[Politics] Why is the world's opinion different than America's?

[Venant]

There are quite a few people in this country who are terrified of dangerous foreign concepts like 'science.' We have a Republican candidate who mocked climate change in his acceptance speech at the Republican convention; which is ridiculous now that we are having '100 year storms' every year and parts of the east coast now look more like the surface of the moon than cities.

[Zhangfei]

Stop using socialism inaccurately. Europe is not socialist. Period.

Much of Europe is socialist. Using dictionary definitions rather than political scientific and philosophical theory is idiotic, reductionism at its most banal and mindnumbingly stupid.

[Deleted]

Much of Europe is socialist. Using dictionary definitions rather than political scientific and philosophical theory is idiotic, reductionism at its most banal and mindnumbingly stupid.

Europe uses a lot of Socialist policies, but the most accurate description of Government systems in Europe would, I feel, be 'Social Democracy'.

[Flatspriest]

Personally, I would want the candidate that the rest of the world did not want us to have in office since that means they are either scared of him, or want the one they do since he will cower down to them.

[Zhangfei]

Europe uses a lot of Socialist policies, but the most accurate description of Government systems in Europe would, I feel, be 'Social Democracy'.

I would agree, but social democracy means a significant amount of socialism. Saying Europe has *no* socialism is just idiotic.

Nye Bevan called the NHS a huge socialist step forward and I agree.

[anthemm]

Much of Europe is socialist. Using dictionary definitions rather than political scientific and philosophical theory is idiotic, reductionism at its most banal and mindnumbingly stupid.

Why are people like you so hostile towards others whose opinions differ from your own?

Here's the New York Times:

"FRANCE has elected its first Socialist president since 1988 and then given the Socialist Party and its closest allies a whopping majority in Parliament. But how Socialist is François Hollande? And what does it mean to be a Socialist these days, anyway?

Not very much. Certainly nothing radical."

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/su...pagewanted=all

Here's Forbes: "But rather than implement actual changes to the system, both voters and politicians like to create the illusion of reforms and security. The reality is that this is fundamentally an effort to create a feeling of reassurance that the current system can be upheld without any serious cutback, sacrifices or changes.

So is there really any hope for reforms, rationality, courage and capitalism in a welfare society? The answer is no, not under the current leadership. Some neighboring countries have pursued more responsible policies in recent years, notably Sweden and Finland. In a benchmarking of best practices, both countries have a more efficient use of money in the public sector, better value for money in education and health care, fewer persons permanently placed on social welfare and a more friendly rhetoric towards business, growth and job creation. Both of these countries must be considered traditional social welfare states, but at least show some degree of moderation in their socialist practices.

So if there is no hope for reforms of the welfare society, the next question must be whether capitalism can exist or co-exist in the long-term in a social welfare state. Essentially, the answer has to be no. A social welfare society that wants to embrace and benefit from some form of real capitalism in the long run will need to: set very stringent parameters for the amount of welfare available to its citizens as a percentage of GDP; set a maximum limit for taxation and government debt levels; secure strong fundamental incentives written into a constitution; and, secure basic negative rights for its individual citizens.

In addition, it will need to embrace a different rhetoric and give up on equality of outcome as a key objective. It needs to welcome, encourage and praise large contributors to the economy rather than vilify them and berate them for populist purposes. It needs to demand responsibility from the citizens for their own economic situation and be very firm on abuse or exploitation of public support or services. It needs to stop victimizing large groups of the society and stop pricing them out of employment through minimum wages and similar initiatives. It needs to stop its politicians corrupting the democratic process through bribing particular voter groups to gain power.

According to the 2012 Economic Freedom of the World report, America’s economic freedom has declined so greatly that it has plummeted to 18th place, even trailing behind Denmark. Now more than ever, America’s capitalistic society is threatened by burdensome government and a bloated entitlement state. Increasing amounts of regulations continue to come down the pipeline, making it harder for entrepreneurs and small businesses to create value.

Growing up in Denmark, I’ve seen this picture before. If America doesn’t want socialism its people must wake up and heed the lessons being played out in counties around the world – like Denmark.. If America doesn’t want socialism it must seek politicians and policies that allow the individual to have more liberty and freedom. If America doesn’t want socialism it must act now. But America must first answer the questions…. Does America Want Socialism?"

Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin...oesnt-want-it/

Now, if you're going to tell me these websites are reactionary, or pro-capitalist, or be highly offensive towards me again, I'm just going to ignore you.

[Endus]

The term ‘socialism’ has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state Communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammelled workings of the economic market. The socialist parties that have arisen in most European countries from the late 19th century have generally tended towards social democracy

According to Dictionary.com, socialism is defined as:

1.
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
2.
procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3.
(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

Stop using socialism inaccurately. Europe is not socialist. Period.

Are there unions that have joint ownership of their plant, or other co-ops? Those are economic socialism, which is the definition you're citing. Credit unions are another example. A "standard" bank is capitalist, a credit union is socialist. That's the central difference between the two.

And then there's social policies, another facet of politics where "socialism" is often, correctly, used. This has nothing to do with economic socialism, it has to do with social-justice and social-welfare programs, like welfare, universal health care, unemployment insurance, disability, etc.

So yes, pretty much every country in the EU and NA are socialist to some degree. There's some slight variations on how much, but they aren't remotely as significant as people make them out to be. Even the US is pretty significantly socialist, both economically and politically, and has been for decades.

[Zhangfei]

Why are people like you so hostile towards others whose opinions differ from your own?

Because stupid opinions that waste my time generate hostility. As I've said before, if we're going to discuss socialism then I would like to discuss it using political scientists and philosophers, not dictionary writers and journalists.

[Puremallace]

I've never heard of Ron Paul being realistic. I've heard of him being idealistic.

Ron Paul would have been a damn good president in 1970. The entire world is run on credit and he wants to take us back to the gold standard? First question is where is all this gold to cover the sheer amount of credit out there.

If we go back to the gold standard kiss Master Card, Discover, and Visa good bye overnight.

He also wants a FULL pullback from all countries we are currently in. Germany, Japan, Korea, and Middle East. All foreign aid would come to a stop if he got his way.

Romney is a hypocrite and the world looking in knows a bull shitter when they see one. To any Republican calling Obama a socialist please shut the f UP PLEASEE.

What I wanted him to pass would have been socialism. What he did pass WAS THE REPUBLICAN HEALTHCARE PLAN FROM 1996

You guys used to be hard core about personnel responsibility. wtf happened to the Republican party seriously.

[anthemm]

If you're going to put it that way, Endus, then I agree with you.

But I don't appreciate it when people say the United States is a capitalist nation and that Europe is socialist, and all our problems will go away if only we were more like Europe. Because this statement presumes that a welfare state doesn't even exist in the U.S. However, something like 50% of the American population now receives financial assistance of one form or another from the government.

What I'm alarmed by is people disingenuously claiming they want more socialism so that American will be more like Europe, because they're radicals who believe in some kind of quasi-Marxist society, and disguise their message in more liberal terms.

[Bad Ashe]

there are only a couple reasons i can think of why the "World view" would prefer Obama:

1. republicans are generally villianized in the global media as being machinegun toting warmongers and profiteers.
2. obama has had international dealings with many nations since his presidency, romney has not been exposed to as much coverage.

either way, the global policies will not be that different regardless which is elected, many will not even notice any difference. the largest divisor between them is how to handle economic issues on the home front.

[Endus]

If you're going to put it that way, Endus, then I agree with you.

But I don't appreciate it when people say the United States is a capitalist nation and that Europe is socialist, and all our problems will go away if only we were more like Europe. Because this statement presumes that a welfare state doesn't even exist in the U.S. However, something like 50% of the American population now receives financial assistance of one form or another from the government.

What I'm alarmed by is people disingenuously claiming they want more socialism so that American will be more like Europe, because they're radicals who believe in some kind of quasi-Marxist society, and disguise their message in more liberal terms.

This basically boils down to certain people in the US who haven't evolved their rhetoric since the '60s. McCarthyism did a number of "communist", and we're still seeing the aftershocks today. "Socialism" got wrapped up in that to a certain extent, primarily because the Nazis were the "National Socialist Party". The issue with that is that the Nazis were anything but socialist in economy, and antagonistically opposed to social justice policies. They lied. I'm really surprised people point at Nazi propaganda and claim that that defines socialism, as if the Nazi Party were some kind of beacon of truth and honor, whose word you could trust. Seriously, that was their big lie. Taking it at face value at any time after 1939 is ridiculous.


Socialism is Medicare and credit unions. If you think it's anything more sinister, then you're using the word to mean something it does not.

[IxilaFA]

My question is what makes European / the rest of the world think they know more about American politics than we who live in America do?

It bugs me when someone who lives in a European nation reads a couple of articles, and forms an opinion about the status of the United States from there. They don't know anything about our living conditions. The only news they get from the U.S. is the largely liberal media, and they form most of their opinions based on the limited sources they have. Also, notoriety. Most of these people who were polled probably didn't read any articles or know much about the candidates' policies. They hear Barack Obama (a known name) and Mitt Romney (a largely unknown name outside the U.S.), and who do you think they're going to pick?

Either way, I don't really care about who the Europeans think should be our next president. It just bugs me that they seem to take such an interest in United States politics and think they know better than us. Not only that, but they try to apply their liberal, socialist standards to Americans, when we are raised with different ideals than them. When it comes to arguing ideals and morals, you can't really set a line for what's correct or not. So we can't really say that Obama is the "best" candidate according to the rest of the world. We just know that he fits their standards of what a good president would be. Also, I would remind people that the U.S. has become a super power by constantly redefining itself and governing its people by a different set of rules than the rest of the world. Hell, the New World was settled by people seeking religious freedom, and the United States was formed by a group of colonies that were tired of the rule of a Monarch who had no idea what was really going on across the oceans. I feel that nothing has changed since those days. The rest of the world is still largely uninformed of the real issues Americans face, and should, quite frankly, keep their noses out of our business.

One last thing: the amount of Americans in this thread that are insulting themselves and their own fellow countrymen are just disgusting. I'm not blind, I know there are plenty of idiots who live here. But we have a long history of being a very proud, very powerful nation with strong opinions and a strong sense of country and self. If you want to insult the tradition of America, go live somewhere else. I'm an American, I'm well informed of all the candidates' policies, and I am offended by people thinking that many Americans are stupid, brainwashed sheep that blindly follow whatever candidate they agree with the most. It's even more offensive that some of these people are Americans themselves.

[Zhangfei]

My question is what makes European / the rest of the world think they know more about American politics than we who live in America do?

There's an inherent advantage of objectivity to being an observer on the outside. Considering, objectively, how poor your media is and how it skews right-wing on an international scale, foreigners also have the advantage of a more mature, analytical and sophisticated media to perceive these events through too.

[Tradewind]

Yeah, US politics are odd to anyone who doesn't live here, and sometimes they're odd to anyone who does.

Fact is, the Presidential election in the end comes down to the respective people, and one's already proven he won't work with Congress, and also is known for letting his campaign accuse people of racism simply for opposing his views. So, the other guy can't be any worse.

A truly unbiased and bipartisan opinion of the situation.

lawl

[Puremallace]

I am offended by people thinking that many Americans are stupid, brainwashed sheep that blindly follow whatever candidate they agree with the most. It's even more offensive that some of these people are Americans themselves.

I am American and am not offended because a hell of a lot of people are blind sheep following either the blue button or red button to pick a President. Euros don't have shit to stand on when it comes to criticizing us.

I am tired of my portfolio taking a hit because you guys cry about taxes and do not want to make investments in infrastructure. Thanks to dumb ass Euro politicians thinking Austerity was a good answer to a Recession we are all screwed with a projected 5 year recession in the Europe and massive debt.

[Deleted]

Simple, people vote for their personal gain, while it's blurry who would provide more for Americans between Obama and Romney, to the rest of the world Obama is a clear winner in terms of the whole planet, Romney's managed to annoy some close relationships with other regions and he's not even president yet.

[Activi-T]

Also, other countries figure Obama's more likely to bow to them than Romney, and they all want a weak American President.

So, that's one way in which what 'everyone else' wants doesn't really make sense for the country they're trying to make the choice for.

We just don't want an American president that will declare China a "currency manipulator" and start another war in the Middle East in his first week of office as it will impact heavily on us here.

[Puremallace]

Also, other countries figure Obama's more likely to bow to them than Romney, and they all want a weak American President.

So, that's one way in which what 'everyone else' wants doesn't really make sense for the country they're trying to make the choice for.

Obama has been consistently violating international law bombing the ever loving shit out of whoever he feels like. Then add in the Osama raid was a violation of god knows how many EU, UN, and international treaties.

You do realize he risked nuclear war with Pakistan to put a bullet in Osamas head right?

By far the biggest bullshit argument Repubs have tried in the past 4 years. Stick with the birth certificate thing because it sounds less crazy, then saying Obama has been weak on foreign policy.

[IxilaFA]

There's an inherent advantage of objectivity to being an observer on the outside. Considering, objectively, how poor your media is and how it skews right-wing on an international scale, foreigners also have the advantage of a more mature, analytical and sophisticated media to perceive these events through too.

This is the kind of statement that bugs me. And maybe you meant it innocently, but by saying things such as more mature and sophisticated, you're implying that Americans are neither of these. I agree our media is pretty much a joke, but I don't need to look at channels like CNN to know what's going on in this country because I live here. I have family members in every corner of the country. Just by looking around me I can get a good pulse on the American economy. I can browse multitudes of local TV stations and read multiple newspapers that give me the same story from different perspectives.