An interesting response to a goofy tid-bit here prompted this post, a defense of the Americans. I'll probably post a few of these just to clear the air about what I think of the American people. This is a blog, and people have a right to their own opinions. But keep the following in mind (Warning, warning! Opinion inbound!)
I think American history has left an indelible mark on the American psyche, both for good or ill. Their War of Independence saw them bleed for their freedom, and their experiment in democracy was as a result one of the best beginnings to a human political endeavour. I say again: the American experiement started as well as anything the world has ever seen (and I'm thinking of times and places like the early Roman Republic.) It started far better than the French with their Revolution, for example, that muddled thing that ended in an Emperor anyway.
The founding fathers of the United States were great men, and the United States has it within itself to be great (in its good moments it may just be the best damned country on the planet.) I'll make that case, which is a weird one for me, over the next few weeks.
For now, let me say two things. First, all the things we say to criticize the American people they freely do themselves. They are a political people, like any, so they'll disagree with one another while they're doing it, but few would say and mean "My country right or wrong" (which Chesterton said was like proclaiming "My mother, drunk or sober.") So they hold certain things fairly dearly, and we should value them from that.
The second thing is this. Look at our country. Canadians are generally a pretty decent people: friendly, relatively peaceful, all of that. But we can be smug. Oh we can be smug. And yet we do as much, on our scale, to hurt others as anyone. Our military is small, so our imperialism doesn't manifest in the form of fighter squadrons or carrier groups, but our banks and our multinationals have proven very effective at taking it to the little guy.
A case study (and home-work for anyone who's curious): Google "Canadian Mining Companies" and scroll past the actual corporate websites to the many reports on atrocities in Africa or South America. Canadian companies own more than 50% of the world's mining corporations. There are places you don't want to admit Canadian citizenship because of that.
Another thought: Look at our standard of living. We're part of that small North American population that consumes to much of the world's resources (40% or something like that? Anyone?) We live on the blood of others as much as any Westerner. So, Iraq aside, we don't have a great deal to brag about.
Ben. Yes, I write this as an ode to the flower that is you. But don't take it too heavily; you just sparked some thoughts, and I appreciate the comments. You're a good man.
7 comments:
I agree with the argument that we as Canadians, in some ways, take for granted the fact that we have a scapegoat such as the United States to blame most, if not all, of North America's problems on. These judgements, I think, have been brought about by decades of critical, scrutinizing analysis of everything 'bad' that has come out of the U.S.'s involvement with foreign affairs (Vietnam, Iraq War.)
However, even though the U.S.A. could be labeled as Canada's scapegoat for a variety of issues, that does not mean Canada gets off 'Scot-Free.' I have in fact researched the mining industry and its global effect, and let me tell you (Johnson, you must be aware of this) but some of the destructive practises put into place in some of these regions are intolerable and in some ways inhumane. And the mining companies are all doing these in the end for one thing - a profit.
Yes the Americans are ruled by a nation of Corporations. Yes, the have flawed morals, but in the end, who are we to judge cynically before we take a look in our own backyard?
Just a thought.
Johnson, no harm done. Like I said, I invite all critisism and opinions against my own, it's the best way for me to shape a well-rounded opinion of my own. Having said that, I do not, in any way, take this blog entry as an attack on me or my opinions but simply a justification of your own.
Let me just clarify where I stand on the United States. You're completely right that we have to appreciate their history. I honestly think it's a shame that Canada never declared independance from the crown, in my mind, that remains a flaw in our democracy. So hats off to the Americans for that part of their history, and yes, to their democracy. We can find flaws in any government, but I truly believe that if we were to find a balance between the United State's government and our own, that we would have an ideal political structure.
Where my argument was stemming from would be with the current U.S. government which I do believe is the worst to have ever been elected in the U.S.'s history. Other presidents have made mistakes, without a doubt, they're all human just like any one of us, however, they also did great things to be remembered for. George W. Bush's term as President is coming to an end and the only thing he will be remembered for is forcing political ideas on others and raking in the financial benefits of the situation. Like I mentioned in my previous comment, it is not the American majority that is profiting from this war, it is the wealthy few. And there-in lies one of the many problems of a country ran by its corporations.
And so I'll end by saying that, yes the Americans deserve our respect, but the Bush administration has (in my opinion) disgraced the democracy that the United States had put in place.
(Maybe one day I'll throw out my critisism towards Canada as well, there is plenty of it.)
Let's not kid ourselves here, Canada is also a nation run by corporations. I wager to say that all of our elected leaders have been lobbied by people working for corporations. Maybe it's not to the scale that it is in the US and the whole Bush-Halliburton scandal, however, corporate pay-offs are corporate pay-offs.
It seems as if these day hating America is trendy. But really, are we that much different? America has sheer numbers behind them. Can we honestly say that if Canada was the size and had the means to do the things that America does that we'd be any different?
Another thing to realize is to compare our collective histories. America is a nation born out of revolution whereas Canada is a nation born out of deserters (ie. British Loyalists). Maybe that has something to do with American militarism and Canadian pacifism.
To address Chris, I believe Johnson is saying that Mining Corps, specifically Canadians, are destroying people and enviroment, so you two are actually in agreement.
To address Ben, first off, I don't think its so bad that we didn't break off from Britain. They are a decent group of people, and we can learn a lot from them, especially with their fascination with the Romans, (ie language, etc). I do believe that the Americans needed to split, in order to give a reality check to Britain because they were somewhat tyrannical. And ya, I do enjoy the United States, they are a rather important nation globally. My dad was born there, so I have a bit of patriotism too. So its not fair we blame everything on them. Yes, they make some decisions for financial gains, thats true, but what nation doesn't? Finally, the Bush administration as a whole, did screw up, a lot. But I mean, I don't think they intended for all this to happen. Circumstance kind of took over I think as well. So its not entirely their fault. This is by no means a justification for forcing democracy on someone. That kind of defeats the point, like George Washington believed, you can't start acting like your enemy to defeat them, for you become exactly what you try to destroy. (He said it better)
Jeremy- I agree completely that we can learn from Britain, but I think that we could learn a little bit from most countries in Europe and, yes, from the United States. Having said that, I must also say that this is a process that should go both ways. Honestly, the United States and Canada have so much in common and the way I look at it, if both countries were to look outside just a little bit into eachother, we might find something there.
At this point I would like to quote the french philosopher Albert Camus who says:
"He who despairs of the human condition is a coward, but he who has hope for it is a fool."
I believe Camus was a pessimest and, in this quote especially, very cynical. But I'd also argue that he has made a very good point, if we consider it to a lesser extent. "He who dispairs of the human condition is a coward" is a line that I like very much and matches very nicely with something else the he said:
"Man is the only creature that refuses to be what he is."
It is too often that we do not accept our own faults and mistakes in order to correct them. By scapegoating (as so many do to the United States) we solve nothing and it seems to be that, at that point, we are almost afraid to face ourselves.
"...but he who has hope for it is a fool."
That, I find cynical. However, it does have a point of genius to it. There must always be hope, the world would be nothing without it. However, I like to believe that Camus meant for the two lines to parallel eachother. If he is saying that it is foolish to think that humanity will stop scapegoating, stop being cowards and start taking responsibility, then I have to agree with him.
I've strayed just a little bit from my original point, but I think my point is well-made.
"I've strayed just a little bit from my original point, but I think my point is well-made."
Which point was that? :)
Haha thanks Johnson.
My point was that, while the United States have contributed much to the world we live in, and while their history gives us much that we can learn from, the current Bush administration is an embarassment to it's country and an abuse on the power that the United States holds on the world.
Having said that, my point made about Camus would be that we are all flawed human beings and that, although it may not always seem like it, our governments are made up of flawed human beings. We tend to forget that. I don't agree with President Bush's actions taken during his time in office, however, he is flawed like any other human. The only thing that separates him, in my mind, from other flawed government personel is that they have left good marks to their names that overshadow the bad. He has only left room for the bad to be remembered.
The thing is, we look back on past presidents such as JFK or Eisenhauer and remember them for having done great things. When we look back on Bush's term, he will not be remembered as great. Our children will be taught about all the great things that past presidents had done during wars or depressions or during a major crisis. But I can only assume that the War in Iraq (hoping it will be over by then) will be added as part of their curriculum. When they learn about this, they will learn about George W. Bush as a hypocritical, war-hungry man trying too hard to make a name for himself.
I've heard the argument before that no other president has had to deal with attacks on their country's sovereignty and national security as Bush has done. I'd argue Pearl Harbour. You look back on history, you'll realize that Bush has made bad decision after bad decision to create the name that he now posesses.
Post a Comment