(February 7, 2016 at 1:42 pm)Excited Penguin Wrote: After all, a nation is the sum of its people. If the people can be altruistic, so can a nation, and conversely, if people happen to be self-serving, so do whole groups of them.

Not, it isn't. It's the sum of it's politicians the individuals have elected. And the US is one of the best examples of it's individuals not always agreeing with the policy made in their names. Especially when it came to war. As could be seen with Vietnam and to a lesser degree with Iraq. Lesser, because there is no longer a draft in place. And lesser because the news coverage toed the line as opposed to the 60ies and early 70ies.

Never mistake the people for the state. People are diverse, whatever policy their nation enforces.

(February 7, 2016 at 1:49 pm)abaris Wrote:

(February 7, 2016 at 1:42 pm)Excited Penguin Wrote: After all, a nation is the sum of its people. If the people can be altruistic, so can a nation, and conversely, if people happen to be self-serving, so do whole groups of them.

Not, it isn't. It's the sum of it's politicians the individuals have elected. And the US is one of the best examples of it's individuals not always agreeing with the policy made in their names. Especially when it came to war. As could be seen with Vietnam and to a lesser degree with Iraq. Lesser, because there is no longer a draft in place. And lesser because the news coverage toed the line as opposed to the 60ies and early 70ies.

Never mistake the people for the state. People are diverse, whatever policy their nation enforces.

Any way you look at it, you still can't remove the peoples' essential roles in governing their own nations. If they can't elect the people best suited for the job of representing them, that's on them. If they can't make a democracy work, that's on them as well. To blame certain individuals in positions of power for anything is either disingenuous or misguided.


Let me put this as simply as I can. If the majority of Americans are not pleased with the way things are going, they should get off their asses and do something about it. There's not much more to it than that.

"Nations don't have friends, they have interests."

Q: Should a nation act so as to favor another nation's citizens at the expense of its own?

Rhetorical, let go of the reply button. A nation needs to take care of its people or it's not a nation. Sometimes that comes at the expense of another nation's people, unfortunate as that may be.

This is why a one government world will never work.

(February 7, 2016 at 2:22 pm)Gawdzilla Wrote:

---

"Nations don't have friends, they have interests."

Q: Should a nation act so as to favor another nation's citizens at the expense of its own?

Rhetorical, let go of the reply button. A nation needs to take care of its people or it's not a nation. Sometimes that comes at the expense of another nation's people, unfortunate as that may be.

---

This is why a one government world will never work.

Fixed that for you.

If you want to further discuss this matter, let me know.

(February 7, 2016 at 2:27 pm)Excited Penguin Wrote:

(February 7, 2016 at 2:22 pm)Gawdzilla Wrote:

---

"Nations don't have friends, they have interests."

Q: Should a nation act so as to favor another nation's citizens at the expense of its own?

Rhetorical, let go of the reply button. A nation needs to take care of its people or it's not a nation. Sometimes that comes at the expense of another nation's people, unfortunate as that may be.

---

This is why a one government world will never work.

Fixed that for you.

You be-ah speakin' mo bettah Englander I be, boss. 

(February 7, 2016 at 2:22 pm)Gawdzilla Wrote: "Nations don't have friends, they have interests."

Q: Should a nation act so as to favor another nation's citizens at the expense of its own?

Rhetorical, let go of the reply button. A nation needs to take care of its people or it's not a nation. Sometimes that comes at the expense of another nation's people, unfortunate as that may be.

This is why a one government world will never work.

I'm seriously considering applying Street Epistemology with certain atheists some of the times.

A world government is not a nation. So your conclusion doesn't follow. Therefore you made an empty statement in the last paragraph.

The US certainly has its issues just like all countries do. However, this is the best nation on earth from what I have seen and I've been to a lot of places. I haven't been to Australia yet but I am going there in April for a couple of weeks to check it out.

Speaking of traveling, I can afford to travel the world because of the great lifestyle I have in the US. I live in a house so big that people unfamiliar with it get lost inside. I make more than a quarter of a million per year and live very comfortably.

How is this possible? Because in the US you can make a lot of money if you are smart and work hard at a career. It's the American Dream. I'm living it.

I don't think there is a term called the Australian Dream or any other country with the word dream after it.

Kusa, what is your work?

(February 7, 2016 at 3:41 pm)KUSA Wrote: I don't think there is a term called the Australian Dream or any other country with the word dream after it.

Done with the platitudes?

Other countries have different myths. Such as "La grande nation".