Why are Americans so Patriotic?

[PizzaSHARK]

Well, the Weimar Republic was democratic wasn't it? the Reichstag Fire Decree and the Enabling Act of 1933 brought about a state of emergency: it wiped out constitutional governance and civil liberties. Hitler's seizure of power (Machtergreifung) was permissive of government by decree without legislative participation. These events brought the republic to an end: as democracy collapsed, a single-party state founded Nazi era.

Long story short, Democracies can fall, given a Crisis where the people are desperate to feed their families ETC ETC. people are almost willing to do anything. Perhaps if the 2nd Amendment was an option to the German people in 1933, Hitler wouldn't have ever steamrolled Europe.

That's certainly possible, but we've had a great deal of technological advancement between 1933 and now. Hell, the Nazi army used the kar98k as its service rifle - a bolt-action rifle. Body armor more or less didn't exist then, communication and transportation weren't all that advanced, and it wasn't until the tail end of the war before we started seeing tanks and other armor that were anything even vaguely similar to modern armor.

That's kind of the point everyone's trying to make. The bit about resisting tyranny may have made sense in the past, but technology has advanced to the point that rifles are probably not an effective deterrent to tyranny at this point. Maybe if private citizens were allowed to own LAWs and you could buy a Bradley at the local Cadillac dealership...

- - - Updated - - -

It really depends on the conflict, the ROE, and the environment.

If a military convoy were to roll into a neighborhood ALA Mogadishu style, those men with small arms may be at a advantage if they are entrenched, have decent cover, and employ quickly assembled roadblocks.

Anyway, im not going to argue military tactics with you. At the end of the day, I believe it is not only the right of Americans to fight against a tyrannical government, but our duty.

Sure, and at least you served so you can claim you followed up on those ideals. To the rest of those loudmouths that never served yet talk about fighting tyranny - go hop your ass onto a plane and go help those people fight ISIL out there. You want tyranny, there's your fuckin tyranny - now go help them shoot it.


I just don't see how a thousand angry rednecks with hunting rifles will amount to absolutely anything useful in terms of resisting a tyrannical government. They would almost certainly be branded as domestic terrorists and have public opinion against them.

[Berengil]

At the end of the day, I believe it is not only the right of Americans to fight against a tyrannical government, but our duty.

What if they don't agree that something constitutes tyranny?

Person 1: " That's a tyrannical action for the government to take!"

Person 2: " I disagree. It seems perfectly reasonable under the circumstances."

[PizzaSHARK]

What if they don't agree that something constitutes tyranny?

Person 1: " That's a tyrannical action for the government to take!"

Person 2: " I disagree. It seems perfectly reasonable under the circumstances."

Sort of what I keep driving at when talking to people that think the tyranny thing is important. They always just seem to assume that public opinion will be at least neutral, if not in their favor. But in all likelihood, any group of people seeking to "resist tyranny" will just look like a bunch of fucking lunatics to the average person and very likely might end up swinging those average people in favor of stronger gun control if they were ambivalent about it beforehand.

Hell, Person 3 could be "I agree it's a little unethical but I don't think it's worth getting worked up over." Neither Person 2 nor Person 3 would be likely to support any sort of aggressive or outright violent resistance by Person 1.

[Shadowferal]

The SCOTUS is the final arbiter of what is constitutional, not a soldier.

Military law is very different from civil law. (Military Tribunal is the final arbiter in that regard)

Poor people in the US have air conditioning, indoor plumbing, PS4, XBOne, wide screen TV, broadband internet, a car, washer and dryer, etc. It might be new and it might not be of the same quality as rich people, but they have it.

Hate to break it to you but I used to be one of those poor people. As such I don't have air conditioning, PS4 (wtf is that?) no TV, broadband (still on dial-up) or washer/dryer (Laundromat down the road) And indoor plumbing is part of regulation of building codes. (Yay regs)

What is your definition of poor? Because you seem to be confusing "poor" with "not as rich as the rich folk", if what you say is true then nobody in America is poor at all. The definition of poor is "lacking sufficient money to live at a standard considered comfortable or normal in a society." The description you have given sounds pretty comfortable in any society to me.

Many people here have no clue about the poor in society. Being born in a slum is a choice, and the word "homeless" doesn't exist./s

If they had to live in it they'd be screaming differently

[May90]

Sort of what I keep driving at when talking to people that think the tyranny thing is important. They always just seem to assume that public opinion will be at least neutral, if not in their favor. But in all likelihood, any group of people seeking to "resist tyranny" will just look like a bunch of fucking lunatics to the average person and very likely might end up swinging those average people in favor of stronger gun control if they were ambivalent about it beforehand.

Hell, Person 3 could be "I agree it's a little unethical but I don't think it's worth getting worked up over." Neither Person 2 nor Person 3 would be likely to support any sort of aggressive or outright violent resistance by Person 1.

Some people even consider existence of state itself as tyranny; they believe that no power group should have a right to control people's lives in any, even the most minor, way. Most of them, of course, think that everyone else is brainwashed sheeple, but that people's eyes can be opened. If such a person were to consider rebellion against "tyranny", they might be so deep into their beliefs that they could seriously expect almost everyone to side with them.

If the government, indeed, becomes oppressive, involving things like power usurpation, silencing of critics, etc. - then, of course, a rebellion is just, and is quite likely to work. But, chances are, at this point, regardless of whether people have personal guns or no, army will side with them (especially since there are laws preventing the army from shooting at civilians for, pretty much, any reason), and the government will go down anyway.

[Hammerfest]

Infestation of leftists? What's that supposed to mean?

What it says.

[May90]

What it says.

You need to clarify it still! Do you mean the people who are waging war against Santa, maybe?

[PizzaSHARK]

What it says.

What it said is nothing of value. What do you mean, "infestation of leftists"?

[Deleted]

Well, the Weimar Republic was democratic wasn't it? the Reichstag Fire Decree and the Enabling Act of 1933 brought about a state of emergency: it wiped out constitutional governance and civil liberties. Hitler's seizure of power (Machtergreifung) was permissive of government by decree without legislative participation. These events brought the republic to an end: as democracy collapsed, a single-party state founded Nazi era.

Long story short, Democracies can fall, given a Crisis where the people are desperate to feed their families ETC ETC. people are almost willing to do anything. Perhaps if the 2nd Amendment was an option to the German people in 1933, Hitler wouldn't have ever steamrolled Europe.

Perhaps if Weimar Republic wasn't a degenerate shithole where "art" was watching people in theaters literally shit on themselves, there wouldn't be need to destroy it.
People don't like degeneracy.

[Hammerfest]

You need to clarify it still!

Yeah no, I don't. I really don't.

- - - Updated - - -

What it said is nothing of value.

Then why are you so concerned about it?

[Vynny]

Well for starters you said America is the wealthiest country. It is not the wealthiest country. If you measure that in terms of total GDP, yes. But if you take the population into account it is not the wealthiest country. In other words, there are other countries in the world where the average person in that country makes more money than the average person in this country.

Another way to measure the greatness of a country is by measuring the happiness of its people. Again, the USA is not number one here. You could also measure a country by the health of its people. America again falls short. You could measure a country by the average intelligence. Once again, America is not number one.

Now, if the only way you measure the greatness of a country is by it's total GDP and military power, then yes. The USA is number one. But many would argue that that's no way to measure the greatness of a country and I respect those people's view points.

That said, yes I am American born and raised. Have you not heard of Milwaukee? And yeah, I love this country. It is my favorite country. But it is arguably not the greatest country. And by saying that it is the greatest and there is just no denying it reinforces the negative stereotype which many Europeans seem to have. That stereotype being that Americans think too highly of themselves, which is basically the whole point of this thread in case you missed it.

IMO, the greatness of a country is the summation of all those metrics you mentioned or in other words; it's the end result of all of those things put together. You can have a very healthy, well educated, happy population and still have a crappy country with no power on the world stage and no influence whatsoever. Remember back to the 2007-09 financial crisis. That originated in America, but the effects reverberated across the world so strongly that it caused a global financial crisis. The greatness of a country is not determined by any one of the factors that you listed, but the power and responsibility that came with that standard of excellence. The USA is such an economic Goliath that that the whole world shakes when it stumbles, the USA's military is so strong that a few missteps can lead to a massive change in the global political landscape, the loss of US academia would significantly hinder progress for the whole of the world, without the USA's massive pharmaceutical's industry the medicine and treatments that other countries use wouldn't be nearly as advanced nor plentiful. You can say that American's aren't the most educated, but US colleges are some of the best in the world and attract applicants from all over. You could also say that America isn't the healthiest nation in the world, but most medical advances are developed in the USA from new medicines to diagnostic technology to physical treatment techniques, most of these originate in the USA.

Onto the whole stereotypes among Europeans thing. I could care less honestly. America is the leading super power and the rest of the world is dependent on it in one way or another, so tell me how I think too highly of America. The socialized healthcare systems (which I am damn jealous of) that many European countries are so proud of could not fund the pace of medical advancement that America does, so while we're worse off with our current healthcare system, it benefits them immensely to be able to buy our technology without having to directly sustain the cost of R&D. European universities are equals to American ones and as such aren't really dependent on them in the way they are with our pharmaceutical industry, but the loss of American universities would be the loss of a valuable partner to European universities. The only NATO member that currently has it's military up to standard is the USA which makes European countries dependent on our military might for protection right now. Our economy is closely tied to the world's economy and whenever our economy takes a hit, the rest of the world takes a hit as well. In a lot of ways, the USA is like the new Rome and if it falls in a quick enough way, the ensuing vacuum left behind could cause a dark age to occur and that's what I'm measuring greatness by, the weight that a countries actions carry on a global and historical scale, and there is no country that can effect the world in the same way that America can in so many different ways. Sure Russia and China could shake up the global political landscape with their military might, but they couldn't effect the world in the same way as far as academia and medicine go, but China could cause a lot of waves economically. The loss of European academia would be a major hit, but it wouldn't cripple global academic advancement; whereas, the loss of American academia would hinder global academic advancement simply because the European system can't handle the same international enrollment levels that the US system can. I mean, the number of international students in Europe is about the same as the USA despite having almost double the total population. There's no country that comes close to the USA in medical advancement, so the loss of that would be huge. Overall, I'm measuring greatness by the amount of impact one country can have on the rest of the world, and the country that has the most ability to impact the world is the USA.

[Aori]

Poor people in the US have air conditioning, indoor plumbing, PS4, XBOne, wide screen TV, broadband internet, a car, washer and dryer, etc. It might be new and it might not be of the same quality as rich people, but they have it.

All those studies that say the best countries are cold, with lots of white people and oil income, I don't buy it. Just the weather alone would keep the majority of Americans away.

From that list I have a AC window unit for my bedroom, I only use it when I sleep if I have too. I have internet because well it easily pays for itself. I have indoor plumbing. The rest of those things I don't have nor can I afford them.

[Maximus Testiculos]

Being patriotic is not a bad thing.

[Judgedredd]

cause patriotism is a virtue of the vicious (i.e. the stupid). Nuff said.

They are so in denial they don't want to call it nationalism. What kind of a country are you Yanks running (or not running) exactly?

[Vash The Stampede]

There's a stark difference between northern Americans and southern ones. The ones down south are very Patriotic and love guns and freedom. The ones up north tend to be more open to the world. A lot of it is also propaganda. We are so programmed to love America, that its become comical. Worst health care in the world? Doesn't matter cause Murica is da best. If you don't think so then I'll shot you with my freedom gun.

[PizzaSHARK]

Yeah no, I don't. I really don't.

- - - Updated - - -



Then why are you so concerned about it?

You expressed a sentiment and then refused to clarify it when asked to elaborate. Why say something if you aren't willing to support it or even explain what you meant in the first place?

[Hammerfest]

You expressed a sentiment and then refused to clarify it when asked to elaborate.

No "clarification" or "elaboration" was necessary.

[PizzaSHARK]

No "clarification" or "elaboration" was necessary.

Except it clearly was, because I wasn't the only person that had no idea what in blazes you were talking about. When you say crazy shit, people usually want some clarification so it sounds less crazy.

[Hammertimee]

Dunno about any of this.

[josykay]

Well, the Weimar Republic was democratic wasn't it? the Reichstag Fire Decree and the Enabling Act of 1933 brought about a state of emergency: it wiped out constitutional governance and civil liberties. Hitler's seizure of power (Machtergreifung) was permissive of government by decree without legislative participation. These events brought the republic to an end: as democracy collapsed, a single-party state founded Nazi era.

Long story short, Democracies can fall, given a Crisis where the people are desperate to feed their families ETC ETC. people are almost willing to do anything. Perhaps if the 2nd Amendment was an option to the German people in 1933, Hitler wouldn't have ever steamrolled Europe.

I doubt that, since the Weimar Republic didn't have a working democratic government anymore during it's last days and has lost the support by the population. The majority was held by the radical left and right parties (KPD und NSDAP), with both activly fighting against the SPD. Especially the KPD considered the SPD being "Traitors of the revolution" and started multiple large street battles against the police and therefore the democratic government. In addition every larger party already got their own armed paramilitary wing (KPD had the Roter Frontkämpferbund, NSDAP the SA and even the SPD hat the Eiserne Front).

The Weimar Republic was a mess, and wiith none willing to defend it it would have lost, no matter what. Even though many people didn't directly support Nazis, they usually didn't support the Republic, and were mostly either far left or monarchists.