What many people don't realize in the US, however, is that this anti-American sentiment and this view of the US was already like that for the rest of the world. With the publication of these pictures people outside the US are not suddenly coming to a realization that the Bush govt is bad -- they've known it all along.
I think the most important effect taking place right now is that many Americans are starting to question for the first time the lies they've been told.
The rest of us already knew.
Hmmm how do you install a thing that tracks the states your visitors come from? Nedstat tracks countries for me, but I never heard of states before...
My name is Victoria, and I am a sitemeter addict.
And, like Berube, I've promised myself that I will no longer care whether I am an adorable rodent or a flappy bird (lol I've also thought that no one can ever de-evolve like that).
So there. Recognition is a first step, isn't it? Now how do I cure myself from my blogging addiction? ;)
Actually I have to say I'm disappointed to note that none of the "big" leftist blogs have commented so far on the WTO ruling against US subsidies. For the first time a third world nation has been able to challenge a first world nation in Free Trade talks, and the WTO has responded by saying that the US does indeed violate international trade rules.
The ruling is only a preliminary decision, however, and could be reversed in June. If Bush decides to eliminate subsidies, however, he could lose major support from the Farm belt areas in the US.
There are many significant implications to this ruling. For the first time, first world nations could be forced to live by the same rules they impose on third world nations when it comes to trade (via the IMF etc)!
I'm surprised that neither Kos, nor Atrios, nor any of the other big leftists has chosen to blog about this.
Patrick, I thought maybe you might be interested in taking a further look (a href="http://new-world-blogger.blogspot.com/2004_04_25_new-world-blogger_archive.html#108308871547293781"my $.02 article on the WTO ruling). I got the story from the Financial Times, and I think it's worth a look.
[/rant]
I just think this is a far too important issue to be overlooked by the blogging community ;)
I don't know if I'd say I was depressed by what happened, but it certainly is unfortunate that people once again show that putting aside ethnic differences for a higher goal just doesn't come easily.
Once again, the fear of "difference" rears its ugly head in politics. Bringing in a Turkish northern Cyprus would not only be good for the island; it could show that Christians and Muslims can both be peacefully integrated into the EU.
Ivor,
(and I promise myself this is my last reply, ugh)
Atheists do not need to prove there is no God anymore than theists do. Theists belive there is a God, and therefore they know. Similarly, athesist do not believe there is a God, and therefore they know. Although many points in religion are based on reason (such as developing theological beliefs to a full, cohesive state), I think the ultimate decision of whether or not you believe in God is based on faith. You cannot ask anyone to prove or disprove the existence of God. If we say that atheists are illogical for believing without proof, then we also have to throw theists in that same sack, and we are all illogical.
Myerz,
(And now I guess I'm fully immersed in the religious debate, what have I been dragged into??)
It's funny you should say that, about a lot of Christians being witless sheep. I think that applies to a lot of people, regardless of their beliefs. A lot of people do not seem to need or care for a coherent moral foundation of their own, and would rather follow a prescribed one -- usually the one that comes in the cultural package handed down to them by their environment. If we go to Brazil, we see a lot of sheep-minded Catholics. We also see a lot of sheep-minded "spiritualists," pan-African orichas, Buddhists, etc. It's not that one religion in particular makes people more irrational -- although I've heard of some cults where the purpose is entirely to brainwash you (but that's another story).
I've come across some very intelligent, rational Christians, Muslims, Jews, atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, you-name-it in my experience. But even these people do not always care to develop their theological foundation to any great extent. Religion all too often has only a functional purpose in many people's lives, and that is what they need and that is what they get out of it.
The same can be said, however, of people's philosophical convictions. How many people do you know that have formulated intricate philosophical theories to understand their world, and act accordingly? Most people, when asked, have very marked opinions about ethical issues -- often contradictory and without a cohesive moral thread. My point, then, is to say that if most people cannot be bothered even to think about their life from a macro perspective, how can we expect them to have their theological convictions any more solidly? I don't think the sheep-mentality is a good thing, I really don't like it at all. But i do think it's a human, rather than a Muslim, Christian, or atheist condition.
One more note ;)
Atheism does not imply that we are the highest or the only forms of life in the universe. There are plenty of atheist scientists looking for life on Mars, aren't there? Atheism, by definition -- A-Theism -- means that one does not believe in God.
Ivor,
I had promised myself I wouldn't engage in the religious debate, but after reading your comment I do feel compelled to clarify one point ;)
(Btw I'm neither atheist nor agnostic, but the point I have to make is based on logic alone and does not necessitate a supporting theological theory)
Atheists need to KNOW and PROVE there is no God no more than theists -- whether monotheists or polytheists -- need to KNOW and PROVE there is a God(s).
What differentiates agnostics from atheists, to my understanding, is that whereas the former are unsure or skeptical either way, the latter are convicted in their BELIEF that there is no God. In the same way, theists believe that there is a God, but proof either way is something I have yet to come across -- hence both philosophy and theology have become as well developed over millennia as we find them today.
There is a very large difference between proving and believing. Of course, you could debate the theological ramifications of this forever. But the main point is that to dismiss atheism as illogical, when it can make sense from at least one logical point of view, is invalid.
Perhaps it can be considered illogical from a particular point of view -- but that does not make it illogical overall, and as such it cannot be disregarded by theological discussions.
"I’m entirely opposed to the kind of hand-wringing calls for cultural and political “civility” that always seem to presuppose that if the rest of us were just nicer to the wingers and fundamentalists, they’d be nice to us right back. No they wouldn’t. We’re clear on that."
Hmmmm...I think you're right on this one...but it reminded me a lot of the response I got to a recent post on anti-American sentiment I wrote lately, which actually got a lot of reaction from my Canadian friends...they argued pretty much along the same lines, that people shouldn't bother to be non-judgmental about Americans, when that's what Americans are with the rest of the world.
Needless to say, I disagree with them profoundly. I don't expect one single person to treat me nicely because I refuse to judge Americans as a people. I agree with you a lot in saying that if we are nice to those who disagree with us, they won't be nicer. So I guess this is just to say that I wouldn't make any claim to political civility based on the consequences of such an action, but on the principle itself ;)
Just a little comment about this side issue you brought up. I think you are pretty much right on concerning the religious issue.
I just love it that some guy asked the columnist whether he'd served in Vietnam -- that, of course, being the mark of a true citizen...of ahem...Canada? LOLOLOL
I even ended up blogging about it too :)
Rea wrote: (quoting another)"Since September 2001, entertainment visas are harder to come by in general, entertainers with visas are more likely to be denied admission for overstays in the past, and Cubans in particular are more likely to get their petitions/applications turned down."
Yeah, if there's one thing 9/11 taught us, it's not to trust elderly Cuban musicians who've been nominated for Grammy awards--a description which, as all good Americans know, fit all the hijackers (except those from Iraq).
--
Yes, more xenophobia, that is exactly what the US needs if it wants to provide the rest of world with more comic relief. It seemed to so enough already with the exaggerated reactions to the Superbowl episode (see Rivka's post)
Right along with the Lewinsky affair being the biggest media issue of the year back in the day, this is ludicrous. Great post, Rivka. And it's not just everyone outside North American laughing at the US right now -- Canadians and Mexicans are rolling on the floor right doubled up with laugher right now. It would be great if more Americans would speak up to let those outside the US know there is another version out there...
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2004 | 14 |
Total: 14 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Electrolite by Hlvictoria:
Show all comments by Hlvictoria.