Canada is a unique nation.
Canadians are not Americans, but we are quite probably the most Americanized people on the planet. So we have the advantage of being able to understand you without losing the perspective that comes with not being you.
This is the value of context.
Context is important when it comes to making decisions on how a country is to be governed. Yet, it appears to be the one thing many Americans desperately lack. It is a common complaint of non-Americans, that you all seem to think that the planet begins and ends at your boarders (You have no idea how often you are accused of “acting like you live in a fish bowl”).
Let me give you a quick rundown to some of the questions you are debating that can be answered quickly and easily with the value of context:
1) End Saturday postal delivery. It will save you millions and do you really need to get that Victoria Secrets catalogue before Monday?
2) Get rid of the paper dollar and mint a coin for God’s Sake. The rest of the world is already enjoying the savings and convenience, so should you
3) It’s a Two Dollar bill that replaces 2 of those paper singles you are carrying around. Again, saves millions. You got one, start using it.
4) Everybody else went metric in the 70’s. Get with the program for crying out loud.
You’re welcome.
Context helps you make the right decision.
But context isn’t just needed in domestic issues, this insight is especially important in the political realm. For Americans isn’t just important, it is vital; and this reason for this is simple: When you get it wrong, people die.
I wish this was hyperbole but it isn’t.
You got it wrong in 1928 when you elected Hoover and the result following the Wall Street Crash, was a collapse of the world economy due to an inept response from the White House. By 1932, the economies of the world were so bad, Hitler was appointed Chancellor to stop the Communists from gaining power by default in Germany. The Japanese militarists saw their chance and began expanding their conquests in China. These actions led inevitably to a war which saw 54 million people die.
It is uncertain that if Al Smith would have been able to stop the depression from happening, but given his progressive leanings and working class roots, it is reasonable to assume he would have taken more proactive steps to lessen the impact and depth of the depression and limited its global reach. It can be argued that had this occurred, Hitler would not have had the opportunity to advance to a level of absolute power that he was given.
I am not claiming that the Second World War was the fault of the United States. It is likely that war would have come regardless, but had the economies of the world not been so devastated by the depression, it is possible the response to Hitler and Japan would have been more resolute and effective.
You got it wrong in 1980 when you put Reagan into the White House and he decided to stake his political career on "stopping Communism is Central America".
Nicaragua. El Salvador. Thousands died and the region was devestated.
You got it wrong in 2000 when Bush II was allowed to take power. By 2012, 227,000 people had been killed as a result of the “war on terror”.
It is more likely that under a Gore Presidency, the 9/11 attacks would have been stopped, or failing that, that the reaction would have been more precise, targeted and the causality count significantly less.
The graveyards of the world are filled with the victims of American hubris; usually so the man in the White House would appear “tough” in the American media and to the American voter.
Like I say, not being American, but being as close to being an American as it is possible to be, gives you a special insight. It gives you context.
When you get it wrong, people die.
So as you approach yet another political cycle and the same arguments start anew, it becomes harder to sit on the sidelines and watch as you bicker and argue back and forth on whether it is better to “reward” Obama with another 4 years in office given his poor progressive record or if putting Romney in would be better as he would really screw things up for the GOP and give progressives a real shot at power.
I listen to the counter argument that No, it is better to go with Obama because he will appoint Supreme Court justices over the next 4 years, and do you really want that choice to go to Romney who would put in more Scalias and Roberts?
In all the arguing I rarely hear the reason that when you get it wrong, people die.
Please consider this simple question when considering on whether to vote and who to vote for in November; how many people are alive right now but who won't be by 2016 because Mit Romney was President?
Consider that question carefully, because when you get it wrong, people die.