| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
On November 04 2010 10:57 trevabob wrote: oshit did you just group socialism, facism and communism as "essentially the same thing" sure they're the same... if you don't know what they are Most Americans that spew hatred of "socialism" don't know what socialism is. | ||
|
trevabob
United Kingdom350 Posts
On November 04 2010 11:08 koreasilver wrote: Most Americans that spew hatred of "socialism" don't know what socialism is. They know that it's evil and (even worse) unamerican though (y) | ||
|
clementdudu
France819 Posts
On November 04 2010 11:03 TheMonkeyMon wrote: I think problem no.1 is that people in the US at least gobble down whatever the media forcefeeds them. Fox New's "OBAMA IS SOCIALIST" propoganda, or the more liberal networks that potray all republicans as crazy people, there is no room for any compromise when you view your opponent as insane/evil. I won't comment on my own political beliefs, I just wish others would realize that sometimes compromise is neccessary, as is reasoned, rational debate. To Europeans: How big of an issue is money in your politics? In America, its honestly what it always comes down to. The rich want the conservatives in power, the poor want the liberals in power, and both sides will beat each other to death to keep their money. I can safely talk for France and say that although money is not completly irrelevant,it has no real power,either during or outside of election times. There's no such things as lobbies,parties get money from the government paying for their campaign. We dont have to go through the hassle of answering 20 phone calls asking for campaign money;) Donations to parties are of course legal,but so restricted that noone does it :o As for ads on tele/radio it's paid by the government for every party(even those with 0.1% of the votes) and they all have to get the same air time(we usually see 10+ ads in a row of 1m30 each) Oh and tv/newspapers/radio ads are illegal two weeks before the election day(not sure at all about the two weeks there). Edit:i should have read your post entirely,i thought you were talking about money in general in politics :o HERP DERP | ||
|
Xtar
79 Posts
On November 04 2010 11:03 TheMonkeyMon wrote: To Europeans: How big of an issue is money in your politics? In America, its honestly what it always comes down to. The rich want the conservatives in power, the poor want the liberals in power, and both sides will beat each other to death to keep their money. If so why do so many Americans vote against their own (financial) interests? I thought they did so because of moral issues and fear mongering. Isn't it the rich that are generally educated and the poor that aren't. And isn't it the educated that vote more for the democrats, which is a little bit less pro-business than the republicans? Isn't the reason both parties have been able to ignore the people on issues like health care exactly because they made other issues more important? There has to be more to it as in the US 10% hold 71% of all wealth. So if the rich all vote one way and the poor the other the rich would always lose. Somehow the rich must trick a lot of the poor to vote against their own interest even given the very limited political spectrum covered by the democrats and the republicans, who are compared to all political parties all over the world basically the same, except for style. If you ask me people in Europe vote more motivated by money than the people in the US. But there's always people from all class that vote for ideology even if it hurts their own wallet. Both on the rich and poor end. But I think the poor generally do it out of ignorance rather than altruism. | ||
|
Monsen
Germany2548 Posts
On November 04 2010 11:03 TheMonkeyMon wrote: To Europeans: How big of an issue is money in your politics? In America, its honestly what it always comes down to. The rich want the conservatives in power, the poor want the liberals in power, and both sides will beat each other to death to keep their money. In germany close to none. Campaign costs are covered by the state. | ||
|
darmousseh
United States3437 Posts
On November 04 2010 11:08 koreasilver wrote: Most Americans that spew hatred of "socialism" don't know what socialism is. I know what socialism is and i hate it even more because of that. Americans in general are distrustful of anything that involves the government handling our money. Even in the name of a good cause, most of the time all government tax dollars end up in someone else's less deserving hands (by less deserving i mean politicians not poor people). It's also interesting to note that americans are the most generous people in the world and donate more money through charity than any other nation in the world. We don't mind helping those in need, in fact we enjoy it. We just want to do it on our terms. | ||
|
bumatlarge
United States4567 Posts
They best part is half of me really feels this way. What meager existence will you Europeans claim in our shadow. Behold my cape of stars and stripes! | ||
Falling
Canada11581 Posts
On November 04 2010 10:37 SichuanPanda wrote: Until you've lived in Canada and seen that the exact same kind of mudslinging goes on in our politics I really don't think you're qualified to say what our politics is like. Canada gets all US TV stations I can see on a daily basis what your politics, my politics, and even two or three other major countries politics is. US does not get nearly as many CA TV stations - much less CA news stations. A similar divide in Canadian politics exists which can't really be seen unless you live here. Our sides of the spectrum though revolve mostly around spending, one side spends a lot, the other doesn't, and the other (third) party somewhere in the middle never gets voted significantly enough to win anyways. Besides when I said 'generally the same' I meant just that. I didn't mean the party systems were laid out exactly the same or agendas were exactly the same. While the power that the US Congress far exceeds the Canadian equivalent we do have two different legislation groups, the Senate and the House of Commons. These correspond to the US Senate and House of Representatives, respectively. We vote for our leader democratically and votes are tallied based on a number of different regions across the country, similar to a US state distict (we literally call them regions). Also like the US the winning party does not necessarily have to obtain 50% of the vote or more (however since the US does only have two major parties it basically means that the winner will be above 50% most of the time). So the particular interactions of Canadian and US politicians may not be the exactly the same, nor the method in which voting below the federal level occurs, however like I said they are generally the same. I would agree that structurally we are fairly similar and we are just as likely to mudsling as the Americans. (No holier-than-thou politicians here.) However, the tone of the politics is much different, particularly recently. There hasn't been rampant fear that commys are taking over the country since the Red Scares in the early years of the Cold War. Where are our Glen Becks, Hannitys and our Limbaughs? Closest we have is Don Cherry and he talks about hockey. They other one that baffles me is gun control. My dad owns 6 guns and hunts. I think hunting is a good thing. I'm against the long-gun registry in Canada. I could comprise and let handguns be legal (although I don't really see the point.) But automatic weapons as a right? Really? When the that right was established, they were thinking muskets, not a weapon that could mow down a crowd in a matter of seconds. I've debated guys that literally would not draw a line on how much was too much fire power in the hands of private citizen (automatic weapon, rocket launcher, tank, nuclear bomb.) All because of this notion that government could potentially become a dictatorship. This is obviously the more extreme view, but a lot of the gun control argument seems to be rooted around the notion that the government is one step away from a dictatorship. lol bumatlarge, truly epic. | ||
|
Almin
United States583 Posts
There's 2 parties: Republicans and Democrats. Republicans say they want tax cuts for the middle class, but they also want tax cuts for the top wage earners ie Millionaires and Billionaires. They say they are for the middle class, but they want to give tax cuts to the rich? And refuse to give to middle class until these millionaires and billionaires also get it. Republicans also refused to vote to force BP Officials to be under Oath. What reason can that be? They are paid by the lobbiests and big companies through campaign donations. There's a reason why 97% of all political donations to Republicans come from millionaires and billionaires and quite the opposite for the democrats. Who really cares about the middle class? Neither. Both try to get reelected Democrats: Paint Republicans as insane religious nuts, some are, but not all of them. As I'm in America, I literally saw campaign television ads every 4-5commercials for months by Republicans and Democrats but mainly republicans. Where are they getting this money from? Big companies that control them. | ||
|
McDonalds
Liechtenstein2244 Posts
On November 04 2010 06:09 domovoi wrote: Actually, the US never talks about politics outside of the US (I had no idea how parliamentary systems worked until I had to do a presentation on it "for work"). And foreign countries talk about US politics all the time, which is why US approval rates worldwide went up so dramatically after Obama's election. The US political system gets the most press coverage by far. Finally, that video was made in Taiwan, it's a little awkward to call it China. That's naive. Think about all the time US news spends covering the Iranian president, the situation in Venezuela, internal Israeli affairs, and so on. You don't really learn anything substantial from the coverage but it is there. People outside the US often watch US politics for the same reason people watch a show like American Idol. Or Cops. There is little substance to it but it is a form of entertainment with a lot of absurdity baked into it. It's almost like the US doesn't know how to have an election. And for someone far away the outcome has little impact so it can be enjoyed on a soap opera level. That's what it really comes down to. | ||
|
Trang
Australia324 Posts
| ||
|
SirazTV
United States209 Posts
On November 04 2010 10:21 stenole wrote: Odd things about American national politics from my perspective: - Only 2 relevant parties. - Both parties are far to the right of all political parties in Norway. - More person focused than party focused. - Religion, family life, religion more talked about than the issues. - Negative ad campaigns. - Enormous sums of money needed and spent on campaigns. - "Winner takes all" system when distributing seats. - Laws have all kinds of bagage attached to them in order to get them passed. Its funny but that is exactly what I find odd about politics in the US. (minus both parties being far to the right of all political parties in Norway) | ||
|
SirazTV
United States209 Posts
| ||
|
Swwww
Switzerland812 Posts
| ||
|
DarthXX
Australia998 Posts
During the Obama election I did do quite a bit of research into how the US political system works, and I have to say I hate it. I much prefer proportional representation such as they have here. The reason being, if you are only given the choice to choose between two parties, you effectively give those politcal parties power from the get-go, without them earning it. Then you have this insane fear of socialism, which I consider to be the one of the greatest things ever. The thing they had with Obama's healthcare reforms was especially telling, do you have any idea how shocked I was to find out that healthcare is not free in America? In every single other country I have lived, the government provides healthcare but in America it is run as a business! I was dumbfounded as to how anybody could oppose a bill that would bring healthcare to people who otherwise could not afford it. The prevalence of religion in politics is also very worrying to me as I feel govt/religion should never mix. In short, America's fear of socialism scares me as I feel they could benefit so much from these "evil views" also needs less religion in politics. Just my 0.02 | ||
|
ixi.genocide
United States981 Posts
On November 04 2010 06:32 Roggay wrote: I'm Swiss and often time US politics crack me up (or scares me) because I find it sometimes so strange and contradictory. IE. we have obligatory health insurance for a long time now and it works fine. When I see people in the USA militing against it, arguing that it doesnt work, I find it strange. When I see people in the USA calling Obama a socialist it makes me laugh, because in switzerland and many other countries in Europe, Obama would be quite far in the right. And there is one thing I will never understand : everyone (well or almost) can carry guns and then they wonder why criminality is so high (common... if no one carry them, then no one can shoot with them, seems intuitive and it works). But well, some things takes time to change. One of the best thing the USA have imo is Obama. In Europe he is, in general, very well thought of. Couple things. obligatory health care in smaller pop countries (yours is 7.6m to >300m) is easier to pull off, especially when you aren't dealing with private insurance companies (which I'm not sure if you aren't). Health care in america needs to be done with some manner of finese because there are many ways to exploit it and the overhead is simply rediculous. People that call obama a socialist are fear mongers, even if I agree with 99% of what they say (which I don't) fear mongering is something that I, and many people, cannot abide by. US politics have gone so far from what they were (because of compromise) that there essentially isn't 2 parties, there is a giant cluster**** where 2 parties should be formed. While most republicans believe in a preset of ideals their original standpoint was "LEAVE US ALONE and don't tax us"; Now it's "LEAVE MY GUNS ALONE and obama is derailing this country" and it is sad. I am conservative in views but wouldn't conform with the republican party because the face of the republican party seems to be racism and ignorance. Everyone that hasn't had a federal offense can legally own a gun (over 18 for rifles and 21 for pistols) and the reason why your intuition doesn't work so well for a society that already has plenty of guns is that IF YOU MAKE GUNS ILLEGAL THEN ONLY CRIMINALS WOULD HAVE THEM. You can't just wave a wand and have all the guns dissapear.... Obama is interesting, I didn't have a problem with him and thought of him as a positive sign of change but lately he has been choosing sides in moral and social issues that he doesn't need to get himself mixed up in. The mosque 3 blocks away from ground zero is a perfect example. | ||
|
Slaughter
United States20255 Posts
| ||
|
Choirdrunk
Canada131 Posts
First, foreigner opinion about U.S. politics tends to be incredibly superficial. There is a massive gulf between what the average foreigner knows about U.S. politics and what they feel they know. There are two reasons for this: media coverage and projection. Media coverage in other countries focuses on personalities and generalities, not policies. This isn't to say something like the Iraq war doesn't receive attention and analysis, but, if you asked 100 foreigners what the 2010 healthcare reform changes actually did, I'd bet you'd get 0 correct answers and a lot of "well, more people got healthcare/insurance." (Actually, if you asked 100 Americans, you'd probably get 99 who answered that way too). The media coverage generally paints the Republicans as corrupt and money hungry and evil and the Democrats as the good guys. There are many, many reasons for this including 1. other countries tend to be more leftist than the U.S., 2. Democrats tend to practice "soft" diplomacy and 3. the xenophobic element does tend to be stronger in the Republican party, which naturally engenders an adverse reaction. So, foreigners have this generally skewed silly portrait of a party that is basically evil that 50% of the country routinely votes for. A foreigner who is educated about the U.S. from their news shows, knows about as much about U.S. politics as IdrA does about threesomes. The second issue is projection. People in other countries tend to project their experiences on the U.S. political scene. Living in the Philippines, for example, a fairly corrupt state, people assume the U.S. works the same way. Now, clearly, there is corruption in the U.S. ... but it is nowhere close to as ubiquitous as it is in most of Asia. In many parts of the world, corruption is so endemic that, it seemed to me, you almost had to embrace it if you wanted any chance of success. The U.S. really isn't like that. Many of these "puppet master" theories (i.e., a couple rich guys in a back room are making all the decisions for everyone) as I like to call them revolve around projections that are not based on any evidence with substance. Third, foreign opinion is fairly skewed by the ideological divide. Other first world countries, tend to be left of center of the U.S. socially and economically. Consequently, they view U.S. politics as backwards since it doesn't conform to their notion of progress. Overall, I'd say the average college-aged foreigner knows as much about U.S. politics as a fifth or sixth grader in the U.S.. That being said, I'd love to see the answers you'd get if you asked Americans what they thought of, say, Swedish politics. 99 out of 100 would have no idea and the other guy may or may not get lucky based on whether the latest issue of the economist had a blurb about the country. | ||
|
Choirdrunk
Canada131 Posts
On November 04 2010 11:10 Xtar wrote: If so why do so many Americans vote against their own (financial) interests? I thought they did so because of moral issues and fear mongering. Isn't it the rich that are generally educated and the poor that aren't. And isn't it the educated that vote more for the democrats, which is a little bit less pro-business than the republicans? Isn't the reason both parties have been able to ignore the people on issues like health care exactly because they made other issues more important? There has to be more to it as in the US 10% hold 71% of all wealth. So if the rich all vote one way and the poor the other the rich would always lose. Somehow the rich must trick a lot of the poor to vote against their own interest even given the very limited political spectrum covered by the democrats and the republicans, who are compared to all political parties all over the world basically the same, except for style. If you ask me people in Europe vote more motivated by money than the people in the US. But there's always people from all class that vote for ideology even if it hurts their own wallet. Both on the rich and poor end. But I think the poor generally do it out of ignorance rather than altruism. Xtar, many Americans just have a different view of how the economy functions. They believe that egalitarianism, and the high taxes associated with egalitarianism, dissuade their best and brightest from producing as much as they could. Whereas I think many Europeans have a more zero-sum view of wealth. i.e., most Europeans believe a certain amount of wealth "exists" and its the government's job to divide it equitably. On a historical basis it's fairly difficult to argue that, in per capita GDP terms, the U.S. hasn't been way more successful than any other nation in wealth creation (a concept that isn't that popular in Europe). You could put the Scandinavian countries toe to toe with the U.S. on a per capita GDP basis but you'd have to ignore the fact that the U.S. spends 23% of its budget on military and Scandinavian countries tend to have significantly more homogenuous populations in order to make the contrast attractive. | ||
|
ixi.genocide
United States981 Posts
On November 04 2010 11:03 TheMonkeyMon wrote: The rich want the conservatives in power, the poor want the liberals in power, and both sides will beat each other to death to keep their money. See that's not true, That is a feeling, a belief and is propaganda. The poor want someone that is going to give them free stuff because they don't have stuff, the rich want their friends in power and the middle man most often wants less taxes and a good place to raise his/her family. Both sides have gone past beating each other to death over this issue, they are now bombing each other to death with public media. 90% of americans want the same thing, They want to keep their money, donate to charity, raise their kids in a safe environment and want their kids to have "The life they never had" or success (depends on what part of middle class you are in). The "Poor" aren't nearly as represented as some would have you believe, free food, money, healthcare and every other human service isn't free, it's a burden on the entire population. I was out of a job for 2 years, I collected food stamps and tanf; I was more than eligible for healthcare and I still don't believe that these services are constitutional or the mark of a great society. A great society is one that helps its fellow man, By that I don't mean that the government forces your hand to give bread to someone, it means that people in position to help others willingly does it to give back to the community. Welfare, tanf, snap etc- these benefits aren't proving america is a great society, they are forcing america to be a mediocre society. | ||
| ||
|
|
WardiTV Weekly
The PondCast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
Clem vs Lambo
Scarlett vs Cure
CranKy Ducklings
IPSL
Dragon vs Hawk
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
