5 ms·

As someone who grew in the Mideast and spent some time in the US/EU/Aus, I was often amazed how completely detached Westerners are from the way the rest of the

by nir 16y ago

As someone who grew in the Mideast and spent some time in the US/EU/Aus, I was often amazed how completely detached Westerners are from the way the rest of the world works. Left wingers or conservatives, so many guns & money have been sheltering the past 2-3 generations from reality that they genuinely believe most people share their values and goals, and that the world operates similarly to their own surroundings. If these documents will cause people to start questioning the utter bullshit they are fed by Fox News or Reddit, Glenn Beck or Jon Stewart, then Assange is the most important person alive today. I doubt that would happen, though.

prodigal_erik 16y ago
If someone's failing to question Jon Stewart, who outright announces that he's not a serious journalist, they're going to need something a lot less subtle than wikileaks.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
Zev 16y ago
Left wingers or conservatives, so many guns & money have been sheltering the past 2-3 generations from reality that they genuinely believe most people share their values and goals, and that the world operates similarly to their own surroundings. Not quite, but, its an easy mistake to make. There's a saying over here, "Politics stops at the water's edge." It means that with domestic politics, politicians can be as bipartisan as they like. But when it comes to international politics, politicians are united and present a similar set of ideals[1]. This idea goes back to America's founding, not just the end of WW2 and the rise of America as a superpower in the 20th century. Daniel Webster said it way back in 1814 and Arthur Vandenberg in the 1950's, when he was a Senator. Anyway. My point is that if you (viewing from the outside in) look at American politics and use it to judge an entire nation, you're getting the wrong viewpoint. If you think that Americans are ignorant of other cultures because they are more occupied with what goes on in the states surrounding them than in countries an ocean away, you've got the wrong idea of America. 1. This is why it was such a big deal for Nancy Pelosi to meet with Bashar Assad from Syria a few years back. She said something different than what George Bush (the President at the time) was saying.
- nir 16y ago
  I don't really have a particular beef with Americans. My statement is about people I know in Europe and other Western nations as well as the US - it's less about politics than people's (politicians included) basic premises.
drusenko 16y ago
"how completely disconnected Westerners are from the way the world actually works" Would you like to explain that, or are you just going to throw a nebulous assertion out there and expect it to mean something?
- nir 16y ago
  Sure (btw, reworded it a bit, hope it's less inflammatory). A good example is the Iraq war: the pro-war side just assumed that, given the option, Iraqis will be happy to adopt the Western liberal democracy model. On the other hand, the anti-war side uses the "illegal war" argument, as if it has any meaning - the world isn't a modern nation with the UN as supreme court, determining the legality of various wars. Another example: Afghanistan. First we go in. Then we realize Taliban not only has a completely different notion of values, but of time itself - they are perfectly happy to continue fighting for 20 more years if need be. Now we're thinking, "let's just pull out and forget about it" - as if it's possible to just start off of a clean slate, no consequence. Another example, Iran in the Middle East. The documents "reveal" what anyone should have known - Arab regimes are horrified of the option of a nuclear Iran. This is because the deepest rivalry in the Middle East, that shed the most blood, is the Sunni-Shiite (and Arab-Farsi) - see the >1m dead in the Iraq-Iran war - rather then the Israeli-Arab obsessively covered by Fox/CNN/Reddit/Beck/Stewart. Finally, a personal favorite of mine: my wife often tells me how her (expensive Ivy League) university professors bring up various UN treaties nearly all nations but the US have signed. They seem to actually believe the various dictatorships that signed these documents will not ignore them completely the second they become inconvenient. I'm not claiming to have a good idea on what to do with Iraq/Afghanistan/Iran/etc. Just that I think the level of discussion is ridiculous.
  - dkl 16y ago
    > On the other side, the anti-war side uses the "illegal war" argument, as if it has any meaning - the world isn't a modern nation with the UN as supreme court, determining the legality of various wars. The left used this argument because it was the handiest they had. I think your criticism of it is absurd. It's like you're saying the left was right for the wrong reason, as if there is one reason all on the left opposed the war in Iraq. How about this: Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and therefore there was NO reason to attack them??

by nir 16y ago

prodigal_erik 16y ago

If someone's failing to question Jon Stewart, who outright announces that he's not a serious journalist, they're going to need something a lot less subtle than wikileaks.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

Zev 16y ago

Left wingers or conservatives, so many guns & money have been sheltering the past 2-3 generations from reality that they genuinely believe most people share their values and goals, and that the world operates similarly to their own surroundings. Not quite, but, its an easy mistake to make. There's a saying over here, "Politics stops at the water's edge." It means that with domestic politics, politicians can be as bipartisan as they like. But when it comes to international politics, politicians are united and present a similar set of ideals[1]. This idea goes back to America's founding, not just the end of WW2 and the rise of America as a superpower in the 20th century. Daniel Webster said it way back in 1814 and Arthur Vandenberg in the 1950's, when he was a Senator. Anyway. My point is that if you (viewing from the outside in) look at American politics and use it to judge an entire nation, you're getting the wrong viewpoint. If you think that Americans are ignorant of other cultures because they are more occupied with what goes on in the states surrounding them than in countries an ocean away, you've got the wrong idea of America. 1. This is why it was such a big deal for Nancy Pelosi to meet with Bashar Assad from Syria a few years back. She said something different than what George Bush (the President at the time) was saying.

nir 16y ago
I don't really have a particular beef with Americans. My statement is about people I know in Europe and other Western nations as well as the US - it's less about politics than people's (politicians included) basic premises.

drusenko 16y ago

"how completely disconnected Westerners are from the way the world actually works" Would you like to explain that, or are you just going to throw a nebulous assertion out there and expect it to mean something?

nir 16y ago
Sure (btw, reworded it a bit, hope it's less inflammatory). A good example is the Iraq war: the pro-war side just assumed that, given the option, Iraqis will be happy to adopt the Western liberal democracy model. On the other hand, the anti-war side uses the "illegal war" argument, as if it has any meaning - the world isn't a modern nation with the UN as supreme court, determining the legality of various wars. Another example: Afghanistan. First we go in. Then we realize Taliban not only has a completely different notion of values, but of time itself - they are perfectly happy to continue fighting for 20 more years if need be. Now we're thinking, "let's just pull out and forget about it" - as if it's possible to just start off of a clean slate, no consequence. Another example, Iran in the Middle East. The documents "reveal" what anyone should have known - Arab regimes are horrified of the option of a nuclear Iran. This is because the deepest rivalry in the Middle East, that shed the most blood, is the Sunni-Shiite (and Arab-Farsi) - see the >1m dead in the Iraq-Iran war - rather then the Israeli-Arab obsessively covered by Fox/CNN/Reddit/Beck/Stewart. Finally, a personal favorite of mine: my wife often tells me how her (expensive Ivy League) university professors bring up various UN treaties nearly all nations but the US have signed. They seem to actually believe the various dictatorships that signed these documents will not ignore them completely the second they become inconvenient. I'm not claiming to have a good idea on what to do with Iraq/Afghanistan/Iran/etc. Just that I think the level of discussion is ridiculous.
- dkl 16y ago
  > On the other side, the anti-war side uses the "illegal war" argument, as if it has any meaning - the world isn't a modern nation with the UN as supreme court, determining the legality of various wars. The left used this argument because it was the handiest they had. I think your criticism of it is absurd. It's like you're saying the left was right for the wrong reason, as if there is one reason all on the left opposed the war in Iraq. How about this: Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and therefore there was NO reason to attack them??