AAAAAARRRRRGH!!! 1 1/2 hours of typing just went down the drain thanks to session timeout. GRRRRR!
Ok, here's the whole thing in a nutshell:
Are you implying though, America's success and freedom is gained mostly or exclusively at the expense of others?
No, i don't think so. You had a huge landmass with a lot of natural resources at your disposal so you could concentrate on yourself for a long time. From what i remember from my history lessons the USA have been a self centered nation for a long time. That only changed when you could be threatened by military forces from abroad. (Correct me if i'm wrong)
Or is it that others just being "left behind" because their own policies or drive doesn't lead to their own success?
... or maybe because they just started to persue these goals a lot later than you did.
I think it all boils down to the way we perceive other nations. (I mostly talk about the german view here because that's what i'm most familiar with.) The USA is a nation we've been looking up to because of its radiating example of a stable democracy and free society although we never believed we should follow every trend from over there. Then again what we knew about the USA came from TV and other media, not from real live experience. I remeber a light feeling of disappointment when i found out that you didn't really live up to your own hype, that what we thought was America in fact was some of the extremes in the west coast cities. However this didn't cause me to sway to the opposite point of view that everything american is bad.
I remember reading a very intersting article written by an american who lived in germany for along time. He tried to explore the reasons behind the recent disharmonies between germans and US americans. He arrived at the conclusion that the roots of the problem lie in the success of the attempted social engineering of the allied forces after WWII. In an attempt to avoid the creation of another aggressive german totalitarian state they were too successful in teaching us to be anti-militaristic, anti-racist and anti-elitist. The nowadays consequences are a climate of being anti-anything, unwillingness to committ to a cause and unability to deal with the pressing problems of the near futere in a reasonable way. And the conclusion that something needs to be done about this fast or the consequences will be disastrous. Sadly, i don't have a link to an english version.
A major issue is the last presidential election in the USA, BTW. A common perception is that Bush is president although he did't actually win the election (perception, remember, not (necessarily) fact). By fighting the issue through in the courts instead of having another election run immediately he has (unknowingly) opened a whole can of worms in a large part in the rest of the wolrd. A sometimes encounterd point of view is that if the leading example of democracy doesn't honor its values what's the worth of democracy in itself? Blame it on the media, blame it on us being stupid germans, blame it on whatever you deem appropriate, the reputation of democracy has suffered (overproportionally) around the world.
Of course, I wouldn't say that the U.S. is squeaky clean in terms of its road to "success." (Just as with any other country / nation or successful person, for that matter.) I would reject the notion that our success is gained "mostly or exclusively" at the expense of others. Just as I would argue that capitalism in general isn't "the few gaining wealth and power at the expense of the oppressed workers."
The colonial era was not one of europes brightest moments. No ones hands are free of blood if you look in the past far enough. Therefore i'd suggest we abstain from any mud slinging on this account, it won't get us anywhere.
It becomes even more cloudy when you try and define "success". If other's don't value "success" in terms of economic welath / power (but something less tangible such as self-defined spiritual, artistic, or intellectual superiority or "rightness"), then why are others concerned if they are not as "successful" as defined by those terms?
Because they may view a society persuing material wealth as misguided or even evil if it tries to spread its views. They may even regard conquest of this other civilization as 'liberation'.
Not that i believe matters are remotly that simple regarding the current situation.
Er, this report was lodged by an Australian journalist. I'm not sure why you even brought up the Information Ministry?
