> I want USA to do whatever it needs to be the top player
Good for you, but try imagine hearing this from a Chinese national.
"Whatever it needs" to do...
Good for you, but try imagine hearing this from a Chinese national.
"Whatever it needs" to do...
And every single country on this planet has baggage. I have people in my family who are living who remember what it feels like to be considered sub-human by British imperialists as they allowed famines. On the grand scheme of things, if we add up the sins and good deeds, the USA has done more to improve the lives of people who are here than other places. It is one of the major reasons my family and I immigrated here. Is it perfect? No. But it is a place where a bunch of different types of people attempt to build something together. Gridlock sucks, sometimes it feels pretty awful, but just speaking personally for myself there's nowhere else in the world where someone like me (with my skin color, religious preferences, etc.) would be able to go as far, or further.
For all its faults, the USA has
- elected an African American president twice
- fought itself and destroyed its own people and cities over slavery
- helped stop 2 world wars
- most of the top companies and talent
- created a sense of world stability where people for the most part chill the f out when they see and want $USD
And it has also caused some problems along the way, I'm sure you can name many of them. But again, in 2022, when I do a simple calculation of where I (with my own baggage and attributes) would most prosper, I can't think of another country. I have been to Japan, loved it there, but it isn't the melting pot that America is. Again these are just my opinions, as someone who immigrated to the USA and is proud to call themselves a US citizen.
This is a bit of a fallacy. The institutions/administration from top-to-bottom is important. For example, Scandinavia never had a black/brown head of state but still the police would not treat you badly like it happens in US. Yes, I have lived there.
Another example, India had head of state from all different religions but does not mean all is fine and clean.
The institutions are important - not the person.
PS: In principle, you as US citizen want your country to top dog. All fine. At the end if every country thinks they themselves want to unilaterally be top - conflicts happen.
At some point one needs to think universally - and establish a level.
Realistically, you have it backwards. In some areas, the education is fine. In many - probably the majority - it simply isn't and you'll be indebted for the rest of your life unless you are really lucky. We (Americans) pay teachers poorly and treat a number of students like criminals while punishing those same students in ways that they cannot get the same education as their peers. And this is after we've failed to make sure children have food and housing so that they can put effort towards learning.
"Lacking in some areas"... yeah. With a generous definition of some.
Interestingly enough, this is the same pro CCP argument but applied to the US.
I will say that the melting pot is true and that the US is one of the most immigration friendly places I've been to. (from a cultural side, not from a paperwork side). In other places you can be there for 20 years and never be considered a true citizen while in the US people would consider you a true American.
As an outsider, to me the American society doesn't seem like a sustainable one. And it corroborates the fact that so many Americans are emigrating out of America.
https://www.city-journal.org/school-shootings-horrific-but-s...
“the annual odds that an American child will die in a mass shooting at school are nearly 10 million to 1, about the odds of being killed by lightning or of dying in an earthquake”
But keep in mind, while Americans find it to be a commonality, it's rare to see news like this in other parts of the world: "...but students don’t need the active-shooter drills now conducted in over 95 percent of the nation’s schools..."
Active shooter drills? In schools? You folk live in a first world country but act like you are living in an active warzone
"Active shooter drills? In schools? You folk live in a first world country but act like you are living in an active warzone"
These things happen due to the same kind of fear mongering and statistical illiteracy you demonstrate in your comments. School shootings are horrible, but extremely rare. It would, of course, be better if we didn't have them, just like it would be better if we didn't have earthquakes, electrical storms, plane crashes, etc. but it's not rational to make life choices based on 1 in 10 million events.
You're also wrong about support for gun control. A majority of the US population supports stronger gun control. Unfortunately, in our political system, that's not sufficient to make it happen.
> A majority of the US population supports stronger gun control. Unfortunately, in our political system, that's not sufficient to make it happen.
Isn't US a democracy? If majority of the population supports stronger gun control, it should be easy to pass.
Anyway, I don't mean to put you on the defensive. I understand that you love your country.
Also, it's a big country. When you have a population of hundreds of millions, a lot of things that are extremely unlikely to ever impact an individual citizen will nonetheless happen on a regular basis somewhere in the country.
"Isn't US a democracy? If majority of the population supports stronger gun control, it should be easy to pass."
If only it were that simple.
"Anyway, I don't mean to put you on the defensive. I understand that you love your country."
I love some things and hate other things. I just think the discussion should be based on facts rather than emotion and hyperbole.
I agree that school shootings are a problem here and would like to see stronger gun control as much as anyone, but it isn't helpful to exaggerate the (very low) level of danger kids face in school.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_ma...
Like, for example, retake control of Taiwan.
https://eurasiantimes.com/perturbed-by-2nd-incursion-china-w...
China has unelected* leaders that at least in theory holds only Communist ideals.
While flawed, in a republic at least you get to vote for your leaders, and thus choose what ideals you like the best.
Of course republicanism or democracy does not preclude a country from committing horrible acts, but they are cleaned up much sooner, and those who are responsible for it are thrown out of office (and sometimes even into jail). Not so in authoritarian countries like China.
* You can technically vote in China, but due to its authoritarian nature only one party is allowed and you're expected to uphold the party line.
How so? Both parties are all in on the prison-industrial scam. Likewise for healthcare, etc. I agree that the US has a largely 'liberal' system, in the classical sense of 'liberal'. I.e. capital trumps human beings.
And you ignore the fact that the US imprisons a much higher percentage of its population than other countries. Part and parcel of the authoritarianism (which is only increasing).
Edit: To answer your claim that:
> “(...) the US imprisons a much higher percentage of its population than other countries. Part and parcel of the authoritarianism.”
No, it's not. Every guilty prisoner in the USA had a public trial with a lawyer before they were sent to jail. In other words they had due process which is the mark of a liberal democracy. On the other hand due process is constantly broken in authoritarian regimes. A great example is, again, China, where you can be "vanished" just for having the wrong opinion, if you're not simply sent to a re-education camp that is for all intents and purposes a modern style of concentration camp.
Before you even try, can the USA be accused of the same thing? Why yes, because it imprisons enemy combatants which are then subjected to cruel an unusual treatment, for instance at Guantanamo Bay (which is amazingly still open for business). But crucially the USA does not do this to American citizens, so while they act horribly authoritarian towards external enemies, they do not act authoritarian against their own citizens, not even towards domestic political opponents.
People online vastly overestimate the actual effect of money on political results, naturally disregarding all the donations made to candidates that lose and ignoring races where the lesser funded candidates win.
If Americans wanted a leftist government, they’d vote for it, simple as that. And yet even in the most left leaning states and cities in the nation , leftist principles have failed to gain much electoral ground.
-- Put a million Uighurs in camps
-- Persecutes followers of pretty much all religions --- Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Falun Gong, etc
-- Flat-out censors anything that offends them in the slightest
-- Puts whoever they want into detention with no kind of due process, from small-time activists to billionaires
-- Harvests the organs of (not previously dead) prisoners
-- Had drones peering into apartment windows during the latest COVID lockdown, broadcasting the literal message "control your soul's desire for freedom"
-- and of course is an autocracy in which Xi Jinping has absolute power
The USA is far from perfect but one thing we learned from Trump in 2016 and Bloomberg in 2020 is that money isn't everything in American politics. The parties do have major differences and bad actors can be held accountable.
I'm not American, but this equivalence that some people like to draw between the governments of China and the USA drives me crazy.
(Though viewing China as a full autocracy with absolute power of a single individual is extremely simplistic)
> (Though viewing China as a full autocracy with absolute power of a single individual is extremely simplistic)
It's overly simplistic, but less "overly" than it was 10 years ago.