5 ms·

In my travels to Europe post-2001 it became pretty clear to me that the citizens there could separate the American citizen from the American government. They k

In my travels to Europe post-2001 it became pretty clear to me that the citizens there could separate the American citizen from the American government. They knew, as they did before 9/11, that the American people were generally peaceful and generous, which was in direct contradiction to the actions of the US Government.

johansch 10y ago
Quite a lot of this goodwill went away after GWB was re-elected. We all thought you made a childish mistake at first (do the downvoters of this comment even remember that campaign? perhaps they were in kindergarten), but the second time.. that was what burned bridges.
- mindslight 10y ago
  There were many people who voted for Bush II the first time, believing his marketing of no "nation building" etc, and were then completely appalled at what he proceeded to do. Unfortunately, the number of blind war-cheerleaders was far greater - tell people they're under attack, and they fall into line. Furthermore, it's not as if with the other party now in power, USG has actually stopped attacking other countries. I think another thing other nationalities (especially Europeans) need [0] to understand is that USians view the necessity of government differently. I believe you see the Democrats as being the reasonable bunch because their rhetoric is more compatible with what you generally expect from politicians. Whereas the Republicans' rhetoric is mainly opposed to the Democrats' version of "progress" rather than proposals of their own top-down solution. So you end up seeing it as progress vs anti-progress, while domestically we do not implicitly assume government structure is even needed. (This is certainly not an endorsement of either party's actual actions after they take office, but only analysis of how their marketing is perceived) [0] if you want to analyze US politics, that is.
- wyager 10y ago
  Actually, many non-US countries had extremely high approval of GWB. http://www.pewglobal.org/2008/12/18/global-public-opinion-in-the-bush-years-2001-2008/ http://www.pewglobal.org/2008/12/18/global-public-opinion-in... Bush was very generous with food aid to Africa, for example, which won him a lot of support there.
  - adventured 10y ago
    Bush did more for Africa than any other world leader in history. There isn't a close second to that. The aid went far beyond just food as well: "When the Bush administration inaugurated the program [PEPFAR] in 2003, fewer than 50,000 HIV-infected people on the African continent were receiving the antiretroviral drugs that keep the virus in check and halt the progression toward full-blown AIDS. By the time Bush left office, the number had increased to nearly 2 million. Today, the United States is directly supporting antiretroviral treatment for more than 4 million men, women and children worldwide, primarily in Africa." http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/04/george-w-bushs-legacy-on-africa-wins-praise-even-from-foes/ http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/04/george-w-bushs-... https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene-robinson-george-w-bushs-greatest-legacy--his-battle-against-aids/2012/07/26/gJQAumGKCX_story.html?utm_term=.363cbe2d825b https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene-robinson-geor...
- zaroth 10y ago
  It's almost sad to think how history will peg GWB as the best US President in the first quarter of the 21st century.
  - mindslight 10y ago
    I doubt the overarching narrative for this period in this country's history will be in terms of positive qualities such as "best".
allendoerfer 10y ago
And yet, look what kind of candidate is still in the race to become president. The American government is voted into office. At least parts of the American people are also partially responsible. I am not saying, they could have known entirely, but the US is involved in the Middle East making it worse and worse since the early nineties, well before 9/11. Edit: Actually since after WW2, but the Iraq wars started in the nineties.
- danjayh 10y ago
  Unsure which candidate you're talking about (both?)? They're both equally awful in different ways.
- ekianjo 10y ago
  Candidates are selected in primaries which represent only a tiny bit of total american voters. So thats it.
  - allendoerfer 10y ago
    Properly done opinion polls represent the American voters, for example this one [0] which states that 41% of American voters think that it would be a good idea to elect Trump. That is more than a tiny minority. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-holds-lead-over-trump-in-new-poll-but-warning-signs-emerge/2016/09/10/800dee0c-76c8-11e6-b786-19d0cb1ed06c_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-holds-lead-o...
    - Jtsummers 10y ago
      It's hard to base anything off opinion polls like that. They don't ask "Who, at of all eligible men and women in the US, should be elected?" They ask, "Who, of these <small set> candidates do you support?" Someone can support Trump if only because they don't support Hillary (fuck, the reverse is probably half her vote).
      - allendoerfer 10y ago
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
tomjen3 10y ago
The U.S. Government is crazy generous. As a European I live in zero fear of being invaded by any other country. We receive huge military subsidies in the form of NATO protections.
- turar 10y ago
  Would you say that someone living in, say, Argentina, or Mongolia, also lives in zero fear of being invaded by any other country?
- ionised 10y ago
  Generous implies the US is benign in maintaining military forces in countries all over the world. It's not.
fit2rule 10y ago
Alas, people are responsible for their governments. You can't have all the rights of citizenships without any of the responsibility. I would say (having lived in both regions) that 'most people in Europe' wish that Americans would take a lot more responsibility for the crimes of their state than they currently do ..
ionised 10y ago
They knew, as they did before 9/11, that the American people were generally peaceful and generous The American people strike me as incredibly schizophrenic overall because half seem to be, as you say, generally peaceful and generous, whereas as the other half seem dangerously self-serving and gung-ho aggressive in their views of the rest of the world, the poor, women, foreigners, science etc. It's this half that tends to support the US governments destructive foreign policies.

johansch 10y ago

Quite a lot of this goodwill went away after GWB was re-elected. We all thought you made a childish mistake at first (do the downvoters of this comment even remember that campaign? perhaps they were in kindergarten), but the second time.. that was what burned bridges.

mindslight 10y ago
There were many people who voted for Bush II the first time, believing his marketing of no "nation building" etc, and were then completely appalled at what he proceeded to do. Unfortunately, the number of blind war-cheerleaders was far greater - tell people they're under attack, and they fall into line. Furthermore, it's not as if with the other party now in power, USG has actually stopped attacking other countries. I think another thing other nationalities (especially Europeans) need [0] to understand is that USians view the necessity of government differently. I believe you see the Democrats as being the reasonable bunch because their rhetoric is more compatible with what you generally expect from politicians. Whereas the Republicans' rhetoric is mainly opposed to the Democrats' version of "progress" rather than proposals of their own top-down solution. So you end up seeing it as progress vs anti-progress, while domestically we do not implicitly assume government structure is even needed. (This is certainly not an endorsement of either party's actual actions after they take office, but only analysis of how their marketing is perceived) [0] if you want to analyze US politics, that is.
wyager 10y ago
Actually, many non-US countries had extremely high approval of GWB. http://www.pewglobal.org/2008/12/18/global-public-opinion-in-the-bush-years-2001-2008/ http://www.pewglobal.org/2008/12/18/global-public-opinion-in... Bush was very generous with food aid to Africa, for example, which won him a lot of support there.
- adventured 10y ago
  Bush did more for Africa than any other world leader in history. There isn't a close second to that. The aid went far beyond just food as well: "When the Bush administration inaugurated the program [PEPFAR] in 2003, fewer than 50,000 HIV-infected people on the African continent were receiving the antiretroviral drugs that keep the virus in check and halt the progression toward full-blown AIDS. By the time Bush left office, the number had increased to nearly 2 million. Today, the United States is directly supporting antiretroviral treatment for more than 4 million men, women and children worldwide, primarily in Africa." http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/04/george-w-bushs-legacy-on-africa-wins-praise-even-from-foes/ http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/04/george-w-bushs-... https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene-robinson-george-w-bushs-greatest-legacy--his-battle-against-aids/2012/07/26/gJQAumGKCX_story.html?utm_term=.363cbe2d825b https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene-robinson-geor...
zaroth 10y ago
It's almost sad to think how history will peg GWB as the best US President in the first quarter of the 21st century.
- mindslight 10y ago
  I doubt the overarching narrative for this period in this country's history will be in terms of positive qualities such as "best".

allendoerfer 10y ago

And yet, look what kind of candidate is still in the race to become president. The American government is voted into office. At least parts of the American people are also partially responsible. I am not saying, they could have known entirely, but the US is involved in the Middle East making it worse and worse since the early nineties, well before 9/11. Edit: Actually since after WW2, but the Iraq wars started in the nineties.

danjayh 10y ago
Unsure which candidate you're talking about (both?)? They're both equally awful in different ways.
ekianjo 10y ago
Candidates are selected in primaries which represent only a tiny bit of total american voters. So thats it.
- allendoerfer 10y ago
  Properly done opinion polls represent the American voters, for example this one [0] which states that 41% of American voters think that it would be a good idea to elect Trump. That is more than a tiny minority. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-holds-lead-over-trump-in-new-poll-but-warning-signs-emerge/2016/09/10/800dee0c-76c8-11e6-b786-19d0cb1ed06c_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-holds-lead-o...
  - Jtsummers 10y ago
    It's hard to base anything off opinion polls like that. They don't ask "Who, at of all eligible men and women in the US, should be elected?" They ask, "Who, of these <small set> candidates do you support?" Someone can support Trump if only because they don't support Hillary (fuck, the reverse is probably half her vote).
    - allendoerfer 10y ago

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

tomjen3 10y ago

The U.S. Government is crazy generous. As a European I live in zero fear of being invaded by any other country. We receive huge military subsidies in the form of NATO protections.

turar 10y ago
Would you say that someone living in, say, Argentina, or Mongolia, also lives in zero fear of being invaded by any other country?
ionised 10y ago
Generous implies the US is benign in maintaining military forces in countries all over the world. It's not.

fit2rule 10y ago

Alas, people are responsible for their governments. You can't have all the rights of citizenships without any of the responsibility. I would say (having lived in both regions) that 'most people in Europe' wish that Americans would take a lot more responsibility for the crimes of their state than they currently do ..

ionised 10y ago

They knew, as they did before 9/11, that the American people were generally peaceful and generous The American people strike me as incredibly schizophrenic overall because half seem to be, as you say, generally peaceful and generous, whereas as the other half seem dangerously self-serving and gung-ho aggressive in their views of the rest of the world, the poor, women, foreigners, science etc. It's this half that tends to support the US governments destructive foreign policies.