Guest Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Your right...we are visible by some everly liberal anti war citizens who feel we do tons of damage to the Middle East...OK lets stop buying oil and see how poor they get. They have poor natural resources to sustain themelves other than oil and they survive thanks to the west and China. However we complain about human rights issues in the Middle East(as in women not being able to do anything that men can in many countries..genital mulitation and God knows what else) and we are seen as insensitive to culture and hypocrites for wanting to limit freedom by not allowing men to kill their wives for simply going out to eat with a man. I think we are far more sensitive than most. I do think we do tons of things wrong but for the most part outside of destroying the environment...good is done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 offense74, sure, "U.S.A. is number one!" Like I don't hear this myth of "American exceptionalism" repeated a more than hundred times a day. It's part of that great ideology behind the United States hegemony. I personally think this sort of nationalistic pride and cultural chauvinism is a large part of the problem. BTW, I don't recall anyone talking about censorship. The film 300 is a consumer product that one purchases by buying a ticket for admission. In this way, not supporting the film is like pharmakon's analogy to veganism. loveliberate, would you pay admission to a neo-Nazi rally or a Focus on the Family conference for the same reason you're willing to attend 300? These forms of "melodramatic propaganada" are extremely influential, but I don't buy into the argument that one needs to support them with attendence and paid admission in order to counter them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 The makers of 300 aren't trying to get us to kill everyone in the Middle East the same way Nazis want us to hate those that are different. These cases are completely different. As for offense he's speaking as a non-American recognizing reality. I don't like it either but no matter what we do we've still wound up the most powerful nation despite the fact that we rely on others that could simply no longer help us and try to screw us over...however they don't because they know they need the US. Its not something I like but its the way it is. I don't have pride in this fact and I like it when our dollar does poorly against the Euro but it will only get so bad due to the Euros reliance on the dollar...same with currency(meaning everying) in the rest of the world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offense74 Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 offense74, sure, "U.S.A. is number one!" Like I don't hear this myth of "American exceptionalism" repeated a more than hundred times a day. It's part of that great ideology behind the United States hegemony. I personally think this sort of nationalistic pride and cultural chauvinism is a large part of the problem. I don't think I know anyone that doesn't dislike the US politics. Alot of Swedes (and I belive other Europeans as well) have a picture of Americans that isn't overwhealmingly positive. You must know this to be a fact?! So is hate different and acceptable when the haters agree with your views? I believe this have caused a myriad of problems in the past. I don't think Americans are different from anyone else and my impression from when I was there is that the US is actually one of the most diverse countries in the world when it comes to culture. Not so with the countries that critiques the US the most. I believe this is the main reason why the US still stands and the others fall.I too have alot to say about American politics. Bush is a moron first springs to mind. It's not at all perfect but it becomes somewhat tiredsome to listen to the constant resultless whining from everybody.BTW, I don't recall anyone talking about censorship. The film 300 is a consumer product that one purchases by buying a ticket for admission. In this way, not supporting the film is like pharmakon's analogy to veganism. Yeah, sorry about me pulling the censorship card, I should have listened better. I agree with you on supporting what you believe in and not paying for what you don't believe in. I believe that if the world were filled with more passionate people (like you) we would be alot better off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 Yeah our politics stink and so does Bush is terrible but we're even worse for making the mistake twice...but when you compare Bush to let say Kim Jung Il...Bush is an angel. With the exception of maybe the Afgan(maybe even Egyptian but probably not) and Jordanian President, Bush may also be more ethical and compassionate than the rest of the leaders in the Middle East. This fact sickens me. It stinks to say it but its the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loveliberate Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 loveliberate, would you pay admission to a neo-Nazi rally or a Focus on the Family conference for the same reason you're willing to attend 300? These forms of "melodramatic propaganada" are extremely influential, but I don't buy into the argument that one needs to support them with attendence and paid admission in order to counter them. I have no intent on paying to watch 300 & I didn't pay to watch Moore's film either. I would definitely consider laying down some cash to infiltrate a Neo-Nutzi/FOTF event in order to gain up-to-date intelligence on their activities, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now