Is USA Hated or Loved Around The World?

Please take a look at this article. published in today´s press. It deals exactly with this matter we were discussing. I just saw it by chance. It should be entitled a Weak Brussels......

 

Anti-American

Anti-American feelings are now affecting investments in U.S. corporations.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051014/ap_on_bi_ge/america_s_image_business

 

Those American corporations pay taxes in each country they operate. They create jobs, they invest, etc, ... A boycottt hurts everyone.

 

And usually hurts no one except the boycotters.

 

If it makes you feel any better (in a misery-loves-company sort of way), the same goes on in the U.S. Without stating particular positions, but including a few brief explanations in parens on why some of these are so contentious, here's just a brief list of subjects that have been very controversial here:

Foreign policy issues (Iraq, Palestinian issues, concerns for perception of U.S., trade, foreign aide, etc.)
NAFTA (free trade vs. free pass for corporations, especially manufacturers, to move jobs south)
CAFTA (same reasons as above)
State's rights vs. centralized government
Unfunded mandates (imposed on states by federal government or on municipalities by state governments)
Mandated government accommodation, paid by taxpayers, of languages other than English (unlike most countries, U.S. has no official language)
Illegal immigration (policies decided federally but most costs imposed locally, rights of illegals vs. rights of citizens, etc.)
Open-border policies toward legal immigration
Student visas (poor tracking misses many no longer attending college yet staying illegally)
Visitor visas (poor tracking misses many who greatly overstay allotted time)
H1B visas (corporate abuse of H1B driving down wages and benefits)
Racial issues (actual instances of racisim vs. abuse of racisim accusations in attempts to further other agenda)
Outsourcing (corporate abuse of same, including outsourcing of private medical records for overseas processing)
Issues regarding separation of church and state
Abortion
Right-to-die
Welfare and other social programs (costs, abuse by some recipients resulting in denial of benefits to others, handup vs. handout, etc.)
Health care (costs, access, etc.)
Taxes (federal, state, municipal, income vs. consumption, property taxes, etc.)
Many public education issues (primary and secondary education)
Post-secondary education (accessibility, cost, 'creeping credentialism', etc.)

Decisions have been made by elected officials, both federal and state, on the issues above, and many others, that have been contrary to popular wishes, with citizens told they lack the vision to undertand the scope of such decisions. (Sound familiar? ) "Vote the incumbents out!" is a familiar cry here, on federal, state and local levels. The problem of course is that once certain decisions are made it can very difficult to change them, even if the incumbents are voted out. It's a little like trying to unring a bell. So if Europeans feel they are being refeudalized, perhaps they can take heart to know that many in the U.S. feel they are being feudalized for the first time. Different than the EU issues but similar in that the U.S. is so large that many states are bigger than entire European countries, so regional differences between states can be similarly vast. Also, much like disputes between bordering European countries, bordering states here often squabble over conflicting interests.

Not quite. They certainly do campaign with polls in mind, but once elected, how they govern is often a very different story. Hence the cries of "Vote the incumbents out!".


Kit

 

Is it better to be loved ... or feared?

 

To SOME extent, the U.S. has no choice but to be both. As the sole remaining superpower, WHATEVER we do will inspire fury and plaudits, depending on whose ox is gored.

 

That's just the point. We are an empire. And we shouldn't have to care. Any more than past empires have cared.

 

This empire relies more than the others in amity allegiance than others. Otherwise, it would unsustainable. That’s probably why the US puts so much care in its diplomatic relations, and in its public perception.

 

Ted, this is what I meant. Sorry about the unintelligible sentences.

This empire relies more than the others in amity allegiance. Otherwise, it would unsustainable. That’s probably why the US puts so much care in its diplomatic relations, and in its public perception.

 

Everyone loves the USA when the need something. Plain and Simple. When everything is nice and sweet we are the biggest jerks on the plant. This is HIGHLY upsetting to me. If you think someone is morally corrupt, like a hitman for the mob, would you take money from him?? NO. So why do all of the US's "Friends" that bash us continue to cash the checks???

Most of Europe exist because of the US. Most Europeon Nations do not spend anywere near the appropriate PERCENTAGE of the taxes on their military. They all count on NATO and the Good Ole Cowboys from across the pond to save the day when the Drek hits the fan. Realisticly only the English have any Military to speak of. And since the end of the Soviets Union this has really become the trend.

Im not saying people should not be critical of the US. Im just saying to understand that there is a mutual relationship and everyone has a part.

If you threw a big party and people just complained you would not invite them back.

Sorry for the rant, but I am proud of being from the USA and wouldnt want to live anywere else....


just my opinion...

 

JLV: What I meant was this: Other empires throughout history haven't given a rip about what others thought. Why does the American Empire care about amity allegiance when others haven't?

 

Uhhh .... because it's infinitely better to be respected rather than feared.

Besides, JLV already addressed your question:

Kit

 

Kit: I'm not necessarily saying that the United States should maintain the American Empire through force. What I am saying is that since many and perhaps most if not all previous empires maintained themselves through force, why would the American Empire be unsustainable through force? Or, alternatively, why haven't more empires throughout history tried maintaining themselves through amity? In other words, what is so unique about the American Empire that it seeks to maintain itself through amity rather than force?

 

Ted, because unlike other previous empires America’s might resides in capitalism, which is heavily dependent on consumers and indifference curves (peopel who can CHOOSE) but also on democracy and estability abroad. To keep this supremacy it needs to export at a furious rate; it needs consumers both at home and abroad, not subjected people. The US has military bases in over 100 countries. Imagine the costs if they had to be defended on a daily basis like, say, in Iraq. On top of that, as Kit said, it is infinitely better and wiser to use soft power. Even neocons admit it. These are very different times.

 

soft power

Maybe neocons are admitting it NOW...

 

I personally never cared about whether we are loved or hated. I have travelled to quite a few countries for business and pleasure and I look at myself as human being first, and an American second. If someone wants to make a crack about the US - go for it. Of course, they are the usually first to whine if we don't respond to their disaster soon enough....

One think I realized very quickly why the French and American's don't get along very well. We are both the same -- very arrogant and nationalistic. We both look at the world as "it is my way or the highway" - we both arm our enemies and yet complain about the consequences. (and the French roads suck as much as ours to! - lol)