America, Man’s Last, Best hope for Freedom…

[amicus]

America, Man’s Last, Best hope for Freedom…


I think the immigration controversy now raging, after several days of watching interviews and commentary, keyed this affirmation…dunno…

Although I have not spent much time in New England, I would like to think that the similarity of the climate to England and Ireland, perhaps also France and Germany played a role.

I think also a ‘new’ land not owned by a Monarch or a Church and the vastness and abundance of the land also played a role.

The Spanish, in South American and Central American Colonies, with their heavy dose of Catholicism, put an entirely different flavor in the soup, as did the climate. Having lived in the deep south, in such diverse places as Arkansas, Georgia Florida and Mississippi, the humid sweltering heat played a role also, I think, in the importation and use of slave labor.

Native Americans also played a dual role when they allied with the French and brought about the French and Indian War that took so many British lives both military and civilian, often in brutal inhumane manner. I wonder if that early experience shaded further relations with the Indians as the immigrants ceased being colonists and became Americans?

As time progressed, the Spanish and the French in the South and Southwest, the British and the French in the North East and in the West, along with the Russians in the West and Northwest merged into a tug of war for what became to be recognized as one great land area from sea to sea.

Although much of early American intellectual and political thought and indeed history, came from Europe, via Locke, Montesque, Blackstone and many others, Thomas Paine was recorded as the first to advocate doing away with a Monarchy and declaring an Independent nation, beholden to no one.

There was surely no single event or epiphany that acted to determine the future ‘character’ that became uniquely an ‘American’ iconography, rather a series of unrelated events and recognitions as men and women and families and communities moved out into the vast wilderness and became self sufficient and individually self aware of that distinction.

There is no place in the world quite like America, even today, as millions from around the globe seek entry and citizenship here. It really is quite amazing.

They come here to be free and to experience the opportunity to prosper. On television recently, I have watched thousands of Mexicans, observed their faces and demeanor and the powerful thought, ‘they came here to be free…’ came into my mind, time and time again.

Having been also in Mexico some years ago and seen the unbelievable poverty and despair, it comes as no surprise that those people seek a better life.

I would hope that Americans everywhere could regain that sense of, ‘give me your huddled masses…’ vision that served so well for such a long time.

I have also traveled in Western Europe before the collapse of the Soviet Communists and sensed an entirely different life aura in England and France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Italy, then southern France and Spain.

America truly is the last place in the world and still the best place in the entire world to seek freedom and the opportunity that all humans yearn for.

I would hope we deserve that past and live up to the dream.


Amicus….

 

[Liar]

Interrestig, anAmicus post that might even have a few pinko liberals nodding in agreement, at least at a few of the points made.

However... The illegal immigrant issue that is on the table now in America isn't about people who are there for the freedom. They didn't come there for the freedom, in fact they came here for less freedom, as illegal immigrants they don't enjoy the rights of identity, which locks them out from big parts of the society. They live their lives always looking over their shoulder, in high risk of abuse, because they for instance don't enjoy the luxury of turning to the police if something was to happen. Which I'm sure you realize. They came here, knowlingly trading in the rights and freedoms they enjoy as legal citizens in their home country (even if those freedoms probably are smaller than those of an American citizen's they are greater than those of a non-citizen illegal immigrant)...for the opportunity to put food on the table.

They came here for opportunities, which your country is a vast sorgasboard of. When I think of "Land of the free, home of the brave", it's the last part that really characterizes America in my mind. People that are not afraid to do stuff, to venture out on their own and seek the opportunities that are up for grabs. The best growing ground on the planet for entrepreneurs.

You have a larger economic immigration than any other country. People who were quite free from oppression, but lacked opportunities to grow. Our level of political immigration per capita is supposedly bigger than yours (or at least it was, the climate is sadly less friendly the last few years), but our ratio of economic immigration is close to zero. Because we can't sustain that and take advantage of that the way you do, for various reasons., a major one being the heterogenity between the European countries. We'd just be importing poverty and neither they or we would be better off.

I have also traveled in Western Europe before the collapse of the Soviet Communists and sensed an entirely different life aura in England and France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Italy, then southern France and Spain.

Just out of interrest, how do you think this manifest itself?

 

[amicus]

Interrestig, anAmicus post that might even have a few pinko liberals nodding in agreement, at least at a few of the points made.

However... The illegal immigrant issue that is on the table now in America isn't about people who are there for the freedom. They didn't come there for the freedom, in fact they came here for less freedom, as illegal immigrants they don't enjoy the rights of identity, which locks them out from big parts of the society. They live their lives always looking over their shoulder, in high risk of abuse, because they for instance don't enjoy the luxury of turning to the police if something was to happen. Which I'm sure you realize. They came here, knowlingly trading in the rights and freedoms they enjoy as legal citizens in their home country (even if those freedoms probably are smaller than those of an American citizen's they are greater than those of a non-citizen illegal immigrant)...for the opportunity to put food on the table.

They came here for opportunities, which your country is a vast sorgasboard of. When I think of "Land of the free, home of the brave", it's the last part that really characterizes America in my mind. People that are not afraid to do stuff, to venture out on their own and seek the opportunities that are up for grabs. The best growing ground on the planet for entrepreneurs.

You have a larger economic immigration than any other country. People who were quite free from oppression, but lacked opportunities to grow. Our level of political immigration per capita is supposedly bigger than yours (or at least it was, the climate is sadly less friendly the last few years), but our ratio of economic immigration is close to zero. Because we can't sustain that and take advantage of that the way you do, for various reasons., a major one being the heterogenity between the European countries. We'd just be importing poverty and neither they or we would be better off.

Just out of interrest, how do you think this manifest itself?

"...Quote:
Originally Posted by amicus
I have also traveled in Western Europe before the collapse of the Soviet Communists and sensed an entirely different life aura in England and France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Italy, then southern France and Spain.


Just out of interrest, how do you think this manifest itself?..."

~~~~~

That last portion did not paste with the 'quote', but I wanted to remind myself of it as your response is as complicated as my post...

There is room for discussion in your original post. Mexico was recently a dictatorship,(not gonna research the details, but trust me), there is also heavy domination by the Catholic Church in Mexico, nothing happens in the 'free' sector without first being filtered through government or the Church; and the battle continues, with new elections, which may go communist, occuring this coming summer.

So, maybe they are oppressed in Mexico or sense that they are or were or are about to me, I am not aware enough to be certain of the degree.

I do know, that Mexican immigrants send money back to Mexico to support their families. If you can imagine what a father and husband, an illegal immigrant goes through in his thought process to accomplish that, you will feel what I feel for them, an empathy, perhaps a sympathy.

However, I understand and agree, that they must live underground, perpetually in fear of being detected, swept into the system and deported. That too, must be a terrible burden.

Not to showboat, but it reminds me of the thousands of 'Anne Frank', stories about Europeans safeguarding those of Jewish ancestry prior, during and post world war two in Europe. I am only thankful that I can read about such things and did not have to experience them.

Something our European litsters may not be cognizant of, the minimum wage in the U.S., something over $5.00 (US) per hour, is 5 times the basic wage in Mexico, Nicaraugua, and the other contingent Central American nations.

Most have no automobiles, no television sets, no microwaves, no medical care, not even a dream of retirement plans, truly African third world environment.

While over half of the so called oppressed African Americans in the United States own their own homes, no one in Central America, aside from the wealthy, the politicians and the Clergy can ever hope to 'own' their own property.

So while you may not personally consider them, 'political refugees', and that they only seek economic opportunity, there is an argument to be made otherwise.


The 'economic immigration' you speak of is a little bit of a mystery to me and I will attempt to explain why...it has to do with a generational gap I experience while others may not.

I worked in the agricultural fields picking fruit and vegetables when I was under 10 years of age and did so for several years during the summer. I also worked in the hotel industry as a young man on my exploratory age of enlightenment. Work, in both cases, I was happy to have as it meant I could eat and continue to exist.

So, when they say, as they do, again and again, Mexican immigrants do work Americans will not do, it gives me cause to question, for I did that kind of stoop labor that, apparently, young American kids will not do in this day and age.

However, as time did pass and I noticed, obliquely, that 'Bracero's' in the past 40 years, did seem to appear more often in the fields and orchards, that what they say, is true.


I went back to your post to see what I had missed and thought to copy and paste this:

"...They came here for opportunities, which your country is a vast sorgasboard of. When I think of "Land of the free, home of the brave", it's the last part that really characterizes America in my mind. People that are not afraid to do stuff, to venture out on their own and seek the opportunities that are up for grabs. The best growing ground on the planet for entrepreneurs..."

I don't know anyway to say that better except by example. I once set forth across country ( a 3000 mile journey, more than 5000 Km.), ran low on money due to automobile problems and pulled into a truck stop and asked for a job.

Worked for a week changing truck tires, a really nasty and hard job, got my vehicle repaired, earned enough to celebrate in a hotel room and got a job as a bartender in a topless joint, even though I had never bar tended 'hard liquor', before, only beer and wine.

Spent too much time watching the titties flop and the torso's girate and got fired after a week, but earned enough (in tips) to continue my quest out of Nevada into the middle west...

I could write a book on that trip and maybe will someday...but...the opportunity you speak of...perhaps...does not require permission or license, just initiative and 'balls', if I may be not so subtle.

I am not a criminal, so I do not know the in's and out's of the drug world or prostitution, although I was aware of the opportunities, and they were many.

~~~

I purposely put off your last inquiry, hoping, as I did the rest, a good reply would generate spontaneously, I fear it has not...



"...I have also traveled in Western Europe before the collapse of the Soviet Communists and sensed an entirely different life aura in England and France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Italy, then southern France and Spain.


Just out of interrest, how do you think this manifest itself?..."

In England, where I first arrived at Heathrow and took a bus into London, I think it was first the stoic order of things. I was young, this was my first trip abroad, although I had been to Canada and Mexico before, but...this was new and different.

This was 1970, 35 years ago and memory fades, and 25 years after the end of world war two, at the time, I am sure I knew less about the history of that conflict than I do now, so...the memories may flex and meld with time, I cannot say.

I think I expected to see war damage, I did not. England seemed very 'quaint' and restrained to me, I think, and very proper. I did not enjoy London very much until I met an English teacher from Michigan who laughed at my plans to go to France and instructed me on how I should properly approach the Continent, (and a few other things).

The most vivid thing I recall is the Picadilly marketplace, with heavy, red faced English women selling all sorts of things and having my first taste of milk and sugar and boiled water that the English call 'Tea' or 'Tay', as they pronounce it.

I do recall the double decked busses and the subways and later in life the namesakes that appeared in movies and were bombed by Islamic terrorists, funny how time catches up with one.

I bought a motorcycle for 35 pounds (no symbol on my keyboard) and headed off according to a map, on a highway, A1A ? for the White Cliffs of Dover and a 'Boat-train' across the channel. I had never ridden a motorcycle before(see my story Natasha) and had a few adventures with that.


You asked, "...Just out of interrest, how do you think this manifest itself?..."[/I]

And I really cannot answer in the specific...it was a French Communist I met in a cafe' in France, a hotel waiter in Paris, that laughed at my 'French', a motor cycle shop in 'Belguise'?, a girl in Amsterdam, the Hydleburg Castle in Germany, a village in Germany where I threw a chain and spent a week in a 'Gasthouse', a Russian tank tracking me along a roadway as I intended to visit Goethe's birthplace, a blue eyed Russian soldier that showed me death in his eyes at a checkpoint? A Swiss Mountain village and lake, and Italian Nude beach, Monaco, or Marselleis....? Or Barcelona in Spain where I gave the bike to a spanish girl who smiled....

I only knew I wasn't in Kansas anymore....but I still, aye, long after, have the memories....

Amicus...







__________________

 

[amicus]

If I don’t get this down, I will forget the association…so I must…



In my post, ‘America the last and best hope…’ there is another aspect, another level of comprehension.

I watched and listened to, a NASA Channel replay of a government hearing with the NASA administrator and a Senate or House Committee Chairman, (they did not display the information of the hearing, time or date or participants, I would have taken notes and included that information), concerning the future of NASA, budgets and plans.

Although they covered many areas, generalities and specifics, there is a kernel I absorbed and thought about as the questions and answers continued.

There was a statement that, ‘America has been the leader in Aviation technology since the beginning of Aeronautics…” which I immediately disagreed with, for at least a dozen reasons, as the British and the French and the Germans had many ‘firsts’ in the field and were seminal in germination of the entire scope of aviation, long before America.

The core of the discussion was the transformation from the Space Shuttle program, due to end in 2010 and the next generation of vehicles, ‘CEV’s’, the completion of the ISS, International Space Station and the next phase of space exploration.

Another key aspect was the ‘Space Initiative’, pronounced by President Bush, in 2005, that is now the ‘law’ of the land, and will direct space exploration for the next decade and more.

Some key questions, aside from the transition of personnel, experience and foresight of those involved in the shuttle program to those who would participate in the next stage of space exploration, was to just how much ‘America’ would be a controlling factor.

It seems that ‘Aeronautical’ advances are being made in Europe and China, not in America, as science and technology places low on the academic scale in the United States and very high in some European and Asian contemporary cultures.

Political inquiries seem to intimate that ‘American’ scholars are not concentrating on the ‘sciences’ and are being left behind by the rest of the industrial world.

I see nothing but a quest for ‘prestige’ from the European Space effort, but India and China? Will either of those be the next to extend the frontiers of knowledge?

Has America lost the lead in the quest to know the unknown? Will the quest migrate elsewhere? Will it suststain?

Questions mainly, answers, anyone?

Amicus…

 

[neonlyte]

Amicus

Space exploration, in my mind, needs a purpose. All exploration thus far has been purpose driven. I don't think there is need to qualify the statement.

Europe has no real interest in space except for strictly scientific or logistical purpose. Europes current drive is to establish a new GPS orbital system to replace the one currently controlled by US military. The first stations are in orbit and tested, locking in their transmission frequences under a convention whose name escapes me.

China, India and possibly Pakistan, have an interest in space largely for military application, with some scientific activity just to lend credibility, they have little or no logisitic use for 'space' ie. in serving their populations other than media orientated services.

The USA's huge effort came out of military necessity in the long days of the cold war, it strikes me the USA lacks a purpose, other than scientific and military to comit to space. What would be the purpose? Going to Mars or the Moon is simply a question of resource application, it can be done but for what gain other than the spin off research development, and granted, that may be immense, just as it was with the 70's space programme.

Even taking the long view is too long. An orbital platform to send deep space missions will reveal little until the key is found to accelerate craft to meaningfull speeds to produce results within the lifetime of the program. I like the idea of going to Mars, not sure it will tell us diddly.

In the short term, I mean thirty years or slightly longer, China and India will have their hands full elevating their populations to the same economic level as the rest of the developed world, only after a certain economic maturity has been reached might they switch resources to non-military space application. The USA cannot afford to stand by and let fledging countries steal a march and will continue with a space programme, with military sidelines to maintain competition.

On the pure research front, scientific application, the USA is to a degree more interested in the commercial application of invention rather than pure research. Emerging nations produce keen minds, a by-product of bringing education to the masses. Education is seen as a solution, a way forward in emerging countries, students approach education with a voracity developed nations scarcely remember. Little wonder they move to the cutting edge of scientific development. The UK's education system blunts appetite for learning, it is geared to the average rather than the excellent, I suspect something similar could be said about the USA. The young citizens of developing nations use education as a stepping stone to grasp opportunity. Go to any developed nation university campus, they are flooded with overseas students, certainly in the UK, and with English, and its variants, being a de-facto world language of choice, the English speaking nations receive a higher proportion of foreign students than non-English speaking countries. How many return to their country of origin and invest their knowledge is unclear, more will do so in the future as their home nations provide the opportunity to advance financially and socially.

On Europe - I don't think you would recognise Europe in 2006 compared with 1970. Change has swept Europe on almost every front. Some say for the better. The price is paid in terms of social cohesion at all levels, today you can drive from the Arctic Circle to the tip of Italy, and never need to show your passport. That is a good thing, but it also eats at the edge of individuality, and when we stop seeing ourselves as individuals, we tend to accept the uniformality that stifles ambition.

 

[Liar]

There is room for discussion in your original post. Mexico was recently a dictatorship,(not gonna research the details, but trust me), there is also heavy domination by the Catholic Church in Mexico, nothing happens in the 'free' sector without first being filtered through government or the Church; and the battle continues, with new elections, which may go communist, occuring this coming summer.

So, maybe they are oppressed in Mexico or sense that they are or were or are about to me, I am not aware enough to be certain of the degree.

However, I understand and agree, that they must live underground, perpetually in fear of being detected, swept into the system and deported. That too, must be a terrible burden.

Not to showboat, but it reminds me of the thousands of 'Anne Frank', stories about Europeans safeguarding those of Jewish ancestry prior, during and post world war two in Europe. I am only thankful that I can read about such things and did not have to experience them.

Like I said, they are probably not AS free as American citizens in America. Or Brits in the UK. But in their current position, living underground in the US, they are less free to move about, exist financially (and certainly not politically) and have little or no legal protection against malice.

I do know, that Mexican immigrants send money back to Mexico to support their families. If you can imagine what a father and husband, an illegal immigrant goes through in his thought process to accomplish that, you will feel what I feel for them, an empathy, perhaps a sympathy.

Something our European litsters may not be cognizant of, the minimum wage in the U.S., something over $5.00 (US) per hour, is 5 times the basic wage in Mexico, Nicaraugua, and the other contingent Central American nations.

Most have no automobiles, no television sets, no microwaves, no medical care, not even a dream of retirement plans, truly African third world environment.

Or to put it in much shorter terms. They are poor. And they move somewhere where there is money. That is economic migration.

While over half of the so called oppressed African Americans in the United States own their own homes, no one in Central America, aside from the wealthy, the politicians and the Clergy can ever hope to 'own' their own property.

So while you may not personally consider them, 'political refugees', and that they only seek economic opportunity, there is an argument to be made otherwise.

Depends on what you populate the word with, I guess. I'm talking about direct threats to health and safety. Open war, despotism, execution of dissidents, ethnic cleansing, stifling of free press, things like that.

Current day Mexio is acknowledged as a democracy with reasonable freedom of speech, press and opinion. Perhaps not perfect and on par with US or western Europe, buy hey. It may be corrupt, ineffective and have unfair legislation. But being dysfunctional is not the same as being evil.

 

[amicus]

Amicus

Space exploration, in my mind, needs a purpose. All exploration thus far has been purpose driven. I don't think there is need to qualify the statement.

Europe has no real interest in space except for strictly scientific or logistical purpose. Europes current drive is to establish a new GPS orbital system to replace the one currently controlled by US military. The first stations are in orbit and tested, locking in their transmission frequences under a convention whose name escapes me.

China, India and possibly Pakistan, have an interest in space largely for military application, with some scientific activity just to lend credibility, they have little or no logisitic use for 'space' ie. in serving their populations other than media orientated services.

The USA's huge effort came out of military necessity in the long days of the cold war, it strikes me the USA lacks a purpose, other than scientific and military to comit to space. What would be the purpose? Going to Mars or the Moon is simply a question of resource application, it can be done but for what gain other than the spin off research development, and granted, that may be immense, just as it was with the 70's space programme.

Even taking the long view is too long. An orbital platform to send deep space missions will reveal little until the key is found to accelerate craft to meaningfull speeds to produce results within the lifetime of the program. I like the idea of going to Mars, not sure it will tell us diddly.

In the short term, I mean thirty years or slightly longer, China and India will have their hands full elevating their populations to the same economic level as the rest of the developed world, only after a certain economic maturity has been reached might they switch resources to non-military space application. The USA cannot afford to stand by and let fledging countries steal a march and will continue with a space programme, with military sidelines to maintain competition.

On the pure research front, scientific application, the USA is to a degree more interested in the commercial application of invention rather than pure research. Emerging nations produce keen minds, a by-product of bringing education to the masses. Education is seen as a solution, a way forward in emerging countries, students approach education with a voracity developed nations scarcely remember. Little wonder they move to the cutting edge of scientific development. The UK's education system blunts appetite for learning, it is geared to the average rather than the excellent, I suspect something similar could be said about the USA. The young citizens of developing nations use education as a stepping stone to grasp opportunity. Go to any developed nation university campus, they are flooded with overseas students, certainly in the UK, and with English, and its variants, being a de-facto world language of choice, the English speaking nations receive a higher proportion of foreign students than non-English speaking countries. How many return to their country of origin and invest their knowledge is unclear, more will do so in the future as their home nations provide the opportunity to advance financially and socially.

On Europe - I don't think you would recognise Europe in 2006 compared with 1970. Change has swept Europe on almost every front. Some say for the better. The price is paid in terms of social cohesion at all levels, today you can drive from the Arctic Circle to the tip of Italy, and never need to show your passport. That is a good thing, but it also eats at the edge of individuality, and when we stop seeing ourselves as individuals, we tend to accept the uniformality that stifles ambition.

~~~~~

All interesting and good and rational things you say, my friend...but it is late, or early and I will need to think on this before I reply...thank you...


amicus...

 

[amicus]

[QUOTE=Liar]Like I said, they are probably not AS free as American citizens in America. Or Brits in the UK. But in their current position, living underground in the US, they are less free to move about, exist financially (and certainly not politically) and have little or no legal protection against malice.

Or to put it in much shorter terms. They are poor. And they move somewhere where there is money. That is economic migration.

Depends on what you populate the word with, I guess. I'm talking about direct threats to health and safety. Open war, despotism, execution of dissidents, ethnic cleansing, stifling of free press, things like that.

Current day Mexio is acknowledged as a democracy with reasonable freedom of speech, press and opinion. Perhaps not perfect and on par with US or western Europe, buy hey. It may be corrupt, ineffective and have unfair legislation. But being dysfunctional is not the same as being evil.[/QUOTE]

~~~~~~~

Again, as with Neolyte, good commentary and deserves more thought than I can offer at the moment....

thank you...

amicus...

 

[R. Richard]

There was surely no single event or epiphany that acted to determine the future ‘character’ that became uniquely an ‘American’ iconography, rather a series of unrelated events and recognitions as men and women and families and communities moved out into the vast wilderness and became self sufficient and individually self aware of that distinction.

A man named J. Frank Dobie wrote a book, titled "The History Of The American Frontier." It was not about cowboys, indians and shoor 'em up. It was about the process of families moving into the wilderness and becoming self sufficient pioneers. Civilization would then catch up with the pioneers and the pioneers and civilization would exchange useful ideas. This last process shaped the unique American character.

I would suggest that everyone read "The History Of The American Frontier." However, the book is out of print.

 

[scheherazade_79]

America truly is the last place in the world and still the best place in the entire world to seek freedom and the opportunity that all humans yearn for.

Possibly - but not if you happened to be one of the black voters in Florida, disenfranchised in the 2000 election.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

America, Man’s Last, Best hope for Freedom…

What man?

 

[neonlyte]

What man?

Picky

 

[TheEarl]

What man?

I hate to be pedantic, but he's technically correct. "Man," in this case, is a concatenation of "Mankind," rather than 'one man/many men' form, and so therefore "Man's" is the right possessive form.

Neon: Excellent description of Europe.

Amicus: I have to say that Europe, especially continental Europe (ie. the crappy bit <smiles>), is also a very popular destination for economic refugees. My parents were in Tenerife on holiday a little while ago and they told me how they saw people rowing the Mediterranean from Africa in an effort to get onto Spanish soil. Thousands upon thousands pay all the money they have to people who will provide them with a rickety boat and minimal resources and a very high proportion of them, maybe as much as 90%, die in the attempt. The ones who get through are 99% certain to get caught and deported back to where they came from (Tenerife being a very small island).

Yet, still, they come. In their thousands. It's so sad.

The Earl

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I hate to be pedantic, but he's technically correct. "Man," in this case, is a concatenation of "Mankind," rather than 'one man/many men' form, and so therefore "Man's" is the right possessive form.

I hate to be pedantic as well, but he'd only technically correct if America were indeed the last best hope for mankind. As the world stands, however, his title has an incredibly higher possibility of being accurate if it refers to one specific man.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

I hate to be pedantic as well, but he'd only technically correct if America were indeed the last best hope for mankind. As the world stands, however, his title has an incredibly higher possibility of being accurate if it refers to one specific man.

*snort*

 

[champagne1982]

<snip>the humid sweltering heat played a role also, I think, in the importation and use of slave labor.

<hack>Native Americans also played a dual role when they allied with the French and brought about the French and Indian War that took so many British lives both military and civilian, often in brutal inhumane manner. I wonder if that early experience shaded further relations with the Indians as the immigrants ceased being colonists and became Americans?

<excise>America truly is the last place in the world and still the best place in the entire world to seek freedom and the opportunity that all humans yearn for.

I would hope we deserve that past and live up to the dream.


Amicus….

To address the snip: It's good the post said "also". I would hate to think that weather could be the sole cause for slavery. Could it be the primary cause for the abuse of an entire race of people was actually the result of a technologically advanced society's greed and inflated opinion of the "rightness" of their power?

I had to hack at this so I could ask why it was failed to mention the treatied allies of the British? Several French and Aboriginal North American lives were lost during this period of warfare and unrest. You have an ethnocentric view that leaves me in no doubt about why I cut the next portion of your post out.

The excision of this statement resulted from the view that America is the last and best place in the world to seek freedom. I hardly think that the homeless and inadequately housed citizens of North America would agree that they are free. For many people the colour of their skin or their sex promises them a life bound in poverty and hardship simply because they are unaware of the assistance available to them or worse, because assistance actually is unavailable.

Please note that my above discussion points are sweeping generalities and not pointed towards any particular group or individual, I merely wanted to say that there were glaring omissions in amicus' post.

 

[TheEarl]

I hate to be pedantic as well, but he'd only technically correct if America were indeed the last best hope for mankind. As the world stands, however, his title has an incredibly higher possibility of being accurate if it refers to one specific man.

Ah, sorry. I thought you were being picky over the placing of the apostrophe, like in Author's Hangout. My bad.

The Earl

 

[R. Richard]

Possibly - but not if you happened to be one of the black voters in Florida, disenfranchised in the 2000 election.

I am not aware of black [or any other voters, aside from felons] who were disenfranchised during the 2000 election. Some voters claimed to be unable to understand the ballots, but they were disenfranchised by their own stupidity and probably just as well.

Why not include the armed forces personnel who were disenfranchised because their legitimate votes did not have postmarks?

 

[scheherazade_79]

Why not include the armed forces personnel who were disenfranchised because their legitimate votes did not have postmarks?

Excellent idea. Then we can take the number of people whose votes weren't counted well over the 2 million mark.

For what it's worth, the disenfranchisement wasn't just the result of spoiled ballot papers - thousands of names were actually purged from electoral registers

More than 133,000 votes remain uncounted in Ohio, more than George W. Bush's supposed margin of victory. In New Mexico, the uncounted vote totalled at least three times the president's plurality -- and so on in other states.

A U.S. Civil Rights Commission investigation concluded that, of nearly 180,000 votes discarded in Florida in the 2000 election as unreadable, a shocking 54 percent were cast by black voters, though they make up only a tenth of the electorate. In Florida, an African American is 900 percent more likely to have his or her vote invalidated than a white voter. In New Mexico, a Hispanic voter is 500 percent more likely than a white voter to have her or his ballot lost to spoilage.

A lot of it was down to dated punch-card machines. They typically spoil around 8% of ballot papers, and most of them were placed in areas with a high proportion of ethnic minorities... who were unlikely to vote for Bush.

I could go on, but I won't because I know there's no country in the world that's absolutely perfect. However, there are some political systems that are less perfect than others, and it might be wise to exercise a little caution before categorising them in jingoistic terms as some kind of saviour of mankind.

The US is a great place to be - if you're white and can afford medical insurance.

 

[amicus]

Sheherezade 79, long after the 'usual supects' long discarded the 'stolen election' farce, still clings to it.

The people chose Bush over Gore and then Bush over Kerry, in two separate elections; investigation after investigation, confirmed the elections to be valid.

I understand it is very difficult for the liberal left wing to even comprehend how a majority of the electorate and the electoral college could possibly reject the left wing liberal philosophy of Gore and Kerry, but they did and they did it legally, as the courts have proven and they will do it again in 2006 and in 2008.

Not through political shenagigans and fraud, as you imply, but because the American people have rejected the liberal agenda. You lost and will continue to lose because you have a flawed and faulty political agenda.

The left wing, liberal agenda, has brought about the destruction of conventional morality and offered nothing to replace it, destroyed the American concept of family, hampered the economy, and with Carter and Clinton, turned American foreign policy into wimpiness.

And now, left wing politics over a generation have destroyed the energy industry and will soon leave you without electricity and gasoline.

Maybe it is time you woke up from your socialist dream and looked at the real world?


amicus...

 

[scheherazade_79]

Amicus, throughout this debate I’ve voiced my opinion openly, but kept to the facts.

You, on the other hand, have become personal, and I see that as being symptomatic of the flimsiness of your argument.

The people chose Bush over Gore and then Bush over Kerry, in two separate elections; investigation after investigation, confirmed the elections to be valid.

The Bush v. Kerry election I know little about. I’d lost too much faith in the American politics to care by the time that came around. But as for the investigations that you seem to hold so much faith in, it might be wise to bear in mind that it was Bush’s campaign manager who oversaw the recount, it took place in the state where his brother in law was governor, and the man who judged that the election had been fair was one of his daddy’s ex business associates.

I understand it is very difficult for the liberal left wing to even comprehend how a majority of the electorate and the electoral college could possibly reject the left wing liberal philosophy of Gore and Kerry, but they did and they did it legally, as the courts have proven and they will do it again in 2006 and in 2008.

Hey, for what it’s worth I don’t affiliate myself to any political doctrine. Undiluted they can all be equally poisonous. But I do have an eye for what’s fair and what isn’t fair. I’m sorry to put it so bluntly, but in the 2000 elections George W. Bush cheated.

Not through political shenagigans and fraud, as you imply, but because the American people have rejected the liberal agenda. You lost and will continue to lose because you have a flawed and faulty political agenda.

Yes, some of the American people did reject the liberal agenda, but many others didn’t. And of the ones who didn’t, a large proportion of them were either ‘accidentally’ scratched from electoral registers, or had their ballot papers screwed up by machines that were renowned for having problems, and were kept safely away from white, affluent, Republican-voting areas.

As far as losing goes, it wasn’t that big an event in my life, sweetheart, so there’s no need to feel bad for me I’m safely in the Welsh mountains, where my electricity is brought to me by wind turbines and the local garage is full of bio-fuel cars.

The left wing, liberal agenda, has ... turned American foreign policy into wimpiness.

Since when has keeping your young men and women away from war zones been the act of a wimp? Let’s not forget about the intelligence that was handed to Bush soon after his inauguration, warning him of imminent terrorist attacks, possibly by hijacked planes. If he’d been really brave he would have acted on it there and then – increased his intelligence budget instead of decreasing it, and sought to put a stop to it before it really happened. But instead he pushed it away someplace where he wouldn’t have to look at it, and went on vacation. What a guy!

Maybe it is time you woke up from your socialist dream and looked at the real world?

Without meaning to be rude, Amicus, I have been looking at the real world – it’s you who seems annoyed at having your ‘Land of the Free’ bubble burst. What you wrote was beautifully lyrical and reminded me a little of an advert for Disneyworld, where everyone wears a smile and is delighted just to be there.

It’s not the case, and I think you were wrong, not to mention arrogant, to suggest that the US is somehow ‘better’ than any other country in the world. I have no problem with patriotism, but there are times when it can be taken to levels that are both puerile and distasteful.