If that is indeed a "common perception", well there's the problem. A brilliant specimen of Americanus Obnoxious Arrogantus in action. Keep saving the world for us mate.hitherto wrote:There is a common conception here that if Americans cared what you Europeans thought, you would all be Nazis
Moonburnt wrote:... Americanus Obnoxious Arrogantus in action. Keep saving the world for us mate.
Save us! Save us from ourselves!
Hey, I think that it is somewhat important what people in other countries think, because your thoughts and feelings somehow effect me. If there is a lot of hatred in the world towards Americans then that is a probelm for me and my safety (I know that it is a selfish reason). But on the list of important issues, for me, in this election it is around #99. There are so many other pressing issues that the fickle perception of foreigners doesn't really matter.hitherto wrote:
There is a common conception here that if Americans cared what you Europeans thought, you would all be Nazis
If that is indeed a "common perception", well there's the problem. A brilliant specimen of Americanus Obnoxious Arrogantus in action. Keep saving the world for us mate.
Save us! Save us from ourselves!
Come off it mate, the Marshall Plan was economic imperialism, a huge bribe because the Americans were terrified communism might take hold in war-ravaged Europe.d2 wrote:Let's not forget the Marshall Plan, which effectively saved Europe from starving to death, and "restored" Europe's economy and infrastructure to better than pre-war levels. Of course, none of the nations of Europe - save the U.K. - has even come close to repaying the loans made by the U.S. It's a good thing that "evil American" bankers were kind enough (and the U.S. economy strong enough) to forgive large parts of said debt.
how can one so articulate be so astonishingly thick?d2 wrote:Moonburnt wrote:... Americanus Obnoxious Arrogantus in action. Keep saving the world for us mate.
Save us! Save us from ourselves!
The common European misperception (and yes, I know that NZ is not in Europe, but the sentiment is much the same) of Americans as uneducated and boorish is largely caused by the fact that even the most uneducated and boorish Americans are still far more economically productive than their foreign counterparts ... even those who are "better educated" and "more refined". This results in their being able to afford to visit the cities of the world in large numbers, where their ignorance is often then displayed.
Conversely, mostly only the "upper classes" (a term which is honestly almost meaningless to most Americans in the sense it is understood by most Europeans) from Europe are able to visit the U.S. This leads many Americans to just as wrongly conclude that all Euros are effete, prissy snobs.
Both "observations" are based upon faulty sample sets.
As for keeping the world safe, it goes without saying to any educated person that the U.S. has done exactly that - and much more - for the latter part of the 20th century. Unless you want to discount WW2 and the winning of the Cold War, that is.
Let's not forget the Marshall Plan, which effectively saved Europe from starving to death, and "restored" Europe's economy and infrastructure to better than pre-war levels. Of course, none of the nations of Europe - save the U.K. - has even come close to repaying the loans made by the U.S. It's a good thing that "evil American" bankers were kind enough (and the U.S. economy strong enough) to forgive large parts of said debt.
This fails to account current U.S. philanthropy. There are several private charities here which - by themselves, individually - provide more aid to the needy of the world than the combined private and public efforts of the rest of the world combined. Don't bother thanking them ... they'd just be embarrassed.
Of course - since misperceived levels of education and sophistication are somehow the important thing to debate (and never actual actions or results) it's "boorish" of us to expect any degree of genuine gratitude, or even remind anyone of these facts.
The ironic part of this is that the U.S. is actually at fault for much of this anti-American sentiment, but for reasons different from those usually cited. The U.S. has effectively shielded a good part of the world - militarily and economically - from the responsibility of having to care for themselves and do their own "heavy lifting".
Thus, a good part of the world is like a spoiled teenager living in his parents basement, complaining that they don't understand his needs, or pay enough attention to him, and how unfair it is that they live upstairs "using most of the household resources", while it's colder and smaller down below. They really ought to care more about "important" things like music, and dad shouldn't spend so much time working. Oh, and he really needs a raise in his allowance, too!
Interesting - but intellectually lazy - way to characterize the issue. Whether the MP was "imperialism" or not (which sounds to me like you're just reading from some unintentionally comical set of "leftist easy answer flashcards") is a matter of opinon, thanks for sharing yours.Fingers wrote:Come off it mate, the Marshall Plan was economic imperialism, a huge bribe because the Americans were terrified communism might take hold in war-ravaged Europe.
The only reason the US economy was strong enough was because the US got involved late, and only then out of self-interest, and hadn't sunk all its resources into stopping what was happening in Europe. ...
forge wrote: how can one so articulate be so astonishingly thick?
Which - again, sadly - fails to address anything I've said, while attempying the lazy ploy of attempying to characterize my views through insult rather than reason.forge wrote:O well, fellow spoilt teenagers - this post is a good example of why we're all doomed. I feel sorry for the well eduacted americans (who dont get their history confused with propaganda and hollywood) because people like this guy really make you all look so stupid.
I think you miss the point. You talk about issue's only looking back a century.d2 wrote:
It fails to actually address the point, however - that the U.S. saved Europe from ruin. You are somewhat making my earlier point - in that you want to discuss motivations and attitudes rather than actions or results.
I think the "leftist easy answer flashcards" comment probably says more about you than any of your other Yoo Ess Ay, Yoo Ess Ay grandstanding. You know, I met a guy like you in Nicaragua shortly after the Americans marched into Baghdad, and it was an education - someone my age who genuinely thought the Republicans were intent on liberating the world. Needless to say his boorish boasting in front of a bunch of people his country has completely shafted (which, I'll admit, doesn't exactly put them in the minority) meant our acquaintance was short-lived.d2 wrote: Interesting - but intellectually lazy - way to characterize the issue. Whether the MP was "imperialism" or not (which sounds to me like you're just reading from some unintentionally comical set of "leftist easy answer flashcards") is a matter of opinon, thanks for sharing yours.
It fails to actually address the point, however - that the U.S. saved Europe from ruin. You are somewhat making my earlier point - in that you want to discuss motivations and attitudes rather than actions or results.
Fingers wrote:I think the "leftist easy answer flashcards" comment probably says more about you than any of your other Yoo Ess Ay, Yoo Ess Ay grandstanding. You know, I met a guy like you in Nicaragua shortly after the Americans marched into Baghdad, and it was an education - someone my age who genuinely thought the Republicans were intent on liberating the world. Needless to say his boorish boasting in front of a bunch of people his country has completely shafted (which, I'll admit, doesn't exactly put them in the minority) meant our acquaintance was short-lived.d2 wrote: Interesting - but intellectually lazy - way to characterize the issue. Whether the MP was "imperialism" or not (which sounds to me like you're just reading from some unintentionally comical set of "leftist easy answer flashcards") is a matter of opinon, thanks for sharing yours.
It fails to actually address the point, however - that the U.S. saved Europe from ruin. You are somewhat making my earlier point - in that you want to discuss motivations and attitudes rather than actions or results.
And please don't patronisingly thank me for sharing my "opinon", as if the little bloke from the meaningless country has a right to be ignored briefly. Accusing me of being intellectually lazy is also a bit rich. Your response to everyone who has answered your original post has been to pat them on the head and say, well done for stringing the words together but you're not addressing my points. Must try harder. In fact, it's you who is failing to address our points, and if you were in a room with us you'd just be talking over us and repeating the same "we saved your ass, you owe us forever" drivel ad infinitum.
As for your original point (at least I think this was it, I'm too lazy to scroll up), the general consensus has been that while the Marshall Plan accelerated Europe's recovery, that recovery was already well underway, in Britain in particular, and would have followed its course eventually. Speed was of the essence primarily to the US, because of that irrational phobia of the c word. If the same thing happened again, you'd be in there again, this time in case Islam spread through Europe. The US always has to have an enemy, and that seems like a pretty imperial attitude to me.