berlusconi's government is the first Italian administration since the end of WW2 that has survived more than 4 years. Hail to European stability. And let's not forget the big scandal in the 90's that revealed that the WHOLE ITALIAN APPARATUS basically was bought by big money and the mafia. That's when  Berlusconi's time came.

Now to Germany, along with several European nations, they want to remove the weapon embargo against China - Hell, this is a nation ruled by social democrats, but do you think Schroeder would critisize Russia's/China's/etc. human rights records? No, because there's big money to be made. Schroeder's government proposed refugee detention camps in Africa. This is fortress Europe. We don't want refugees, Germany doesn't want refugees, Spain doesn't want refugees. We'd rather let them starve or get murdered.

I'm not even going into Africa, Blood Diamonds and European interest in Africa. I'm not going into the rise of anti-semitism in Europe. I'm not going into the NPD getting elected in Sachsen, Germany. I'm not going into nationalism - Blocher, Haider, Le Pen. I'm not going into Franco. I'm not going into Portugal's former war in Angola. I'm not going into Germany selling chem labs to a dictator. Switzerland, Britain's St.Kitts & Navies etc. harboring this world's dictators' money. It just ashames me. This is not a question of mediocracy. Europe is taking over American values? Where? If you consider lying, corruption and indecency to be American values, you're right. And no, 'Europe is not going to work out' if it continues like this.

My only hope are the smaller nations, such as Finland, Sweden, The Netherlands, Austria, Portugal and the newly joined eastern nations such as Poland or Latvia. I don't expect anything from the current BIG leadership of Europe.

Why do we keep blaming America where we should blame the West as a whole? We have a responsability too, and obviously we all forgot about it. We blank out our own wrongdoing, and America serves as a scapegoat. Europe in its current form is morally not better than America. We just hide our interests beneath a curtain of lies and self-righteousness.

Americans, don't bet on Europe. We need to base our views on more than just Realpolitik, on more than just a basic frameset that promotes stupid blindness and hatred. This is about decency, freedom and fairness. This is about our left values.

Edit: I did not intend to sound apologetic regarding the Bush administration. I just think that anti-americanism leads us Europeans to overlook important issues such as ie. France's role in global water privatization, on which I'll hopefully post a diary as soon as I find the time. Yes post war iraq is horrible, but there are issues at hand with similar (or even higher?) significance. And, oh joy, we Europeans could do something about them.

•  excellent

  I hope this is the first of many recommends!

  by Miss Devore on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 02:32:27 PM PDT

•  thnks for this diary

  Burlusconi in particular sems to me a particularly anti-democratic and corporatist leader: one could argue he's as bad as Bush.

  Chirac is also a lot slimier than people admit.

  And Blair of course is a disaster.

  So the "leadership" only seems good in comparison to the US: I think however in the end this is a Democrats vs. Republicans kind of debate, since many of us here on dkos voted for Kerry not b/c we thought he would solve America's problems, but b/c he was a hell of a lot better than Dubya.

  Same with the European leaders: Chirac is bad, but le Pen or some other European proto-fascist is worse. The EU for all its faults is still much better than the States right now.  

  by gnat on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 02:34:11 PM PDT

  •  Berlusconi's days are numbered

    Romano Prodi, an incredibly popular past PM, is running against him next year in the national elections, and if the regional elections are any indication, Berlusconi's party Forza Italia is going to get its butt kicked.

    by SneakySnu on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:40:30 PM PDT

  •  Berlusconi...

    has modeled his admistation's policies explicitly on those of the Reagan and second Bush administrations.
    

    It is asbolutely absurd to suggest otherwise.
    No other Italian government in the history of the post-fascist republic has adopted a free-market neo-liberal ideology which so explicitly recalls  the Reagan and Bush administration's drive for the privatizatin of everything on gods' green earth; that borrows on TRICKLE-DOWN ECONOMIC THEORY to justify income tax cuts for the wealthy; that wishes to emulate the American model of a strong Presidency with the necessary relative weakening of the legislature as a consequence; which uses the war on terrorism as an excuse to justify anti-immagration and anti-privacy policies, and the list goes on and on.
    

    Italian television is saturated with the sludge and filth of violent pornographic mayhem that Hollywood and the rest of...yes...AMERICAN pop culture pumps out the way Halliburton and the oil companies pump out oil from conqeuered and confiscated Iraqi oil wells.
       Berlusconi is trying (and succeeding) in remodeling  the Italian educational sytem along the lines of the warped and unsalvageable American low-standards, get-out-with-a-degree as fast as you can and get to work making money, money,money
    theories..
       He's quite literally copying everything that is wrong with America and pasting it on to an Italian culture with which it is incompatible, both  culturally and socio-economically.
       Following the rules of logic, what I just gave constitutes an unassailable conterexample to your ridicuous unwarrented gerenarilaztion that: "Europe is not copying the US." I can't speak to France, Germany, or the others...However, if you know anything at all about even high-school level logic, you will withdraw that ridiculous universalization because only one counterexample is necceassry to annihilate a universal statement of that nature.
       As to the West being responsible for this and that disaster: again you fail to distinguish.
    The war in Iraq, the  single biggest catastrophe of our times, IMO, was opposed by most European regimes. One of the biggest supporters was the fanatical Americanist Silvio Berlusconi.
       I don't undertand the point of your whole dairy entry: if you are saying simply that every nation
    in Western civiliation has its dark spots and defects in history and in the present..well, that's a simple truism. Every nation, culture, tribe, or clan in the history of the world has been responsible for horrendous and unspeakable crimes: I challenge you to give me a counterexample against that universalization. Good luck!!!!
         There's no point in discussing and debating a truism, obviously. Your diary basically boils down to a nihilistic and cynical rant against the evils of humanity.I have much sympathy for such a world- view and I'm trying extemely hard to reconcile my own fundamental pessimism about humanity with progressivism in politics. But, that's a philosophical issue and not really appropriate for a political forum.
       Or, if it is,it should be addressed in an analytical philosphical manner: with arguments
    and evidence, not obiter dicti and polemical/rhetorical flourishes as is the case with your own diary.
         All that Jerome was saying was this: the bush admistarion is alienating the hell out of European popular opinion; aggareavting the already broiling and brewing antagonism bewtween the two sides of the atlantic. You don't really respond to that, do you? Do you have evidence that suggests the contrary?

    by gilgamesh on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 01:45:53 AM PDT

•  Thank you for speaking up on this.

  Frankly I am sick to death of America being used as the scapegoat. I want to know why the US has to set the example for the rest of the world, and why Europe is such a follower instead of a leader if they are so stellar and judgemental.

  When reading the other diary, I was thinking about all the ties that France had with Iraq when they were refusing to go along with the US in Iraq.  They presented it as a moral/values issue acting as though they were above ever using military action, when really they had so much economic investment and greed invested in Iraq that they couldn't agree to go against Iraq even if they had wanted to.  

  And what is with the arms dealing with China.  Spreading weapons around the globe can no longer be blamed on the US now.  And the reason for all of this is greed, something that Europe has plenty of.  

  I personally can't believe the response to the Fuck America diaries. Owning up to the Us having a hard time now, and doing things to hurt the ret of the world is one thing.  Rolling around in your own guilt and spitting on yourself for hours at a time while relishing every min. of it is another. Half the comments are examples of self loathing.  We know the situation we are in, we know how we got here, we know the US has made major mistakes.  If Europe is all a fuss with disgust for the US, then they will have some internal review to face shortly.  How about taking some responsibility for what happens in a global society instead of sitting passively blaming everyone else.

  by hopscotch1997 on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 02:35:16 PM PDT

  •  "Fuck America"???

    Where on earth did you see "Fuck America" diaries?? If you are referring to mine, as is presumably the case, noting that an opinion is widely held outside America does not make it necessarily true, but should maybe get you to wonder where this came from. That was my intent. Maybe indeed it is a case of kettle calling the pot black, and you can just ignore what I wrote.

    I was certainly not praising our pathetic current leadership in Europe, in case you did not notice. To each hi/her problems...

    by Jerome a Paris on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 02:55:56 PM PDT

    •  well

      In my oppinion a faulty line of argumentation. While the USA surely has its faults, like every country, and its current policy is uhm well, maybe into the wrong direction, the current wave of anti-americanism in Europe cannot soley be explained by it. Especially when realizing that Europe is no better. I stick to the scapegoat theory, combined with some sort of inferiority complex. Like it or not, but the blame game is truly out of proportions here.

      by rukkus on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:01:36 PM PDT

      •  well,

        I have addressed the issue of anti-Americanism quite specifically and I stand by my diaries in that respect.

        I'll say it again: when the Brits (and the Germans, the Italians, the Dutch) hate and fear the Americans more than they hate the French, it is a significant bit of information for an American site, whatever its causes, and however bad or criminal or pathetic their own leaders are.
        

        by Jerome a Paris on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:27:06 PM PDT

        •  This is significant?

          This is news?  That the Brits hate the Americans more than they hate the French?  You must be kidding.  The Brits have always hated us.  (speaking in general terms, of course - as the cliche goes, some of my best friends are Brits.)

          I think one of the problems with your two diaries "Stupid Fucking Americans" and "Stupid Fucking Americans II: Saying the Same Things in a More Polite Manner" is your gee-whiz-let-me-inform-you attitude when you're conveying stuff that everyone here already knows.

          by hrh on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 06:57:36 PM PDT

        •  Are you, like, Gallup or Zogby?

          Where do you get off speaking for ANYONE but yourself, let alone the French or "the Brits (and the Germans, the Italians, the Dutch)"? NEWSFLASH: European Union is an oxymoron!! Read all about it!! Prove you are not blowing smoke kisses from your cultured ass to your "fans" in this thread.

          by peterborocanuck on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 03:35:24 AM PDT

          •  I think your reaction is uncalled for

            and bigotted. We speak on this site about what the religious right wants, the freepers think, the democrats should do. We generalize continuously. I think that is allright as long as we realize what we are doing, and we should never forget we should not apply these generalities to the indivual.  

            In Europe we feel a sense of hopelesness, and the hopelesness translates in the kind of reactions Jerome was mentioning.

            The good thing about the provocativeness of Jerome's diaries is that it attracted a lot of traffic, which I think is great because we need to get a dialogue going.  

            by amsterdam on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 04:25:03 AM PDT

            •  I think the diaries were

              uncalled for and bigotted. You have no idea who you are speaking to. If you did you would be embarrassed by your post. Show me some data that would allow Jerome to speak for an entire continent. Provocative? How about presumptuous. I laugh at your accusation of bigotry. I'm sure I've been called worse things by better people. I'm all in favor of starting a dialogue--with our opponents.

              by peterborocanuck on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 01:10:41 PM PDT

              •  I would call

                "blowing smoke kisses from your cultured ass" bigoted.

                And judging by the tenor of your reply I presume I am talking to a presumptuous ass.

                by amsterdam on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 01:20:21 PM PDT

                •  you presume my presumptuousness.

                  Curious. Presume anything you like. You won't shut me up by hauling out the "B" word. Either HELP or get the hell out of the way.

                  by peterborocanuck on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 01:55:33 PM PDT

                  •  What is your problem

                    Why all this agression. People are ranting on this site all the time. These diaries are a commentary on the general mood of Europeans towards the US at this time.

                    You can get all pissy about it, but the shooting incident involving the Italian journalist are our headlines and people here are just fed up with display of arrogance of the US.

                     I guess you wanted a more sanitized version of how the rest of the world views America. If that is the case just stick to your tv and you will here exactly what you want to here. Or you can get real about the situation and start a dialogue with the foreigners on this site. This is not just your problem. Bush is our problem too. And as far as Europeans are concerned the Americans put him there for a second term.

                     This administration has been abusive and demeaning towards Europeans, and some of the reactions in this diary towards Europeans were lot more insulting and showed less nuance then Jerome's diaries if you will bother to read them carefully. I did not find any personal attacks there.

                    I don't want to continue to exchange insults with you. I am looking for the dialogue and I am hoping to work with Americans who like me see the
                    Bush administration as a menace to world peace.

                    If I have offended you I apologize. I experience the same kneejerk reaction when I feel Europeans
                    are attacked as you obviously do when Americans are the criticized.

                    by amsterdam on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 02:43:29 PM PDT

                    •  I haven't insulted you.

                      Therefore we are not trading insults. The shooting of the journalist and her erstwhile rescuer wasn't "a display of US arrogance"-- it was a display of incompetence by the poor bastards who shot them. Whoopsy-doodle, they weren't Iraqi?!! Do you actually buy the whole line that the US government wanted her dead because-because why? Because her rescuer successfully negotiated her release? It's the latest in a long string of violent FUBARS at these checkpoints. Good God Alighty, YES. Crimes are being committed wholesale. Hands up Kossaks: How many of you voted for Bush in 2000? How many in 2004? Any repeaters? Helpless?? You feel helpless in Europe? Try living in Kansas with your politics.

                      by peterborocanuck on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 03:31:14 PM PDT

                      •  Bush style diplomacy

                        I offer you to find a way get beyond our differences, but apparently you are not interested.

                        Let us agree to disagree and end this useless discussion.

                        by amsterdam on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 11:52:37 PM PDT

                        •  Bush diplomacy indeed

                          1 You called me a bigot. 2 You called me a presumptuous ass. 3 You informed me I had a problem with agression, because I didn't like a diary that repeated "stupid f*cking Americans" like a mantra. 3 You scolded me for getting "all pissy". 4 You characterised my response as "kneejerk". After all that your perception of what has transpired between us is that you have been trying to offer a way to "get beyond our differences"? Yeah you could teach Bush a thing or two about diplomacy. Agree to disagree? I dunno, you never once addressed my points. But yeah, sure whatever.

                          by peterborocanuck on Tue Mar 08, 2005 at 04:55:01 AM PDT

      •  don't think so...

        
        In my oppinion a faulty line of argumentation. While the USA surely has its faults, like every country, and its current policy is uhm well, maybe into the wrong direction,

        please...  don't insult people's intelligence here.  
        BushCo is attempting a wholesale makeover of US society...
        

        • cultural = religious fundamentalism
          
        • undermining middle class <> handing power to corp. interests
          
        • eradicating enviro protection (eg. enabling wholesale pollution/rape of resources)
          
        • media takeover
          
        • utter dishonesty on virtuall every public policy
          
        • abandoning any pretense of fiscal responsability in lieu of indeological interests

        Making light of such stuff doesn't particularly sit well with me.  

        
        the current wave of anti-americanism in Europe cannot soley be explained by it. Especially when realizing that Europe is no better.
        

        Beg to differ: allowing for truth in your proffered accessments of Euro leaders, their scope (aside from Italy) is not close to Bush's white house.  Europe does have enviro priorities and acts on them.  They've been far more responsable w/finance... going in 2 opposite directions, actually.  

        On most important issues, euro governments have responded to sentiments of their larger public.  In US, not only just the opposite, but massive disinformation campaigns on multiple fronts attempting to BS the public into massively self-destructive policies.

        Sorry man, I can't agree w/you.    

        
        I stick to the scapegoat theory, combined with some sort of inferiority complex. Like it or not, but the blame game is truly out of proportions here.

        Again, can't agree.  

        The divide has grown exponentially since W's 2k inauguration.  Prior, the fissures were minor and not strewn with distrust as they now are.  I'd also point out these sentiments are not uniquely European: they are shared by +-51m USAsians, Oz, most of So/Central American now, and increasingly Asia.

        That the Blue Planet, a mere 4 years after BushCo invaded, is now far more dangerous and deadly place than before is not a product of Europe's overblown rhetoric.  Whatever the problems on your side of the pond, the epicenter driving discontent emanates from Wa DC... period.  

         

        by jdmckay on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:44:41 PM PDT

        •  Well

          The Kyoto protocol is a perfect example of what I mean. While Europe talks about environmentalism, they don't walk the walk, please once look into France's role with global water privatization:

          • "The world of privatized water is overwhelmingly dominated by two French transnationals. Suez Lyonnaise des Eaux (which built the Suez Canal and had 1999 profits of $1.5 billion on sales of $32 billion) and Vivendi SA are referred to as the General Motors and Ford Motor Company of the water world. Both are ranked among the 100 largest corporations in the world by the Global Fortune 500. Between them they own, or have controlling interests in, water companies in over 120 countries on five continents, and distribute water to almost 100 million people in the world."

          • "Adding to this intense pollution is the sewage waste of five million customers of the privatized water company Aguas Argentinas, which is dumped directly into the river each day without treatment. Three kilometers upstream Aguas Argentinas treats the very same water for use by the same population."

          • 'The deal made between Argentina's water authority and a consortium that includes the Suez group from France, the largest private water company in the world, and Spain's Aguas de Barcelona, in May 1993, established a new private entity, named Aguas Argentinas, with the help of the World Bank which also bought a small stake in the consortium. According to a study by Dr. Malpartida's Ecology and Environment Foundation, the new company was "the biggest transfer of a water service and watershed into private control in the world" encompassing a region with over 10 million inhabitants.'

          Or about human rights, the way Europe treats its refugees is shameful:

          • "Italy, which is one of the founding countries of the European Community, deliberately violated the Geneva Refugee Convention. The Italian airlift mass deportations bring damage not only to the foundations of international refugee protection but also to the European protection of human rights. Without examination of their flight reasons, more than 1.100 persons were flown out to Tripoli."

          • "According to the Italian TV channel SkyTG 24, hundreds of persons deported from Lampedusa were simply transferred to the desert near Libya's Southern border."

          • "PRO ASYL reminds of the fate of eighteen refugees who in September of 2004 were deported to Libya's common border with Niger by the Libyan regime. They were exposed to the desert and died with thirst. "

          • "Germany and Italy are pressing ahead with plans for setting up holding centers in North Africa for would-be immigrants to the European Union"

          by rukkus on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 04:23:56 PM PDT

          •  you are being

            way to all-or-nothing here: Kyoto was at least signed by the Europeans, and Kyoto is not about global water resources and cannot be expected to address every issue that arises in this hypercapitalist world. Don't conflate issues: even Blair said that Kyoto was only a first small step.

            Environmentalism by the way should be the one thing that, if framed correctly, everyone can agree on at least foundationally. The problem is that environmemntalism is only as good as the environemental LAWS.

            So I think Kyoto is actually an indication not of how Europe is somehow paying lip-service to environmentalism, but of how the Bush adminsitraion is paying lip service to environmentalism.

            Rome was not built in a day, and continuing to set up straw men about the ills of certain European multinationals does not really address the issue at hand: Bush is a world disaster, and even nonpolitical and center-right Europeans now realize this.    

            by gnat on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 04:31:31 PM PDT

            •  I also want to add

              that there is in Europe at least some respect for the status of international laws (Geneva convention, etc) and accords that of course Bush is totally against. America wants to have it cake and eat it too: while the Germans are tryin Rumsfeld for war crimes, Bush is caliming that he has international democracy's best interests at heart. Could it be that Europeans, having lived through fascism, have noses better attuned to it now?

              I agree that the EU is hardly a utopia of progressive ideals, but a little perspective here would help.

              by gnat on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 04:36:55 PM PDT

            •  kyoto

              Yes water resources is a part of environtalism, since dumping your 'xxxxx' into argentinian rivers or the victoria lake isn't exactly the cleanest way of sanitation in my oppinion. Also sending your biggest engineering companies to the Yangtze and the subsequent flooding of thousands of villages isn't exactly true environmental policy either (ABB etc.). Yes Bush is a world disaster, but European indifference and inaction is too.

              by rukkus on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 04:42:39 PM PDT

              •  more straw men

                are you against the Kyoto accord b/c it fails to address every environemntal ill in the world?

                If we take your attitude to an extreme than it would be to do nothing at all.

                Kyoto is a good thing, and the U.S. should have signed it and under Kerry it would have been signed.

                Does Kyoto save the world? Of course not, but it's a step.

                by gnat on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 04:46:55 PM PDT

                •  lol

                  no I'm not against kyoto, heck, you misunderstand me. Kyoto IS a good thing, but current BIG European governments are doing everything they can to 'ignore' it. That's why I said my hope lies with the smaller nations, because the current BIG nations are doing everything they can to promote their nation's companies and their interests. It's actions like Schroeder's attempt to sell a nuke reactor to China, even tho his party is against nuclear energy. Etc...

                  by rukkus on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 05:00:39 PM PDT

          •  hmmm...

            Hi:

            1st, water privatization right up there on top of my list of corp. evil.  I'm not familiar w/French/Spanish projects you list.  Do you have links on this stuff?  If it's as you say (I don't doubt you), I'd have to adjust some opinions I have.  It would, however, have to be on very large scale to match what BushCo doing in this arena... eg. it's one thing for heartless multi-nationals to exploit to full extent, and quite another to have these efforts fully supported/enabled/protected by a federal government, as is case here (US) now.  Implementation of Nafta: Chpt 11, f:ex.  And BushCo holding municipalities hostage to federal funds by demanding privatization of water projects in many localities.  Much more...

            Re Human rights and your Italy citations... all true.  I'd point out that these guys (Berlusconi & co.) are more than counterbalanced by EU, however.  And in larger arena of human rights, no comparison between EU as whole in so far as per/capita $$ to charity/disaster/human need (etc.) as opposed to US under Bush... both as matters of federal policy and citizen generosity, US far stingier.  

            Beyond that, the growing selfishness of US charactar (I've lived here all my life) is perhaps most frightening aspect of all this.  That so many here now respond to ameoba level stimulation of contrived media is taking (taken?) root.  It's somewhere beyond bizarre.

            Digsby has been hitting on all cylinders last couple of days, aptly describing all this much better than I.

            In any event, respectfully I disagree w/your intial premise: EU has long ways to go before approaching malfeasance level of BushCo.  
            

            by jdmckay on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 05:39:05 PM PDT

            •  some links

              • http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=165
                
              • http://www.thewaterpage.com/int_companies1.htm
                

              I'll try to provide some more links if I find the time, in the meantime there are some good books by Vandana Shiva.

              On the refugee issue, I tend to disagree, since the Schengen/Dublin/Amsterdam treaties really try to 'get rid of refugees' by all means possible.

              •  The principle that refugees and asylum seekers should be dealt with in the first 'safe country' they have entered and not be allowed to claim asylum in another 'safe country' once their case has been dismissed.

              •  The concept that airline carriers will incur a liability if they allow passengers on their planes from outside of Europe who do not care adequate documentation.

              •  The co-ordination of immigration information by the police forces and Home Offices of Europe.

              The war on refugees is not only waged by Italy, but also by ie. Spain, Portugal, France, etc. Basically all countries with access to the mediterrean sea. The Schengen/Dublin treaties mainly places the burden of taking care of refugees on border countries. Those countries in return do everything they can to STOP the influx.

              A pdf on it can be found here

              by rukkus on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 05:56:36 PM PDT

              •  Thanks

                for links!!!  I'll dig though 'em.  "Water Page" in particular (surprised I never saw it).

                re: refugee issue, I don't think I mentioned it. :)
                Anyway, I made my points and leave it there.

                Suggestion: if you do dig for more on line water info, maybe consider posting a diary.  I don't tend to keep these conversations in focus for long (so many hours in a day), and may miss it.  Beyond that, it's something people should know about IMO.

                Ok... cheers!

                by jdmckay on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 06:48:20 PM PDT

      •  Maybe?

        "current policy is uhm well, maybe into the wrong direction"

        I'm beginning to get the picture.

        by TocqueDeville on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 04:50:18 PM PDT

        •  hmmm

          I should've put a </sarcasm> there. lol, of course it's going into the wrong direction.

          by rukkus on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 05:11:49 PM PDT

          •  relativism sucks

            as a tool of discourse. But I suppose subtlety is lost on many.

            by ksh01 on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 05:44:37 PM PDT

      •  As an American who has lived in both

        France and Germany (and who speaks both French and German), I feel that perhaps I am qualified to answer? Yes, Chirac and Schroeder are, for the most part, embarrassments. I wouldn't vote for them, unless I had no other choice but someone more rightwing than they are. I have Kurdish and Turkish friends in Germany who are certainly on the short end of the stick when it comes to that country's immigration/citizenship policies (a misery). And I have Muslim friends from France (another miserable situation).

        BUT, there is a huge fucking difference between the overhauls both Germany and France are experiencing (revision of social and work policies) and what we are currently experiencing in the U.S. As an immigrant in Germany, I NEVER felt threatened by authorities (even when my work visa was in..how shall we say this?..tenuous circumstances).

        Whereas here, in the US, in New York City, as a natural-born citizen, I am friggin' FREAKED OUT by the federal government and their Dominionist, anti-woman, anti-minority (unless they're OUR dishwasher minorities!) ways.

        The current Admin. is awful. Tony Blair ain't much better. But you'd have to trot out a figure like the Jorg Haider, or LePen, or the CSU in Germany (not to mention the almost-banned other right-wing groups) to come close to the asswipes in power in the US right now.

        by Xray the Enforcer on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 05:05:26 PM PDT

        •  How Much Time Have Spent in New York ?

          ...Because I can take you to places where illegal immigrants are all over the streets, neighborhoods where the biggest businesses are telephone and fax centers (also serving as money laundering centers) catering to immigrants without long distance phone service, and areas where no one is even thinking about speaking English to go about everyday business.  If immigrants in New York are feeling 'freaked out' because of threats by authorities, they certainly aren't showing any signs of distress.  As a matter of fact, they appear to be less harrassed by 'authorities' here than they would be in their homelands.  

          by Grand Poobah on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 07:30:44 PM PDT

          •  In NYC - a few years

            I wasn't speaking in the voice of "an immigrant here in the US or an immigrant there," but merely my own experience as an immigrant in Germany and France vs. an American citizen in America. BushCo freaks me out much more than anything even equivalent in Europe - where I didn't have the rights of citizenship.

            As for the people who don't even bother to learn English - what can I say - being shot at in Queens by 2-bit gangsters perhaps beats the hell out of being chased down by FARC rebels or leftovers from Mao Zedong's Revolutionary Army - who knows, who cares? There is a continuum of horrors in this world - and while the US might not be the worst of 'em, we sure as fuck aren't among the best either. Which, in my opinion, is a goddamned tragedy.

            And just for the record, one of my close friends is Lebanese (they moved here during the Lebanese civil war 14 years ago). My friend's father was "disappeared" by security forces in Lebanon for a couple of months when my friend was younger - he was eventually returned to the family, and they fled Lebanon almost immediately (via Iraq, funny enough). My friend, for the first time since she arrived her 14 years ago, is totally convinced the US authorities will take her father and her brother away, solely for being Arabs. My friend is not one to overreact - even when a car bomb went off in front of their house in Beirut - but she's plenty worried now.

            by Xray the Enforcer on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 08:08:58 PM PDT

      •  Please explain

        so that a dumb euro can understand.

        I stick to the scapegoat theory, combined with some sort of inferiority complex. Like it or not, but the blame game is truly out of proportions here.

        So the US didn't lie about Iraqi WMDs but a scapegoat did? The US didn't recklessly invade and occupy Iraq but a scapegoat did?

        Your definition of anti-Americanism seems to be 'not going along with the lies told by the Bush-administration'.

        by high5 on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 01:35:53 AM PDT

        •  you're totally off base

          In case you hadn't noticed, NOBODY here has defended the Bush administration or its lies.  The poster is talking about the brain-dead tendency to blame this entire country for the mess that we're in while failing to admit that Europe has played a role in creating the mess too.

          by hrh on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 05:42:24 AM PDT

    •  Sigh.

      As you can see from the dynamics that have become apparent since your initial diary, it is very difficult for people to be pragmatic and rational when they get a whiff of criticism.  As I said on your other diary, there will be some who will take the observations you offer, think about them, and attempt to be more thoughtful as a result of hearing them.  Then, of course, there will be others who actually cannot hear anything once they realize they are being criticized, who will reflexively distort and fabricate to rationalize their overreaction.  'Tis the human way and goes a long way in explaining why the world has always been and will always be something of a mess.  

      by lightiris on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:07:20 PM PDT

      •  nice one

        now I of course wonder whether i'm part of the pragmatic crowd, or the over-hyping distortion crew :)

        by rukkus on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:11:19 PM PDT

        •  No,

          you seem to be firmly in the pragmatic camp.  ;)

          by lightiris on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 05:00:45 PM PDT

    •  Do you really think that there is one single

      person on this blog, excepting the trolls, who are not intimately acquainted with the idea. You could perhaps take it somewhere where you are not preaching to the chorus of the already aware.

      I would like to ask you, as I did in a comment on your diary, what you would like this particular audience to do about it.  It seems that we have rung out every little bit of energy left in ourselves to try to set this govt. right.

      You should go to a blog in Europe perhaps, and pose the same statement to them that the United STates has a poor idea of them.  As is so in every situation, a generalization cannot be made, because no, it is not all of Europe who has that opinion of us just as the same is true here.  But that said, why was your diary not addressing both parties as guilty instead of presenting a single minded point of view and waiting for the commentors to then agree with you and proceed to flog themsselves in response.

      I don't see the point you are trying to accomplish, as I said before in coming to this audience other than to rub in a point we are all well aware of.

      Since no one is innocent it seems that the solution is not going to come about if only one of the parties is expected to admit it and to work on the problem.

      by hopscotch1997 on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:11:10 PM PDT

      •  2 points

        • I agree with your general point. The assymetry comes from the fact that one country has attacked, bombed and occupied another and is threatening a bunch of others, while the other side, while certainly not pure or perfect, is not doing any such thing. I am thus addressing the people that can actually do something about what is going on today.

        • If what  said is so mundane, why wasn't it simply ignored?

        You will note that I ended my diary with a positive note, saying that the current positive evolutions that can be seen in Europe can be put to work together with what the progressives are doing in the US, and that better knowledge on both sides would help greatly in this.

        If the transatlantic dialogue here on dkos ends up being "you're bad. But you're worse. But you did this. I did not - and you helped me do it. Etc..." it would be a real pity.

        by Jerome a Paris on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:22:13 PM PDT

        •  OK Jerome

          But you are not reaching out to the right people. Kossians are the good guys. Inviting them to rub ashes on their faces and don burlap doesn't do much to actually work for change. These guys get it already. Trash talk America like you did to their opponents, the right believers. See how far you'll get.

          by peterborocanuck on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 04:37:15 PM PDT

      •  Yup.

        Shame on you!!! You have not single handedly preserved the free world from fascism!!! Oh, the shame that covers you and your descendants for all time. Shame shame shame. Quit your job!!! take to the streets!!! Martyr yourself, damnit!!! Otherwise I'll have to. And that would truly suck, because I have shit to do. I have to go shopping.

        by peterborocanuck on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:24:22 PM PDT

      •  He did have a point

        He was telling us of the harsh reaction in Europe to the Sgrena news.  I didn't know that.  Why do you say well all knew of that reaction?  The articles in US press haven't mentioned it.  Gilgamesh recently wrote in his diary:

        "I coudnìt even discuss this topic with my family today, notwithstanding the fact that I'm %100 on ther side, because they're now becoming angry with the American people as a whole;  rational thought and discourse is beginnign to break down. They no longer talk about he Bush admin amymore; it's YOU ARROGANT American people who want
        to doinate and control avything and eveyones' lives."

        I've lived in Europe.  I encountered some silly anti-American stuff, but things were much different when I took a brief visit there a couple years ago.  Several people felt it ok to tell me, "I don't like Americans."  That's new.  And what Jerome and Gilgamesh are relating to us sounds newer yet.
        

        by PeterLee on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:32:15 PM PDT

        •  I was talking

          about the overall attitude of Europeans toward Americans, which he implied was made worse by the attack on the Italians in Iraq.

          by hopscotch1997 on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:44:25 PM PDT

        •  irrational anti americanism...

          Irrational anti-americanism didn't start with the shooting of Sgrena's car. You should've been here when the Iraq war started, or even Afghanistan's bombing. And not to mention Bush's re-election. People from all parties HATE america, and not just since this incident.

          The problem with the current form of anti-americanism is that it implies a "we are better" attitude. Many Europeans really believe that America is descending into the new middle ages, and that America constitutes the new Roman empire. But they refuse to look at their own wrongdoings, since hey "we are perfect". They turn blind and blame America for everything that's going wrong, escaping from their OWN responsability. And heck, as much as I hate the current Bush agenda, I can't stand that either :P

          by rukkus on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:51:45 PM PDT

          •  Yes

            See this is the thing. I think the US is fucked up in a lot of ways, but I find myself defending the nation a lot when I go abroad. This is true in Anglo Canada and Britain, so I can't even imagine what it is like in nation's with weaker cultural ties to the US.

            The idea that the US is descending into a new medievalism is, well, a tad overdrawn.

            As I said, I don't like how far right the center of political gravity has moved in this nation and I think that there is much in Europe I would like to see this nation adopt as policy. But, some of the caricatures like the one you point out are way over the top and show little real understanding of what life is like in this nation. I know its become a bit of a cliche, but Bush's policies in many cases are not popular. He was re-elected primarily because of proximity to 9/11 and the perception that he would be tough on terrorism, coupled with carefully calibrated appeal to social conservatives, particularly on gay marriage. If you are following his second term closely, you'll note that his big initiative - phasing out social security - has hit a big roadblock, primarily because the nation doesn't agree with him on this issue. On a side note, the US supreme court just outlawed execution of minors last week. So there are small positive signs. As it usually is with this nation, it is very hard to generalize.

            Ben P

            by Ben P on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 04:04:13 PM PDT

            •  it's also possible

              he was not re-elected at all, but stole the damn thing. Certainly if Ohio was in the Ukraine, things might have been different.

              Americans tend to take their "democracy" too much for granted, and even many liberal kossacks who hate Bush nevertheless still resist (for emotional reasons) the idea that Bush is bad enough to actually STEAL a national election.

              Mainstream media, where art thou?

              by gnat on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 04:08:40 PM PDT

              •  well

                But there were no mainstream media reports in europe on the possibility of a stolen election. Instead we got the "stupid america" op ed's... didn't even bother to look at it, since the result fitted their 'americans are stupid'mindset. If they had truly BOTHERED they'd have had some pieces on it.

                by rukkus on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 04:20:41 PM PDT

                •  I'm disappointed

                  that the media hasn't covered the possibility that ass-monkeys from Uranus rigged the elections for Bush.

                  We got beat, even accepting the "irregularities". The first step on the road to recovery is accepting that fact. Democrats need to accept that because constantly harping on about the "Stolen election of 2004" isn't going to win us anything in 2006 or 2008.

                  by Aexia on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 12:48:36 AM PDT

          •  "You should have been here"

            Exactly.  I'm not there now and wasn't there at those times.  That's why I appreciated Jerome's and Gilgamesh's posts.  I missed their posts from when the war started.  ;)  

            And to those Americans who have never lived in Europe, I must say that when I lived two years in Germany, once in the late 80s and once in the mid 90s, I don't recall me ever thinking: "Oh, these people are anti-American."  Like I said, an occassional silly comment and disgust over the death penalty, for instance, but never phrased or expressed like "You fucking Americans with your death penalty." So this talk of Europeans having always hated Americans is a bit overdone, imo.  Heck, in general I'd say just the opposite: They liked Americans.  

            I also don't see why some insist on viewing this new dislike as merely an intensification of an existing dislike, instead of something that even moderates and former friends have taken up.

            I like your second paragraph very much and appreciate that perspective of things.  I wasn't so fond of the original diary entry, though.  To me, it was akin to saying that the Democrats are also not perfect, so don't criticize Republicans.

            by PeterLee on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 04:44:02 PM PDT

          •  Everyone hates Rome

            It's nothing personal.

            by fishhead on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 05:54:58 PM PDT

            •  Every Roman believes that

              everyone hates Rome. It nurtures their ego.

              by high5 on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 01:46:56 AM PDT

            •  Wait a sec... please clarify:

              Rome as a city (art, history, tourism, culture... Who hates it???), or Rome as Italy's center of government and power, as when the Lega Nord louts refer to "Rome" in all their high-and-mighty racist political rants?

              by Donna in Rome on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 02:40:57 AM PDT

              •  I think Rome is metaphorical here

                = America, or whoever is ruling the world at any particular moment.

                I have to say, we got a lot of thin-skinned folk around here.

                European politicians are corrupt, hypocrisy is pandemic, it's all about power and money... yup.

                rukkus's diary is a valuable corrective, but it doesn't cancel out the horrible image of America in the world today.

                This is the way the world is.

                What are we going to do about it?

                by d52boy on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 05:53:43 AM PDT

              •  What I meant

                Rome as in the Roman Empire.  The big hegemon on the block.

                by fishhead on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 07:08:27 AM PDT

          •  What's irrational?

            Was it truly irrational to be angry at Americans over Iraq?  The buck has to stop somewhere.  Those of us living in America do deserve some of the blame.  

            It seems to me that you're nitpicking a lot.  Yeah, no country is perfect, but in terms of the way we've been acting on the world stage recently, we certainly deserve any anger that is directed toward us.  

            by Asak on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 08:26:07 PM PDT

            •  I'm angry....

              at Americans over Iraq.
              Shit, I'm so angry most of the time I can't see straight.
              If the tables were turned, I'd be super-f***ing pissed at the French.
              It's so easy to hate them, don't you think...
              (Freedom fries and all that)

              If some of them hate Americans, great! That means that they are paying attention.

              by buddywally on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 11:54:33 PM PDT

        •  Just spent the weekend talking to Europeans

          I just happened to be in a tourist area in Bangkok this weekend, and spent a considerable amount of time talking and mainly listening to European tourists from a variety of countries.
          Interesting to note that I did not meet one person who believed our story on the Sgrena "incident". Why? They stated previous lies on WMDs, bombed wedding parties and a belief that the US army always killed innocents for no reason and was not commanded very well.
          Also they in general did not hate all American people, but hated Bush and his ilk, the US military and Americans who like to shout but not listen, actually they were quite surprised  that I was more of a listener than a speaker. Apparently that image is not often seen by Europeans.
          Incidentally a lot of these people were actually fairly right wing, which made the fact that they were aware of and critical of their own repective governments shortfalls quite surprising albeit refreshing to me.
          It really is worth getting away from the States and listening to others a little if you actually care how your country is seen in my opinion.

          by observer393 on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 08:09:19 PM PDT

        •  they're bigots, plain and simple

          Several people felt it ok to tell me, "I don't like Americans."

          "I don't like Americans" is a bigoted dumbshit opinion.  It's exactly the same as "I don't like the French.  Let's rename the goddamn fries Freedom Fries."

          Why should we take these bigoted dumbshit opinions seriously?

          If they said, "I don't like Bush" or "I don't like what your administration is doing," or "I don't like the direction your country appears to be going in," that would be a totally different story.  Those are perfectly reasonable criticisms.  And I'd say, "Right on, I agree with you."

          I don't see why this difference is so hard for some posters to grasp.

          by hrh on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 08:10:08 PM PDT

          •  reaction

            Unfortunately the reelection of the Bush changed a lot of minds. Before that it was common to hear: Bush is bad US people are OK in general. However, returning Bush with an increased mandate was seen as a snub to reasonable people of the world. There was definitely a shift to "**ing Americans after that, and to be honest blame must rest somewhere and we are all representatives of our own country. I hope for the day when we get to live down our stereotype as world bullies who dont care for others, and part of that will only come from us acepting what we collectively are and are known as, so before dismissing what is said as bigotry let's take a long hard look at our collective self for the sake of our futures.

            by observer393 on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 09:40:27 PM PDT

            •  stereotypes

              I hope for the day when we get to live down our stereotype as world bullies who dont care for others, and part of that will only come from us acepting what we collectively are and are known as, so before dismissing what is said as bigotry let's take a long hard look at our collective self for the sake of our futures.

              Why should we accept the insulting, bigoted stereotype?  Should the French say, "Oh, OK, I guess we can see why so many of you think we're arrogant, cheese-eating surrender monkeys.  Sorry about that.  It's our fault.  We'll try to behave better so you can see how wonderful we really are."  

              How about the caricature of liberals put forward by jerks like Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh?  Should we accept that?  "Well, yeah, Rush, there are certainly some people on the left who are whining immoral Commie pinko flag-burners, I guess you're right, we need to work harder to convey a better impression of ourselves."

              Gee, I don't think so.  

              Bigotry should never be tolerated.  And that's what insulting stereotypes are - bigotry.  

              The best way to combat these stereotypes is to deny them and convey the truth instead.  Instead of saying, "Yes, you're right, only a completely fucked-up country could re-elect Bush" we should point out that almost half the electorate voted for Kerry - more than voted for Reagan in his landslide.  We should point out that millions of us are outraged and horrified by this administration and its war, and we're doing what we can to change things.

              by hrh on Tue Mar 08, 2005 at 07:58:38 AM PDT

      •  Remember what triggered the diaries

        A US patrol emptying their machine guns into a car, killing a European and wounding two others, and the European reaction to this incident.

        Of course Europe is not perfect, I even have to disappoint Rukkus when it comes to the Dutch leadership. Balkenende is a Bush lapdog. And I hope he gets his but kicked out because of this.

         But the fact is at this time the US is out of control waisting lives in Iraq, polluting our environment and refusing to consider the rigths of the rest of the world population.

        At this time I am scared to death when I see the rise of a fascist governnment that can reach any part of this world with their wmd. I am afraid when I read some of the ideology of the neocons with its goal of world domination.

        As a world citizen I think I have the right to  question the motives of the US since the US feels it has the right to police and pollute my world.  

        If we want to discuss the imperfections of the different European leaders I am all for it. As a matter of fact I would love it, because that would involve a broader perspective of Americans into European affairs.
                       

        by amsterdam on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:57:39 PM PDT

        •  THANKYOU!

          p.s. Amsterdam rocks!

          by Little Hamster on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 04:09:01 PM PDT

        •  question the motives of our gov't

          all you want - I'll be happy to join you - but please refrain from insulting an entire nation.

          THAT'S where Jerome's diaries were at fault.

          by hrh on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 08:12:30 PM PDT

          •  Our nation sucks...

            Sorry dude, but why shouldn't they insult our entire nation?  Americans have a lot to be ashamed of.  We use too many resources, we consume our way into debt (this is not just the government but people who do this!).  As a whole we are fat and overweight, arrogant, and selfish.  Most Americans' lives revolve around the schedule of television shows.  

            My advice is to not identify with this country or any group.  Think of yourself as an individual.  Don't pretend that America is great because it's not.  Don't pretend that Americans are great, because we're not.  

            Does that mean you personally suck?  No, it doesn't.  

            by Asak on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 08:30:50 PM PDT

            •  you know what?

              There are millions of Europeans who are fat, arrogant and selfish, too.  There are millions of Europeans whose lives revolve around the schedule of TV shows.  (Some of my European friends know more about current American shows than I do.)  There are millions of Europeans who are racist, narrowminded, bigoted and provincial.  There are millions of Europeans who brainlessly elect bad, corrupt politicians just like we do.  

              Don't pretend Europeans are so much better than us.  They're really not that much different.

              by hrh on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 09:44:56 PM PDT

              •  'You're just as bad"

                isn't much of a defense. Europe isn't perfect. That doesn't change the fact that the Bush administration is bat-shit crazy.

                by Aexia on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 12:50:15 AM PDT

                •  yes,

                  The Bush administration is batshit crazy.  That's not the same thing as "America sucks, Europe is better".  If I thought this I wouldn't be on this blog.

                  by hrh on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 05:10:07 AM PDT

          •  Hegemony

            has been a policy of your nation for the better part of the last sixty years, so excuse me for thinking that the desire for global domination is an American cultural phenomenon - with the huge caveat that there are individual exceptions, many of them here.  

            But you should face it, hrh - those exceptions are a minority in American society.  The foreign policy of the US since 1945 is pretty compelling evidence of this.

            by fishhead on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 09:10:43 PM PDT

            •  um...

              excuse me for thinking that the desire for global domination is an American cultural phenomenon

              No, I won't.  The "desire for global domination" is certainly not an American invention - it's gone along with any great world power, throughout human history.

              Our foreign policy since 1945 is to make the world safe for capitalism.  And the main reason this has been so successful is that people in other countries want to make money, too.  Greed is pretty much universal.  So go ahead, complain about our hegemony, but take a look at all the ways that you and your fellow citizens have been complicit in it.

              by hrh on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 09:35:35 PM PDT

              •  I didn't say

                that it was an American invention.  I said it was a phenomenon of the culture.  And you needn't be so defensive - I absolutely do not deny that other nations are complicit.  That pisses me off too.

                by fishhead on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 10:01:35 PM PDT

                •  what I'm saying

                  is that our culture is yours too.

                  by hrh on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 10:33:19 PM PDT

          •  Don't kill the messenger

            Jerome's diaries did not insult an entire nation. He reported the general European attitude towards the US at this time as a result of the shooting incident with the Italian reporter.  

            by amsterdam on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 10:51:13 PM PDT

            •  that won't fly

              He may not fully agree with the particular characterization "stupid fucking Americans", but he himself explicitly blamed the entire country for Bush - conveniently forgetting that almost half the electorate voted against Bush.

              This is lazy thinking and comes dangerously close to knee-jerk anti-Americanism, as I said.  

              Please don't try to say that he was "only reporting" in these two diaries.  It's not true.

              by hrh on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 05:29:05 AM PDT

          •  As I read Jerome's diaries

            he was not insulting your entire nation.

            He was attempting to explain why your entire nation was being insulted.

            My response to people in Britain who insult America is to refer them to DailyKos.

            My father is slowly coming round!

            by Febble on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 02:49:20 AM PDT

      •  The thing is

        is that the US claims to be a paragon/champion of moral authority in the world. Hence the invasion of Iraq. Other nations don't. Thus the US opens itself up to criticism in ways other nations don't  because of this.

        Jerome's point about Britain is a good one. When the US becomes less popular than France in Britain, you have a problem.

        Ben P

        by Ben P on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 04:08:41 PM PDT

        •  this moral "outreach"

          of the Bush adminstration's claim to be "democratizing" the middle east, though b.s., works as effective propaganda potentially.

          The war on terrorism, like the war on communism, is so amorphous and pseudo-patriotic it provides tremendous cover for things like oil pipelines and CIA opium smuggling.

          Part of the enforcement of these moral "crusades" comes from the continued pollyannish view many Americans have about their history. Re: Bush senior's "city on the hill" crap.

          by gnat on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 04:13:44 PM PDT

          •  That's rich!

            "Moral Outreach" sounds like a nice and moral thing to do. More like: "Sorry, I was just trying to help to improve the quality of your life."

            What we are doing there is nothing less than playing GOD.

            by Kenyan on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 09:42:19 PM PDT

      •  One generalization is true

        In Canada, the mainstream Democratic Party would be considered cetre-right, and I'm sure this is the case in many parts of Europe.  You have Democratic Party legislators who favour capital punishment and are against gun control and universal health care - issues which have long since been disposed with in Canada and much of Europe.

        When America's so-called "left wing" is to the right of centrists (and even conservatives) in Canada and Europe, well you have to expect a little fear and loathing.  Especially when you're the big hegemon on the block.

        by fishhead on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 06:00:57 PM PDT

        •  You're right

          but you misidentify "left vs right".

          Traditionally the world over for example gun control is a right wing issue not a left wing issue. "Keep the peasants unarmed".

          The death penalty too isnt necessarily left vs right. There are a lot of reasons people oppose the death penalty and you might be suprised why people in america oppose it. In most cases it probably has more to do with the fear of executing the innocent than viewing the execution of those assuredly guilty being inhumane.

          Left vs right has been spun into oblivion. A truer view of left vs right would be that the left generally places trust in the individual while the right places its faith in the state. The left distrusts power.. the right worships it. The left believes (generally) that morality must be applied in every decision.. personal, governmental etc etc. The right views morality as a means of control over individuals.. and as completely non-applicable to state action.

          by cdreid on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 12:19:59 AM PDT

        •  This is very true

          From a Danish viewpoint the USA has two right wing parties, one plain right wing, the other extreme right wing.

          I was astonished to hear Kerry talk about how the enemies of the USA would be "hunted down and killed" during the elections.  That is a rhetoric way beyond even extreme parties in most of Europe, and Kerry was the moderate. It didn't bode well to hear that.

          by Rene on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 12:35:56 AM PDT

    •  Earth to Jerome!

      If you are referring to mine, as is presumably the case, noting that an opinion is widely held outside America does not make it necessarily true, but should maybe get you to wonder where this came from. That was my intent.

      Jerome, don't you think we KNOW where this comes from?

      by hrh on Tue Mar 08, 2005 at 08:03:10 AM PDT

      •  hrh

        glad you're still around!

        Please go read this exchange with Blue Neponset

        by Jerome a Paris on Tue Mar 08, 2005 at 08:31:19 AM PDT

        •  thanks Jerome!

          for the heads-up - I've posted a response.

          by hrh on Tue Mar 08, 2005 at 09:43:31 AM PDT

  •  None of us is innocent

    Either as individuals or nations. Those of us who are aware of the machinations of global corporate power realize that it spans all frontiers and knows no allegiance.

    That being said, and acknowleging the need to all work together, I want to say this much to you: it behooves us to get America straightened out first, inasmuch as you take for yourselves the role of world cop (while you claim not to want it), and ask to be looked upon as the example (but only when it flatters you). I'm sorry to say that the current geopolitical trends have much more to do with American triumphalism and interventionism than any other single force.

    It doesn't mean that the rest of western civilisation is guiltless, but you become an obstacle if you don't recognize the priority of fixing America first.

    by thingamabob on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 02:58:09 PM PDT

    •  I agree with

      the idea that America is the 800 pound gorilla in the global political room, and it's been taken over--as Sy Hersh says--by a kind of "cult"...so that America's problems are now the world's. But I'm not sure the loaded phrase "western civilization" that you employ is helpful: I think that the global hypercapitalism now gunning for an eco-apocolypse is hardly worth the term "civilization" or even culture. We are all implicated in this beast, and Wal-Mart is now in China. So assuming the meltdown does not arrive real soon, and we expel Bush, we still have to face the fact that signing on to Kyoto will not be enough: my point here is that leadership is generally lacking globally, and too often the "choice" is between tepid business-as-usual corporatist neoliberalism and far-right militarism. Is the former better than the latter? Of course, but it has its own insidious and anti-democraic legacy as well: pernicious b/c it often cloaks itself behind pseudo-progressivism. Anyway, I digress...

      by gnat on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:09:51 PM PDT

      •  The journey of a thousand miles

        begins with a single step, no?

        I mean, you're right of course that the "alternative" to the hypercapitalist neo-fascism which is currently choking off civilization is basically a kinder, gentler variety of the same. But it shows some promise, as opposed to none, and is an important step forward.

        The long-term, I am sorry to say, is probably very long indeed, short of some catastrophic end to current social conditions.

        Sometimes it may seem like we need to nuke ourselves. I can't quite get there, but I acknowledge the conundrum.

        by thingamabob on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:46:27 PM PDT

    •  whaaat?

      but you become an obstacle if you don't recognize the priority of fixing America first.

      Where the hell is this straw man coming from???  Listen, we here already recognize this priority - why do you think we're on this blog?  But that is OUR priority.  YOU, as a citizen of another country, have priorities of your own.  Fix what you have access to.  Do what you can where you are.  Complaining about something that you can't have any role in fixing is just wasted energy.
      

      by hrh on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 08:35:31 PM PDT

      •  Listen to others

        As an American I would just like to say I would love our country to listen to those from other countries. We have a lot to learn. Too often we think we are better than others. We are not. There are both good and bad Americans. Too often we think our institutions are better than those of others. They are not. Some work while some dont. Too often we think our system is better than that of others. It is not. It has good and bad points. Our problem is we never look: we never listen.
        If even those on this board do not want to listen to mild criticism from overseas then I am sorry but we do not have much of a future.

        by observer393 on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 09:49:42 PM PDT

        •  I'm fine with listening to others

          as long as they're not attacking my entire country.  There's a big difference between constructive criticism and bigotry.

          by hrh on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 05:37:18 AM PDT

      •  Sorry about the invective

        But please listen, you sanctimonious nitwit.

        I do plenty to fix problems in my own country, and I am the first to admit of them here when it's appropriate. But I would be wasting both my time and yours and everyone else's if I came to DKos to discuss the problems with the education in Ontario, or the lack of political will to tackle municipal issues in Canada's cities, or... etc.

        I come here in order to HELP. You don't want the help? Fine. Disregard what you don't like. In fact, stay away if you are not prepared to listen to the voice of reason.

        And, by the way, you at least had (theoretically) a vote in your last elections. I didn't. I just have to live with the negative impact caused by your fucked up political system.

        So when I earnestly spend my time trying to provide you with information you may need, and suggestions---not as a Canadian, but as a citizen of the planet which your government virtually claims to own---you can either listen and engage in a dialogue, or you can ignore it completely, or if you must engage in self-righteous, ignorant twaddle, you can go fuck yourself.

        by thingamabob on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 06:24:54 AM PDT

        •  why should I listen to you

          when you call me names?  I didn't call you names.  Yeah, you're a big help, sure.

          Since you're a Canadian, here's a story for you: a few years ago I was standing in line at a London hotel waiting to check in when the guy in front of me turned around and struck up a conversation with me.  He was very friendly and wanted to talk, so we chatted for a while.  From his accent I thought he was American, so I asked him, "What part of the States are you from?"  He gave me an outraged glare and snarled "I'm not American, I'm CANADIAN!!" and turned his back on me.  He never spoke to me again.

          As Steve Martin used to say, "Well, ExCUUUUUSE ME!"

          So fuck him, and all the rude fucking Canadians who have attitude problems about America and Americans and can't resist any opportunity to get their digs in.  If you're one of them, fuck you too, with my compliments.  

          by hrh on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 09:45:44 AM PDT

          •  Let me see if I understand you

            "I know YOU are, but what am I?!!"

            Is that it?

            You see, if I'm not very much mistaken, your original reply to my post was not intended to be constructive criticism, just criticism. You weren't interested in why I felt that way, or whether there was an opportunity for dialogue, or perhaps a chance to persuade me that I had things wrong.

            No, you seemed interested in basically telling me to mind my own business and please shutup if I don't have anything "useful" to say.

            And, sure enough, your latest response contains a blanket criticism of all the rude fucking Canadians who blah, blah, blah.

            So really I didn't need to apologize for the invective. Seems like it was just what the doctor ordered. And, thank you, seriously, for clarifying that I can safely disregard your opinions on certain matters. I am sure you will treat me to just the same. More power to you.

            by thingamabob on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 11:37:38 AM PDT

            •  go back and read my post again

              In the post I responded to, you set up a straw man, this idea that we on this blog somehow don't want to fix America first, that we want to tell other people what to do.  (wow, talk about "projection"!)

              Now, if you didn't intend to convey that idea, then go ahead and clarify what you meant to say.  But the speed and facility with which you suddenly shifted to ad hominem namecalling indicates that you weren't interested in constructive dialogue, you just have a big chip on your shoulder about Americans, just like that asshole in the hotel.

              Please feel free to disabuse me of this notion.

              by hrh on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 11:44:21 AM PDT

              •  Okay, I can't stay mad

                at someone who uses the word "disabuse". But, I still have a few bones to pick over.

                Now, do you really think I would come here to troll around because I'm one of those Canadians who just can't stand Americans (or at least, has a chip on his/her shoulder)? That would be a profound waste of everyone's time. Not that it doesn't happen, but a quick read of what I post here should disabuse you of that notion.

                I think you fail to remember the post I was responding to with my first in this ever-sillier parade of responses. For your reference, here it is in a nice grey box:

                Thank you for speaking up on this. (3.66 / 12)

                Frankly I am sick to death of America being used as the scapegoat. I want to know why the US has to set the example for the rest of the world, and why Europe is such a follower instead of a leader if they are so stellar and judgemental.

                When reading the other diary, I was thinking about all the ties that France had with Iraq when they were refusing to go along with the US in Iraq.  They presented it as a moral/values issue acting as though they were above ever using military action, when really they had so much economic investment and greed invested in Iraq that they couldn't agree to go against Iraq even if they had wanted to.  

                And what is with the arms dealing with China.  Spreading weapons around the globe can no longer be blamed on the US now.  And the reason for all of this is greed, something that Europe has plenty of.  

                I personally can't believe the response to the Fuck America diaries. Owning up to the Us having a hard time now, and doing things to hurt the ret of the world is one thing.  Rolling around in your own guilt and spitting on yourself for hours at a time while relishing every min. of it is another. Half the comments are examples of self loathing.  We know the situation we are in, we know how we got here, we know the US has made major mistakes.  If Europe is all a fuss with disgust for the US, then they will have some internal review to face shortly.  How about taking some responsibility for what happens in a global society instead of sitting passively blaming everyone else.

                What up, bro? Here are your words:

                In the post I responded to, you set up a straw man, this idea that we on this blog somehow don't want to fix America first, that we want to tell other people what to do.  (wow, talk about "projection"!)

                Now compare the two. It looks, and looked, to me as though someone was basically saying, "get your own house in order before you start criticizing us, though we may be guilty of some stuff."

                My response was meant to convey the (reasonable?) idea that we are all, in fact, guilty to some extent, but that the biggest single obstacle right now to many things in terms of sorting out international problems (criminal court, role of the UN, global warming, landmines, nuclear proliferation, etc.) are the policies of the US Government. And, to be completely honest, it sounded a little bit like an American with a chip on his/her shoulder telling the rest of the world to bugger off until we are perfect enough to take you to task.

                So come on, show me where I'm wrong. I dare you to honestly review all of these messages and demonstrate to me that I'm the one who is being illogical or overwrought.

                Maybe you didn't deserve the spirited name-calling. But to be clear, the names were for effect, and they do not constitute an ad hominem attack. I offered compelling reasons for my disagreement, even if I used the word "nitwit" in addressing you.

                But hey, I appreciate you seeing this through a little further, and am hopeful we can come to some agreement on this.

                by thingamabob on Mon Mar 07, 2005 at 02:12:06 PM PDT

                •  I remember the post

                  by hopscotch?? and I agree with it wholeheartedly.  Particularly the bit that you bolded: &nbs