Is America Really That Bad?
Is America Really That Bad?
Been seeing a lot about how the government passes shitty laws, lot of mass shootings and expensive asf health care. I come from a developing nation and we were always told how America is great and whatnot. Are all states is America bad ?
You're viewing a single thread.
No, it's not nearly as bad as depicted.
The USA, for all its faults, remains the standard against which other countries measure themselves (and find themselves lacking). That's why every embarrassment and mistake gets blasted across the international media.
That’s why every embarrassment and mistake gets blasted across the international media.
Do you speak languages other than English fluently?
the standard against which other countries measure themselves
What are you basing this on?
What are you basing this on?
As I explained, the international newsworthiness of any American embarrassment and shortcoming.
Do you speak languages other than English fluently?
Why?
Are you going to compare your country favorably to the US on that point?
They're asking because you're probably stuck in a media bubble based on the fact that you simply cannot read the opinions of people outside of the US's sphere of influence.
One wonders they don't just come out and say so.
One wonders why you won't answer.
Because it's not a sincere question asked in good faith. It's just another attempt to evade addressing anything I actually say in favor of insulting my intelligence.
No, I don't speak other languages fluently. I speak some Spanish and a little French, and I can cuss you out in Japanese. But English is the only language I speak fluently. And if you were half as sincere as you no doubt are going to claim to be, you'd have realized that I NEVER SAID I AGREED WITH THEM. I only pointed out that they find THEMSELVES lacking.
I answered the OP's question honestly and accurately to the best of my knowledge, understanding, and perceptions. Which is WAY more than you or any other respondent has done.
So, go ahead. Mock me for only speaking gasp one language! It doesn't make me wrong.
Imagine for a second that you speak Chinese. You find yourself on a Chinese forum and a Chinese person explains that China is the country against which other countries measure themselves and this is why they are always attacking or criticising China.
You then ask this person if they speak anything other than Chinese, because you want to know if they're basing that opinion only on Chinese media.
But instead of answering the question, and perhaps acknowledging they live in a media bubble, they instead choose to repeatedly avoid answering it, then type out a very long and defensive rant with capital letters.
What would you think of that person?
What would you think of that person?
I'd think they're wrong. And I'd spend my time explaining why.
But I wouldn't take their opinion personally; I wouldn't be upset by it; I wouldn't feel compelled to question their intelligence, morals, ethics, or motives. I wouldn't complain that they're being unfair, chauvinistic, or sheltered.
I'm asking because I want to know what you're basing your opinion on.
I direct your attention to my original post.
This is very chauvinistic.
Please explain how I'm incorrect.
You gave an opinion that can't really be called "correct" or "incorrect." It's just chauvinistic.
Ah, what a great example of a thought terminating cliche, a statement that does what it says to save you from cognitive dissonance and nuance. You are clearly using chauvinistic as a pejorative, so you need to either justify how they're wrong or take it back and stop muddying the waters with your empty ideological language.
To be clear, I don't necessarily agree with op's statement. The US as a developed nation clearly has more opportunities and advantages than developing nations, but there are other developed nations that meet and sometimes beat the advantages the US brings. I'd argue the US is at least in top 3 of being the most successful nation in diversity and global influence, but other nations have better welfare programs, housing policy, and cultural aspects imo.
You're reading very far into my use of a word. I used it because its meaning is very applicable here. It's not "empty ideological language." It means something similar to "patriotic," though I didn't use that word because for some reason in the US patriotism is considered to be a good thing.
This user seems to think the US superior to all other countries. The word's definition certainly seems to apply:
Militant devotion to and glorification of one's country; fanatical patriotism.
Prejudiced belief in the superiority of one's own gender, group, or kind.I agree you used chauvinistic to mean that, but you then followed it up by saying that you didn't have to justify why what they said is wrong. You do. It's also not the case that what they said was definitionally chauvinistic, although I'll let that slide because it was something similar enough.
Suppose it was the case that one nation was in every way better than all other countries. Shouldn't the citizens of that country be proud of that? Beyond pride, shouldn't they do everything they can to spread their glorious system to the world and bring prosperity to all? That doesn't necessarily mean wars and colonialism, that simply means all soft power efforts to implement systems that show themselves to work. I think the answer to this hypothetical is this nations citizens should feel pride and should spread their system.
The key point here is the United States isn't better than every country in the world, thus Americans shouldn't feel such extreme pride about their country. However, the United States is pretty good. I think some form of pride / patriotism are justified for Americans and even forms of soft power to implement effective policies are justified, but this answer is impossible to reach when you throw out all feel good thoughts about nations as chauvinistic.
This user seems to think the US superior to all other countries
I said no such thing.
Short memory, you said:
The USA, for all its faults, remains the standard against which other countries measure themselves (and find themselves lacking).
How to interpret that sentence:
- The USA has its faults
- Other countries compare themselves to the USA
- THEY find THEMSELVES lacking
How not to interpret that sentence:
- The USA is actually superior.
That's a cop-out. You've accused me of being a chauvinist. Either you have a reason for that or you don't.
If you do, spill it.
If you don't, then you're just hurling insults.
The USA, for all its faults, remains the standard against which other countries measure themselves (and find themselves lacking).
This statement - do you not see how that's an incredibly arrogant and patronising thing to assert?
Please explain why I'm incorrect.
"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence" (Hitchen's razor), you made the claim.
Actually, I explained my reasoning.
You're incorrectly assuming that something has to be incorrect to be chauvinistic.
Chauvinism is defined as "excessive or prejudiced support for their own cause or group". Excess and prejudice are incorrect bases for an opinion.
And if I'm not wrong, then what is your objection?
I am not going to debate over semantics with you.
You already started.
Well, for one, when compared to other countries, the United States is pretty consistently lacking no matter what aspect of it you're measuring. I wouldn't exactly call that a standard. Maybe a minimum standard?
Could you summarize which datapoints you'd like to hilight?
This is a summary.
I can read Wikipedia anytime. I'm here for a discussion.