America-An Evil Country?

[K. A. Pital]

I believe there is a moral difference between setting out specifically to wipe out a group, and expansion for expansion's sake, yes.

There may be moral difference in the intent, but not the result.

Prior to reading Fiasco I would have agreed with you. After reading it, well...I'm inclined to say that it is almost as if the Administration made the concious decision to screw up by the numbers.

The fact that they mishandled Iraq is something that we know post-factum. Note that indeed in history were examples of fast and rapid pacifying and re-building of countries, but such are very few. Iraq is just one example. To think that most interventions produce bad results because they're incompetently run... is kind of missing the forest for the trees.

Just the two.

One. The USSR was confined to it's continental borders and adjacent territories. It lacked power projection abilities and a blue-water navy. We were a non-contestant there. The other "two" could've been the British Empire but it no longer could attack remote territories after WWII due to decline of power.

I'm not sure what the gist and true intent of that phrase is, Stas.

Well, some people I've run into justify the US mistreatment of various ethnicities because they "threatened" the integrity and stability of the US or something else - essentially a crypto-racist claim.

You're speaking to a guy who thinks our foriegn policy should be conducted solely in the Western Hemisphere with few exceptions.

I'm a guy who thinks a country can only "conduct foreign policy" (if that's what it's called politely now) only with those countries which are on it's immediate border, and only if they are an immediate threat to said nations stability. Generally, I would even say that a country doesn't have military business beyond it's borders. The problem with America that it consequently increased it's arrogance to the point where it considers the whole _world_ as a theater or "sphere of interest" for it's operations.

I made add, Stas, that Russia was busy imposing similiar measures in it's territories on non Russians during the 18th and 19th centuries.

I have never said that the Russian empire did not commit evil. But I must again wonder why are you using the "tu quoque" defence.

If the worst thing the United States has done since the 1920s is dragging it's ass in granting the rights promised in the Constitution to segments of our population and invading Iraq, then we're ahead of the game

Why "ahead of the game", really? Many countries already abolished racism, and some were ardently anti-racist by that point. And invading Iraq - it seems you miss out a whole century from US history, eh? The US wasn't involved in other more or less evil actions in the XX century? Like, being the only country which deliberately used atomic weapons with a clear terror purpose? Churning out dictators and running coups and wars in Latin America? Iran-Iraq war mischief and other stuff? Bombing Vietnam indescriminately almost into stone age, with additional damage to adjacent territories? And that's just a very short list.

[Lonestar]

Oh damnit, I had a long response typed out, then I had to go do something, and now I don't know what I did with it.

Bottom Line:

I had a knee jerk reaction to what I percieved as a thread created for the sole purpose to bash America. I still think that was the original intent, but I will push the "I believe button" and assume it was seriously academic. I maintain that the evils America has perpetrated are no worse than our historical counterparts, and that the perception of evilness today is less "because the country is evil" and more "because it's unchecked".

I also had a long and rambling paragraph saying that the reason why the Soviet Union was mroe or less confined to it's border areas instead of overseas adventures(outside of the use of proxies), is that the USSR's neighbors were potentially more deadly then, say, Mexico, and there was a real need to keep the bulk of the boys home.


I could go further but I am beset by immense laziness, and the need to get on with work. I percieved this as a thread created solely to bash America, and reacted thusly. I agree that American has perpetrated many evils, but I disagree that it's evils have surpassed it's historical counterparts.

[K. A. Pital]

I also had a long and rambling paragraph saying that the reason why the Soviet Union was mroe or less confined to it's border areas instead of overseas adventures(outside of the use of proxies), is that the USSR's neighbors were potentially more deadly then, say, Mexico, and there was a real need to keep the bulk of the boys home.

The reason was that the USSR could not physically afford, supply, execute overseas assaults. That's all. Without a blue-water navy and the ability to constantly supply the war theater, any military adventure outside the immediate vinicity of the USSR is impossible. Period.

One could argue that _if_ the USSR was more rich, more powerful and had a stronger navy it would've done the same overseas assaults as the US does and strat-bombed countries on other continents into the stone-age, but...

But this is pointless alt-history fantasies - after all, if the British Empire was more powerful, or any other state, it would've behaved that way, and then they would've been the point of discussion.

Now there is no power that could seriously hope to "check" on the US or a power to which the US would listen. The US is indeed unchecked, and it achieved this status with a clear will to mess with the politics of foreign states all over the world that has historically formed during the last century.

[NecronLord]

I suppose if you want to get anal about it, America has existed longer as a continuous nation-state than some of the worst offenders; many of which don't really exist at all anymore. Britain is the only Evil Empire I can think of that's outlasted us- as in still exists.

Rome. China. Persia... I could go on.

[Lord of the Abyss]

Please. The American Indian genocide was the by product of European and American expansion, not an end goal of itself.

It was an intended goal. The idea that it wasn't is historical revisionism.

The sin of this administration is not the Iraq war, but the gross mishandling of it.

A war of pure aggression, with no justification is most certainly evil; the fact that most Americans supported it for so long is one reason why I consider America evil as a group.

I believe there is a moral difference between setting out specifically to wipe out a group, and expansion for expansion's sake, yes.

It's the results that matter, not whether or not it was a priority. If someone is killed out of bigotry, or killed to get them off land you want, or worked to death as a slave, they are still dead. This attitude that it matters why populations are slaughtered is a major source of America's evil behavior; it's no different than the people who thought it was better for our pawns to slaughter political dissidents in South America and Asia in the name of Capitalism and Democracy, than it was for the pawns of the Soviets to slaughter them in the name of Communism. The dead and tortured don't care why they were killed or tortured.

I had a knee jerk reaction to what I percieved as a thread created for the sole purpose to bash America.

I thought the intent was to bash me.

[Lonestar]

I thought the intent was to bash me.

Plenty of that going on in existing threads.

[CarsonPalmer]

The intent of this thread is not to bash YOU, its to debate out a one-liner claim that's too much of a tangent to continue in the original thread.

Now, America's actions towards the Plains Indians are undefensible and obviously wrong, racist, and vile. However, the same action had taken place across the continent in acts committed by the British, Fench, and Spanish. There is very, very little criticism of the British Empire, which is in fact often praised. Nobody posts claims that the Spanish Empire is the most evil country ever to blight the world. America seems to getting the short end of the stick here.

Now, its also unfair to paint America as an evil force unto the world. After all, we did fight a war to end slavery, and made major contributions to the Allied victory in WWII. It would be equally unfair to refer to Great Britain as evil on the whole.

Now, to the claim that America has never changed governments, and so still has to bear the blame of past crimes, this is also unfair. The nature of the American system is such that the entire form of government need not be scrapped for the same people to be knocked out of power. Its not fair to claim that the current American government has a serious connection to Andrew Jackson and the Trail of Tears, unless one also accepts that Britain has also not substantially changed its government.

[kheegster]

Just a couple of comments...

There is very, very little criticism of the British Empire, which is in fact often praised. Nobody posts claims that the Spanish Empire is the most evil country ever to blight the world. America seems to getting the short end of the stick here.

No, there's a significant amount of hand-wringing in the UK over the legacies of Empire (although paradoxically quite a bit of pride as well). The UK generally treats its former colonies with more courtesy than it does other countries (although these days EU > Commonwealth) to the extent that I can vote in UK elections simply because my country was a former British colonoy.

Now, its also unfair to paint America as an evil force unto the world. After all, we did fight a war to end slavery, and made major contributions to the Allied victory in WWII. It would be equally unfair to refer to Great Britain as evil on the whole.

You fought a war to end slavery in your own country. Virtually all other countries had abolished it by then.

[wolveraptor]

First, "everyone else does it" is not a valid excuse, as most people learn while children.

Can you fucking read? Just where did I say that it was an acceptable justification?

Second, you assume there are countries lacking in evil intentions. Perhaps now - but historically ? I believe that for the majority of recorded history, there were no significant non-evil organizations. Good individuals, no doubt, but the history of nations and religions and the wealthy is the history of monster feeding upon monster, while the innocent and guilty are crushed underfoot.

That's my entire point, you mouth-breathing idiot. The universality of "evil" countries makes the term rather worthless. Calling America evil is not really a meaningful assertion.

[Covenant]

While it's easy to bash America, it's partially our fault for claiming to be a shining city on the hill while also fucking around in things that are not our business. Seriously though, evil? Not by any worthwhile metric. For America as a whole to be considered an evil country would be a childish sort of analysis that ignores the history of brutality that exists in every nation.

This is why it really is silly to harp on just about any nation's past deeds, and you also can't blame the people there today for the acts of their great-grandparents. If you go back in time, my ancestors woulda' been Europeans, not Americans, but I can hardly be held accountable for the acts of the British Empire, can I? Then why should I answer for the American Empire?

The current administration does suck ass. And yes, lotsa' people died in the past. It's true, and it's happened everywhere. We should never apologize for anyone's atrocities, but there's a point at which criticizing someone over them just seems retarded. I have no idea if America could be considered less evil than another world power, given a few immensely malicious foreign policy decisions throughout the 1950's to today. But it's certainly no more evil today because of what it did in the past than any other nation. It's viciousness and cruelty in this era is the fault of the people in office now, and we shouldn't excuse them for full responsibility, or stupidly punish the people for things they haven't done.

[Lord of the Abyss]

Just where did I say that it was an acceptable justification?

When you claim we can't call America evil if other countries are just as bad. That's precisely the same as saying "But everybody else does it, Mommy !", except for the scale. In other words, if Nazi style fascism took over the world, and every country was controlled by Nazi-style governments, would Nazism suddenly no longer be evil ? That is, in effect, what you are claiming.

The universality of "evil" countries makes the term rather worthless. Calling America evil is not really a meaningful assertion.

America is what it is. The virtues and vices of other countries make it no better, and no worse.

[CarsonPalmer]

To Kheegan, I wasn't speaking about the world as a whole, just this board in particular. Further, the country as a whole can't bear the blame of an issue so divisive a war was fought over it. There was significant opposition to slavery across the country, that was suppressed for various reasons. And yes, it is a shame that we were late to party on that issue.

Wolveraptor expressed what I wanted to say in a way better than I could, so I'll stand by that.

[Darth Raptor]

Rome. China. Persia... I could go on.

Holy hell, am I not using proper English or what? Modern Italy != Rome. PRC != dynastic China. Modern Iran? Not Persia. Modern United States EQUALS the USA that killed all the injuns.

[CarsonPalmer]

Why does Modern US=US that killed all the Indians? Does modern Britain=Britain that fought the French and Indian War? The form of government did not need to change because there is nothing inherently wrong with the government.

[Darth Raptor]

Why does Modern US=US that killed all the Indians? Does modern Britain=Britain that fought the French and Indian War? The form of government did not need to change because there is nothing inherently wrong with the government.

Yes, Britain has also maintained coherent continuity of government- which is why I used it as an example. Again, as noted, most of the other big offenders no longer exist.

Knee-jerking seems to be murder on reading comprehension, so I'll clarify: Frank asked what, if anything, about America's atrocious past stands out in this shitty, shitty world. I simply pointed out that America has not changed hands in a massive revolution since its inception. Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, the Soviet Union and the Roman, Russian, Persian, Ottoman, Holy Roman and all the other empires are no more; replaced by governments too young to have racked up that big of a body count.

[Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba]

Rome. China. Persia... I could go on.

Holy hell, am I not using proper English or what? Modern Italy != Rome. PRC != dynastic China. Modern Iran? Not Persia. Modern United States EQUALS the USA that killed all the injuns.

He's saying that the Persian Empires, the Imperialist Persians, and the Roman Empire all outlasted America in their own forms and easily outclassed it in terms of horrors wreaked.

[Darth Raptor]

He's saying that the Persian Empires, the Imperialist Persians, and the Roman Empire all outlasted America in their own forms and easily outclassed it in terms of horrors wreaked.

Oh, okay. I never meant to suggest the contrary, but I can see how it could read that way. My bad.

[K. A. Pital]

There is very, very little criticism of the British Empire, which is in fact often praised...

...by racist imperialist nuts. Seriously, people who praise the British Empire have something clearly wrong with their head. The fact that there's little criticism of the British Empire only speaks volumes about people, nothing more and nothing less. It's always easy to criticize someone outside the anglo-Saxon culture, right? But heaven forbid people note on the notorious misbehaviour of Britain or the US - nooo.

And to say that it's unfair to portray the history of these countries as evil forces is sort of... strange. Somehow no one objects when people portray other countries as epicenters of world evil incarnate - but heaven forbid the US government is called evil.

I wonder why, really? Does it bother people that a democratic government did evil, which means they bear some part of responsibility for this evil? Perhaps that. Those who live in undemocratic states, empires, etc. at least have the excuse of their government acting totally contrary to their will, or far beyond it.

America hardly has any such excuse.

[Darth Wong]

It is a serious case of hyperbole to declare that America is an "evil nation" if it is implied that it is unusually evil relative to the entirety of human history. It most certainly is not, and has in fact set a shining example compared to many past empires.

Having said that, one can say that America is in denial about its history. Just look at the absurdly understated figures for the Indian genocide that were quoted earlier in this thread. Do you really think the early settlers did anything to slow down the spread of smallpox? They knew exactly what it was doing to the natives, and in fact they actively encouraged its spread. Remember Amherst and the "donations" of infected blankets to Indian tribes?

Biological warfare is not a new development, and the Native American death toll is vastly greater than what the apologists are willing to admit. Counting only direct casualties in battle is the height of dishonesty.

[18-Till-I-Die]

There is very, very little criticism of the British Empire, which is in fact often praised...

...by racist imperialist nuts. Seriously, people who praise the British Empire have something clearly wrong with their head. The fact that there's little criticism of the British Empire only speaks volumes about people, nothing more and nothing less. It's always easy to criticize someone outside the anglo-Saxon culture, right? But heaven forbid people note on the notorious misbehaviour of Britain or the US - nooo.

And to say that it's unfair to portray the history of these countries as evil forces is sort of... strange. Somehow no one objects when people portray other countries as epicenters of world evil incarnate - but heaven forbid the US government is called evil.

I wonder why, really? Does it bother people that a democratic government did evil, which means they bear some part of responsibility for this evil? Perhaps that. Those who live in undemocratic states, empires, etc. at least have the excuse of their government acting totally contrary to their will, or far beyond it.

America hardly has any such excuse.

It think you hit the nail on the head dude.

It seems to me that a lot of people dont want to admit they were helping this along. People say that you dont support the government it's not your fault but also at the same time inaction is a kind of tacit agreement with the actions of yoru government. SOMEONE has to have the balls to stand up and call something wrong, and some do, but so many dont and it's becaus ethey want to enjoy the benefits of their society without worrying about what it's doing abroad.

There was a line in Hotel Rowanda that, in my mind, pretty much describes the average American's point of view perfectly. Paraphrasing...

"People look up from their newspaper in the morning, see on the news that thousands are dying. Then they say "Oh how terrible" and go back to reading the paper like nothing happened."

Appathy towards the evils around you, and the evils of the past, are what causes more evil to happen. Look at Germany, after WWII they literally outlawed even the mention of Nazism in their country, but here in America oh, God forbid that someone suggest you outlaw something just as evil like the Klan! "You're oppressing them! You're trampling on their civil rights!" oh boo muthafucking hoo. And God help you if you suggest something like reperations for slavery, or the displacement of the Native Americans, or anything of the sort. You're practicing 'reverse racism' if you even, a little bit, feel guilty that these thinsg happened. Everyone rushes to find excuses "But--But--But THEY were doing it too!" is the most common also "It was a long time ago, standards of good and evil change" as if either of those even remotely resembles a valid rebuttal.

No one really wants to admit that they are part of the suffering as much as the ones who caused it. That they benefitted their whole lives from it, continue to benefit from it, and that their children and grandchildren will benefit from it for generatiosn to come. People prefer to distancethemselves from it and blame it on some individual, ignoring the very real, and in most cases blatanly open, public support for ALL of these things. The Indian Holocuasts, slavery, the Cold War, Iraqi, all if it was openly supported by the people not just the government. Ignoring this only compounds the problem.

[NecronLord]

He's saying that the Persian Empires, the Imperialist Persians, and the Roman Empire all outlasted America in their own forms and easily outclassed it in terms of horrors wreaked.

Indeed. At least, comparatively, they lacked the highly sophisticated means of death-dealing and poverty-inducing the US has, but did pretty impressively with what they had. Of course, Persia's probably not truly deserving of a place there, as the Ancient Persian Empire (though like a vampire, it comes back from the dead) only lasted about two hundred years. So you've outlasted them.

But yes, the USA has many, many centuries to go before it's the longest-lasting 'evil empire' in world history.

...by racist imperialist nuts. Seriously, people who praise the British Empire have something clearly wrong with their head.

That they do, but it's pretty much ubiquitous here. Niall Ferguson, for example, looooves the British Empire, and thinks all the Darkies were much better off when the loving English feet walked all over them (An abstraction, yes, but not much of an exxaggeration) and he gets a TV show on one of the top four stations over here to pedal this stuff.

'British Empire, force for good'

[Stofsk]

'Exxaggeration'? Oh Necronlord, no. No.

You're from the UK, how can you get the words wrong? Shame. Shame, on all Necrons everywhere.

[Bounty]

Just a thought - Belgium has existed as a continuous state longer than America, and its practices in the Congo far outstrip anything the Americans did.

No we haven't. The country was still Austrian territory when the American Revolution happened and it wasn't until 1830 (after being part of France and the Netherlands) that independence was declared. That's 177 vs 231 years.

You're right about Congo, though. Using severed hands as currency wasn't exactly a high point of civilization.

[Rogue 9]

I would just like to interject to point out that the American government undergoes revolution every two, four, and six years. One doesn't have to go about shooting people to revolve the government.

[K. A. Pital]

That they do, but it's pretty much ubiquitous here. Niall Ferguson, for example, looooves the British Empire, and thinks all the Darkies were much better off when the loving English feet walked all over them (An abstraction, yes, but not much of an exxaggeration) and he gets a TV show on one of the top four stations over here to pedal this stuff.

Niall Ferguson? Idiotic american rightwingers get screentime too, and sometimes even shows. "British Empire, a force for good" - thanks for sharing this. Unique insights into the fucked-up mind of a fanatical right-wing mouthpiece. I honestly want all those idiots to be turned black and then sent off back a few centuries via time machine to a colony of their beloved Empire to feel "the power of the good". Fucking morons.