Is it possible to see America as it is and not through rose colored glasses...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

Is it possible to see America as it is and not through rose colored glasses or not with a jaundiced eye?

America has blood on its hands; slavery, the destruction of the American Indian, Jim Crow, appropriation of other people's lands. But what other empire doesn't ? Building an empire ain't beanbag.


There are a lot of empires that acted worse.

Imagine you were the best looking, strongest, richest, and smartest guy in high school. You could end up being an insufferable asshole. That's the position America has been in for much of its history. Maybe it could have acted better but it could have certainly acted worse.

[marym625]

1. I'm sorry but what is the point?

Because we weren't worse we shouldn't see things as they are?

What standard should we hold ourselves to? We didn't use the nuclear bomb after WWII so we're good to go?

This is just unacceptable to me. I am shocked.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. We should see thing as they are but in context.

The question to me is would other nations with similar power have used that power more humanely?

[marym625]

4. Why isn't the question

What did we do wrong and how can we make sure we don't do it again?

That's kind of like comparing siblings and being pleased that the one only beat a person rather than killing someone like the other did

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. Three prisms or lens in which to see America or any other empire

Prism One

-Rose colored glasses

Prism Two

-A jaundiced eye


Prism Three

-Without really any lens at all...


Of course, we have done a lot of really nasty things, and should try not to do the again.

[marym625]

12. I'm sorry,

I just don't understand how looking at it this way is productive.

I guess that's just me. Good luck with your post.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

15. Thank you.

To clarify I'm not asking you or anybody to condone bad conduct by a person or a state.

My question really is would others have acted differently.

[merrily]

27. I am missing the point of that kind of hypothetical question.

Sheer speculation is the only way to answer it. That being the case, everyone is going to conclude what he or she is already pre-disposed to conclude.

[Android3.14]

2. Depends on who is looking

Anyone claiming to see the "true" America is as unreliable as the person claiming to see the "true" message of God. A appreciate your message, though.

[LWolf]

5. And your word choice makes a point.

"Empire." For better or worse, empire is not good for people or the planet. Empire is not the friend of liberty or equality. Empire is not a vehicle to express empathy or good will.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. I wouldn't dispute the fact we're an empire.

[LWolf]

8. Neither would I.

And that's why I tend to have that jaundiced view you also mentioned.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. A jaundiced absolute or relative view?

I would put the US and England in your garden variety empire category and Imperial Japan, the former Soviet Union and NAZI Germany in , for lack of a better word, "evil empire" category.

This can be revealed in the way those who were once subject to their rule and no longer are feel about them.

[LWolf]

11. I'm not really a believer in evil.

In arrogance, hate, ignorance, fear, and greed, yes. I think all of those apply to all empires, to one degree or another.

Greater or lesser "evils?" Empires aren't good for people or the planet regardless of where they fall on that "greater or lesser" continuum.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. I tend to agree

Nations are like individuals and they are the result of all the decisions that brought them to where they are. Could America have decided to use it more power more benignly in this instance and that instance? Of course but many of us are where we are because of those decision that America made that were anything but benign.

[LWolf]

21. Maybe it was inevitable.

Whether as part of the British Empire, or the new nation under our Constitution, our country started and grew by taking territory and resources from others.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. The Native Americans were hunter gatherers

The Native Americans were hunter gatherers. They didn't want to be confined to a parcel of land. They were bound to have a challenge to hang onto the land.

Trying to take it away was regrettable but understandable. But saying you were noble in doing so is not understandable.

[LWolf]

26. Yes. nt

[Bluenorthwest]

18. Evil is a word meaning profoundly immoral and malevolent. Belief has nothing to do with it. It's not

a religious term.

[LWolf]

23. I wasn't speaking from

a religious pov. I think the concept of evil, as in general use, is simply inaccurate.

I would categorize the conditions of profound immorality, of malevolence, as mental illness rather than "evil."

I guess "evil" might be a symptom of mental illness; I just prefer more specificity.

[alphafemale]

9. It's Complicated. nt

[leveymg]

14. "There are a lot of empires that acted worse" - really? Give us an example of another

one that has ALL these features:

* founded in Continental genocide,
* built on racial slavery,
* colonized countries across two oceans,
* developed and used the atomic bomb,
* repeatedly invades, pulverizes and occupies countries with oil in the name of freedom.

You know what, America IS exceptional.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. The Roman Empire, the Soviet Union, Imperial Japan, and NAZI Germany.

The latter two wreaked more havoc in a decade or so than the United States could have ever dreamed of.

[leveymg]

19. In terms of numbers killed to establish, build, expand and maintain the American Empire, We're #1*

Indigenous population killed, (95% mortality, 1500-1900) - 20-25 million
African Slaves who died during capture and Middle Passage - 2-4 million
Number of foreign civilians killed ("excess mortality&quot by US forces and US-armed proxies during wars since 1945 - more than 2 million

I do agree that during World War Two, the Nazis and Imperial Japan killed by far the largest number of civilians in modern history.

*The World War Two civilian death toll, particularly in China and Russia, are staggering, as many as 15 million Soviet civilians billed by German and Axis forces; meanwhile, some estimates for civilian deaths during the Japanese occupation of China, Indonesia and Indochina and the Philippines range upward of 50 million. WW2 mortalities below broken down by military deaths and total military and civilian fatalities: http://www.nationalww2museum.org/learn/education/for-students/ww2-history/ww2-by-the-numbers/world-wide-deaths.html

Deaths by Country

Country


Military Deaths


Total Civilian and Military Deaths

Albania


30,000


30,200

Australia


39,800


40,500

Austria


261,000


384,700

Belgium


12,100


86,100

Brazil


1,000


2,000

Bulgaria


22,000


25,000

Canada


45,400


45,400

China


3-4,000,000


20,000,000

Czechoslovakia


25,000


345,000

Denmark


2,100


3,200

Dutch East Indies


--


3-4,000,000

Estonia


--


51,000

Ethiopia


5,000


100,000

Finland


95,000


97,000

France


217,600


567,600

French Indochina


--


1-1,500,000

Germany


5,533,000


6,600,000-8,800,000

Greece


20,000-35,000


300,000-800,000

Hungary


300,000


580,000

India


87,000


1,500,000-2,500,000

Italy


301,400


457,000

Japan


2,120,000


2,600,000-3,100,000

Korea


--


378,000-473,000

Latvia


--


227,000

Lithuania


--


353,000

Luxembourg


--


2,000

Malaya


--


100,000

Netherlands


17,000


301,000

New Zealand


11,900


11,900

Norway


3,000


9,500

Papua New Guinea


--


15,000

Philippines


57,000


500,000-1,000,000

Poland


240,000


5,600,000

Rumania


300,000


833,000

Singapore


--


50,000

South Africa


11,900


11,900

Soviet Union


8,800,000-10,700,000


24,000,000

United Kingdom


383,600


450,700

United States


416,800


418,500

Yugoslavia


446,000


1,000,000
dividing bar
World-Wide Casualties*

Battle Deaths


15,000,000

Battle Wounded


25,000,000

Civilian Deaths


45,000,000

*World-wide casualty estimates vary widely in several sources. The number of civilian deaths in China alone might well be more than 50,000,000.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. IMHO, we treated indigenous peoples pretty shabbily but we were pikers....

IMHO, we treated indigenous peoples pretty shabbily but we were pikers compared to the Japanese and Germans. It's unfathomable to
me the horror the Japanese unleashed on other Asians .

And tens of millions died in Stalin's mass collectivization and over hundred million died in Mao's Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution.

My goal wasn't to exonerate America for its prior bad acts or continuing bad acts but to ask if any empire would have behaved differently given the environment it found itself in.

[leveymg]

43. I think most of us agree that the American Empire exists, and that we are not an exception to the

general rule that mass murder is an inherent part of all Empires. We can differ about the details and relative lethality of Empires.

To put a subjective stamp on it, I am not saying that we are the most evil empire in history, just that we aren't really altogether different from the others. I don't get any pleasure out of that judgement, but I believe it fits the facts.

[edhopper]

17. I have a problem with this claim

"Imagine you were the best looking, strongest, richest, and smartest guy in high school."

All we are is the strongest. The rest is American exceptionalism bullshit. And looking at America through rose colored glasses, as you say you don't want to do.

[merrily]

28. I have trouble imagining I'm a guy. And, are assuming a white guy?

[edhopper]

29. Well

America is a White Guy. Who would doubt that?

[merrily]

31. For one, the US Census Bureau.

[edhopper]

32. No

Not who are Americans. The country itself acts more like a White Guy than any one else.

[dissentient]

22. That is a pretty low standard

"Well, we only dropped two atomic bombs, we could have dropped a lot more and killed millions. Yay, us!" With that kind of standard, no wonder so many American's have the America, fuck yea! mentality.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

25. I guess that makes us the "Not as bad" genocidal empire.

"Patriotism is the passion of fools and the most foolish of passions." Arthur Schopenhauer 

[merrily]

30. Does it, though?

"Patriotism is the passion of fools and the most foolish of passions." Arthur Schopenhauer

I do feel protective of America in some way. It's almost like I am about my family in that, I can complain about my sister, but don't you diss her to me. Ad I am sentimental about its more prominent rivers and mountains, etc.

I cannot abide jingoism. A woman on another board I used post on said that only members of the military were patriots. All else was nationalism. I don't know if I agree, but it was food for thought.

I am not sure I understand what this thread is about. Am I supposed to well with pride because Germany once behaved worse? I just don't get the goal.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

34. I'm fond of rivers, mountains, forests, etc. But, I'm not enthused about killing for them.

Or, grabbing more of them from other people.

I find the idea of killing for something as nebulous as "Love of country" more than a little repulsive. In fact, it was my time in the military that persuaded me that Schopenhauer was right.

The OP smacks of "America, right or wrong" or "America, Love it or Leave it". Which leads to rationales for damned near anything. Our torturers aren't as bad as Nazi torturers, our massacres aren't as bad as Stalin's. My-lai wasn't as bad Lidice so we can overlook it.

“Patriots always talk of dying for their country but never of killing for their country.” Bertrand Russell

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. If you think what I suggested is tantamount to "America, Love It or Leave It."

If you think what I suggested is tantamount to "America, Love It or Leave It" I assure you my view on the sweep of American history is infinitely more critical than the lion's share of our fellow citizens and every man who has occupied the White House including it's current occupant.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

37. Good. But, inferring that we are "not as bad" as other empires is ingenuous.

[jwirr]

36. Yes, it is like saying that one killer is better than another because one killed less than the other

I also think the question should come down to why our leaders want empire and most of us could care less? I hate the idea that we think being any kind of empire is good. Greed rules and regardless of all the stats about who did what to whom one empire is no less greedy than another.

[merrily]

38. I questioned whether it actually makes us the less evil empire. I'm not at all sure it does.

Sounds like a possible Cawfee Tawk topic for discussion, at the very least.

[jwirr]

40. Neither am I because we are very good at hiding the truth from the people. They leave a lot of room

for doubt.

[merrily]

42. Maybe, because we were so large and powerful and rich, we had less need to do certain things.

Just a word or two from us, just an array of our battleships floating by your nation, spoke volumes and got results. Plus, we were able to buy a lot of what we wanted from people.

If we felt a need to do more, would we have done it? I think we would have.

We practically wiped out First Nations. Sure the numbers weren't huge, but the percentage of the total population that we wipe out was pretty big. World War I. Hiroshima, Nagasacki--and WWII was all but won by then anyway, I'm told. Abu Ghraib. Drone Tuesdays. We do what we think we have to do. And then some.

So, are we the less evil empire because we can scare people and buy things? Or are we less evil because we just won't do certain things?

As I said, it might be a good topic for Cawfee Tawk.

[guillaumeb]

33. Interesting premise.

Let me begin with a joke/question:
What is the difference between Canada, The US, and Mexico?
Answer: The US has nice neighbors.

The perception issue might be related to how close you are to the object being perceived. Similar to the 3 blind men and the elephant parable.
If you have only lived in one place than you have no basis for personal comparison. And if you live in the Death Star you are rarely the attacked. The US has not been attacked by another nation since 1812, and that attack was a defensive response to the US attacking Canada. Yet the media/political narrative is that the US is a nation under siege from a variety of enemies who "hate us for our freedoms" in the words of Emperor Bush the Lesser.

I think the question should be: Why an Empire?

[McCamy Taylor]

39. Empire equals stealing the labor of other people for your own gain.

So, by definition, we are a criminal enterprise. I guess how you judge "empire" depends upon how you judge criminals in general. If you cheer for the criminals then you should be good with the US. If you think the baby should be allowed to keep its candy, you probably think that our nation is pretty fucked up.

[jwirr]

41. And don't forget steal their resourses.