Monday January 6, 2025
SNc Channels:

Search
About Salem-News.com

 

Jul-15-2009 03:50printcomments

The American Problem

Because America is such a huge economy and military power, it has influences, positive and negative, virtually everywhere on the earth. The American problem, in fact, the world’s problem, is that as long as Americans continue to act, politically and militarily, as if they are the only people on earth, the future looks rocky indeed—for everyone.

Salem-News.com
Courtesy: breedersdigest.files.wordpress.com

(CALGARY, Alberta) - On the second day of her confirmation hearings, judge Sonia Sotomayor was asked about the influence of foreign law. She said: “American law does not permit the use of foreign law or international law to interpret the Constitution. That's a given. . . . There is no debate on that question; there's no issue about that question.” She could say nothing else. When other Supreme Court justices in the past (O’Connor and Ginsberg) have mentioned taking wisdom from other jurisdictions, they received death threats. Clarence Thomas said that the Court should never “impose foreign moods, fads or fashions on Americans.” To dismiss the extensive legal traditions of some of the other great nations of the world as “moods, fads or fashions” is nothing short of ignorant. Which reminds me of a joke. A man dies and goes to heaven. St. Peter is showing him around and the man notices a high wall and what sounds like voices on the other side. What’s the wall for, he asks St. Peter. Not so loud, St. Peter replies. Catholics over there. They think they’re the only one up here. This applies to Earth and the human race. To hear many Americans on the topic, they are the only ones on the planet. But to paraphrase Robert Pirsig, author of Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance, "Why, for example, should a group of simple, stable compounds of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen struggle for billions of years to organize themselves into [an American citizen]? What's the motive?" But, of course, a majority of Americans, believing as they do in Christian-oriented religions probably wouldn’t even understand that little joke and if they do, would probably be offended.

The Myth of American Exceptionalism

Earlier this year, Roger Cohen in the New York Times, reviewed a book called The Myth of American Exceptionalism by the British writer Godfrey Hodgson and acknowledged American exceptionalism: “The high number of its prison inmates is exceptional. The quality of its health care is exceptionally bad. The degree of its social inequality is exceptionally acute. Public education has gone into exceptional decline. The Americanization of the Holocaust and uncritical support for Israel have demonstrated an exceptional ability to gloss over uncomfortable truths, including broad American indifference to Hitler’s genocide as it happened.” This exposes the foundation of the American Problem—the belief that America and its people and somehow favored by their Christian God. But, says Rush Limbaugh: “America is the solution to the world’s problems. We are not the problem.” au contraire, counters Cohen, “The culture wars saw the rise of a new Christian right intent on defending its conception of American values not only against metrosexual coastal cities but also against a death-penalty-deriding Canada and Europe. The result, Hodgson argues, is an America unique not for its virtue but for its failings and illusions.” Hodgson argues that “what has been essentially a liberating set of beliefs has been corrupted over the past 30 years or so by hubris and self-interest into what is now a dangerous basis for national policy and for the international system.” The corruption began before that. Part of American Exceptionalism is the idea that the magical system called Capitalism has made America great. But, wrote Ferdinand Lundberg in the late 1960s: “Whereas European royalty and nobility played profound integral roles in European history, the latter-day American rich were more like hitchhikers who opportunistically climbed aboard a good thing. They produced neither the technology, the climate, the land, the people nor the political system. Nor did they, like many European groups (as in England) take over the terrain as invading conquerors. Rather did they infiltrate the situation from below, insinuate themselves into opportunely presented economic gaps, subvert various rules and procedures, and, as it were ride a rocket to the moon and beyond, meanwhile through their propagandists presenting themselves, no less, as the creators of machine industrialization which was in fact copied from England and transplanted into a lush terrain.” Capitalism, wrote Lundberg, is a failure system: “In business, under the American system, hundreds of thousands more have failed, generation after generation, than the few who have succeeded. If we are to judge by the preponderance of individual successes over failures or vice versa, then the American system, businesswise, is a record of steady, almost unrelieved failure. It has failure literally built into it. It is indeed a near-miracle, front page news, when anyone really makes it. This judicious observation sounds paradoxical only because it contradicts conventional propaganda.” That was 1968. As Jay Goltz wrote last week in the NYT, “The Dark Side of Entrepreneurship”: “Some 70 percent of businesses fail within seven years, according to the Small Business Administration. In the worst cases, the result is not only business failure but also complete financial failure. What I have learned is that the damage doesn’t stop there. I share this with you as an attempt to bring some reality to the conversation about entrepreneurship. It is not just about passion and innovation and bringing your dog to work. It is also about risk, tenacity and fear. It is also about the repercussions of bad luck, bad decisions and bad economies. I know of four business owners in Chicago who have taken their own lives since the economy turned.” Because America is such a huge economy and military power, it has influences, positive and negative, virtually everywhere on the earth. The American problem, in fact, the world’s problem, is that as long as Americans continue to act, politically and militarily, as if they are the only people on earth, the future looks rocky indeed—for everyone. ========================================================= Daniel Johnson was born near the midpoint of the twentieth century in Calgary, Alberta. In his teens he knew he was going to be a writer, which is why he was one of only a handful of boys in his high school typing class—a skill he knew was going to be necessary. He defines himself as a social reformer, not a left winger, the latter being an ideological label which, he says, is why he is not an ideologue. From 1975 to 1981 he was reporter, photographer, then editor of the weekly Airdrie Echo. For more than ten years after that he worked with Peter C. Newman, Canada’s top business writer (notably a series of books, The Canadian Establishment). Through this period Daniel also did some national radio and TV broadcasting. He gave up journalism in the early 1980s because he had no interest in being a hack writer for the mainstream media and became a software developer and programmer. He retired from computers last year and is now back to doing what he loves—writing and trying to make the world a better place.




Comments Leave a comment on this story.
Name:

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.



PNWCC.INFO July 16, 2009 11:25 pm (Pacific time)

Iraq was a "stable society"? What on earth are you on? Saddam killed millions over the years, and Iraq had unemployment of about 80%, and was ruled by a network of thugs and informants and secret police, whose favorite activity was torture and killing to extract information to determine who next to shred.

Editor: I don't know what planet you live on pal, but even the biggest false propaganda spreaders don't suggest that Saddam killed millions. Let's see, George Bush senior encouraged the Kurds to revolt against Saddam Hussein.  They did, we abandoned them, and left them to die after encouraging their revolt.  You think the U.S. gets to wash its hands of responsibility for that? 

Google Answers published this early in the war, "So, that line of reasoning goes, the U.S. is actually culpable for most of the deaths of innocent Iraqis. (Some have said, it is responsible for ALL of them.) And apart from putting down the rebellion, Saddam has NOT in fact been killing hundreds of thousands of people. So, removing Saddam's regime will NOT actually save hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi lives."

 I asked people all over Iraq to tell me how their country was before the U.S. invasion and they all told me that the invasion did not help their lives in any way, shape or form.  Iraq was a peaceful, functioning country when we attacked it.  It is not a matter of theory.  'W' knew they had nothing to do with any acts of aggression toward us and yet he made our military attack the country anyway.  It is true that if an Iraqi crossed Saddam Hussein he would pay, but that was mostly political opponents. 

Yes, they had the infamous meat grinder in Baghdad, yes his one son was a horrible pervert, but overall they were mostly just hassling their own, how does killing a load of people and destablizing their infrastructure help?  Under SH, some people were victimized and savaged and murdered, but most weren't. 

I have been to a town called Al Dujayl where there was an organized attempt to assassinate Hussein in 1984 or so.  Very interesting stuff.  Everyone there was either killed or jailed, but that is to be expected in a failed assassination attempt I think. 

After we invaded, women in labor at night could not reach hospitals, we totally and completely disrupted their life, killed up to a million people or more, losing thousands of our own in the process.  What about Burma?  What about North Korea?  I guess real threats aren't interesting unless they have oil.    


Daniel Johnson July 16, 2009 4:15 pm (Pacific time)

The reason democracy is so difficult, is because it is a "top down" processs. It is not something the "people" want, but something that the intellectuals of society *think* that people should have. Think Iraq. They weren't doing "fine" before W invaded, but they had a stable society.


Henry Ruark July 16, 2009 10:23 am (Pacific time)

To all: Some recent comment here emphasize once again precisely why the Enlightenment took place. Despite such unwise comment remorselessly revealing the basic philosophies of the writers, nearly 250 years of American history clearly demonstrates that the majority of our people do NOT feel or think OR react to that level and set of values. IF they DID, we would never have progressed as far as we now have, demonstrated daily via the many fine events in our American lifestyle, vs the very few characterized by such unthinking, unfeeling, and democracy-damaging distortions as demonstration here. Serious readers can check for themselves in any standard American history, believable because checkable and fully confirmable via solid values and lawful standards built over those years by our system despite its weaknesses and mistakes -- still correctable simply by application of the principles firmly set forth by the Founding Fathers, empowered by the potent weapon they bequeathed to us all --the VOTE, intelligently and assiduously applied.


PNWCC July 16, 2009 2:05 am (Pacific time)

What can mere men do against such reckless hate? Ride out to meet them... You will not win. YOur hate will lose. The right will prevail, not the hate, the lies, the wrong. You lose, Daniel Johnson.


Daniel Johnson July 15, 2009 9:18 pm (Pacific time)

Allow me to share the contents of a news item I recently copied off the internet: Atlanta, GA (DWPI) - FBI crime lab tests on the rifle that James Earl Ray supposedly used to kill civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. have been concluded. Tests were to determine for certain whether the rifle was in fact the same gun that fired the fatal bullet back in 1968. Senator Arlen Specter(R-PA) announced the findings: "These tests show conclusively that the rifle fired the bullet, which hit Dr. King in the chest, bounced off the railing, penetrated Bobby Kennedy's head, turned right through President Kennedy's head, caromed off Governor Connelly's leg, and eventually came to rest in Mr. Reagan. There's some evidence that the bullet also killed Archduke Ferdinand and may have possibly gotten a piece of Pope John Paul. The claims regarding John Lennon are obviously preposterous."


Henry Ruark July 15, 2009 8:32 pm (Pacific time)

John, "Anon": Beg to differ, friends, until -unless you cite authoratative historians for your personal very distorted view. Per basic points in "Anon", to which J says he agrees, have just finished survey of several famed Colonial histories without any reference at all supporting what you state. Due to Colonial history in full public record, statements re Rockefeller/Rothschild are at best hearsay, without shred of solid evidence you can cite from recognized authorities. Ditto re yrs per Jackson and stated conflict; ditto re Lincoln, monetary policy and details of his assassination. IF you have claimed data re JFK, must ask if you have filed it with federal authorities, since to possess same and NOT do so is in itself extremely open to further investigation. Is that why original is anonymous ? That's first reliance of those who plant such claims, never allowing further check. When J. states "absolutely correct" as public statement supporting Anon's charges, he falls directly into same status. SO, kids, put up or shut up, with solid checkable citations for several authoritative and well-published historians. OR stand challenged and unresponsive, for all to see and record...and do not forget where you found this wild and irresponsible stuff, either.


John July 15, 2009 5:36 pm (Pacific time)

Anonymous is absolutely correct. This country is the primary finacial corporatocracy of English and European interests, assuredly of international banking, Zionist, and other "New World Order" groups.


Anonymous July 15, 2009 11:33 am (Pacific time)

Around 1776, the new America decided to do business with the British, the people who they just went to war with, instead of France, who basically won the war for them. The Rockefellers/Rothchilds convinced them to do that with their overwhelming power and money. Andrew Jackson faught them, they tried to kill him..Lincoln changed the monetary policy, they killed him. The 1913 federal reserve act, and JFK being killed because he wanted to end the federal reserve bank owned by rothchild/rockefeller. Put the puzzle together, do your homework, find out what is really going on. Its not good. But, not sure why I am writing this, cause in my heart, I somewhat feel its too late.

[Return to Top]
©2025 Salem-News.com. All opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Salem-News.com.


Articles for July 14, 2009 | Articles for July 15, 2009 | Articles for July 16, 2009
Sean Flynn was a photojournalist in Vietnam, taken captive in 1970 in Cambodia and never seen again.

googlec507860f6901db00.html
Support
Salem-News.com:

Special Section: Truth telling news about marijuana related issues and events.

Tribute to Palestine and to the incredible courage, determination and struggle of the Palestinian People. ~Dom Martin

Click here for all of William's articles and letters.