12 ms·

The US is repeatedly on the wrong side of history. And they cannot even face that. Red scare. Supporting neo-liberal-to-fascist govts. Yelling democracy but th

by cies 5y ago

The US is repeatedly on the wrong side of history. And they cannot even face that. Red scare. Supporting neo-liberal-to-fascist govts. Yelling democracy but then killing democratically chosen representatives when they do not "suit de US likings". Bitching about some "meddling" in their election when the history is full of US meddling in democratic process of other nations. Giving "foreign aid" to apartheid regimes. US looked like a force of good after WW2, but that deteriorated quickly. Not that other western nation states are holy, but the US seems to be the ringleader.

cies 5y ago
Now I know HN is not all about jokes. But this came to mind in context of this most horrible war the Viet had to fight to gain independence from their colonial overlords: https://www.reddit.com/r/dankmemes/comments/6zefas/the_flag_of_the_united_states/ https://www.reddit.com/r/dankmemes/comments/6zefas/the_flag_...
- noduerme 5y ago
  Never mind the horrors inflicted by the North on their newly liberated Southern brethren, 800,000 of whom fled by boat (many to take up successful lives as immigrants in the evil, racist USA).
hansor 5y ago
You should investigate CIA/NATO funded clandestine operations such us GLADIO involving terror attacks in Europe against civilians. AKA "strategy of tension". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_Due https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_Due https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOC_1990_324_R_0186_01&from=EN https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:J... >The August 2, 1980 bombing of the Bologna train station which killed 85 people, is widely recognized as a Gladio operation. While it was initially blamed on the communist “Red Brigades,” eventually, right-wing and fascists elements were discoverd to be the culprits. Two Italian secret service agents and Licio Gelli, the head of the infamous P2 Masonic lodge, were convicted in connection to the bombing. >1969: “In Italy, the Piazza Fontana massacre in Milan kills 16 and injures and maims 80 [….] during a trial of rightwing extremists General Giandelio Maletti, former head of Italian counterintelligence, alleges that the massacre had been carried out by the Italian stay-behind army and rightwing terrorists on the orders of the US secret service CIA in order to discredit Italian Communists.”
- jules-jules 5y ago
  It's telling that mere links to factual information on Wikipedia can still garner downvotes on HN.
shp0ngle 5y ago
Eh, my relatives are South Vietnamese, Vietcong was basically mafia and when communists won, they were horrible to the South. Not saying Diem government was that good, especially in their last months their anti-buddhist paranoia made them insane; but yeah communists were bad against the buddhists too once they came into power. But yeah Agent Orange and napalm were horrible. There is no debate about that.
- dash2 5y ago
  Sorry that this got downvoted. Large numbers of Vietnamese refugees fled Vietnam after the North's victory.[1] Arbitrary arrest and torture remains widespread in Vietnam according to Amnesty International. These were incredibly interesting and inspiring pictures and it's a shame to see the top comment hijacked by juvenile America-baaad-ism. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnamese_boat_people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnamese_boat_people
  - shp0ngle 5y ago
    Well nowadays the government is much better and basically tolerable. Torture and death sentences are still present, but I would not say widespread, unlike in the hardest years of communism. There are political prisoners, but it’s not random and widespread. Coincidentally, Vietnamese communist government nowadays tries to be Best Friend with USA.
    - cies 5y ago
      > Torture and death sentences are still present, but I would not say widespread Also in the US that you seem to defend...
      - altcognito 5y ago
        My Vietnamese friends would explain to you: They are happy to have worked hard here, own restaurants, get degreees and raise children in a system that is largely fair and representative. It does not lack problems but they would argue it is far fairer than communism.
guerrilla 5y ago
This file has a long list of some of those things. It has some bias and some things I don't think there's much evidence for but I think it's good entry point for starting to research: https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/us_atrocities.md https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/us_atrociti...
CamperBob2 5y ago
A controversial assertion. If there's a "wrong side" of history, there must also be a "right side." Who do you consider to occupy that position?
- Jenk 5y ago
  ~~False.~~ Their does not need to be a right side just because there is a, or even many, wrong. Everyone can be shitty. e: not false, I misread.
  - unishark 5y ago
    Wouldn't your view be in agreement with the poster? They aren't saying they personally believe there must be a right side but that the metaphor implies it.
    - Jenk 5y ago
      I think you are right.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- brobdingnagians 5y ago
  Not a country or group, but individuals. The countless good people who work for what is right. Like Corrie Ten Boom who wrote The Hiding Place [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrie_ten_Boom https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrie_ten_Boom
- cies 5y ago
  I'd say post WW2 Scandinavia+Iceland has been rather exemplar. Bhutan comes to mind too.
  - 5y ago
dash2 5y ago
You failed to mention the times the US was on the right side of history. Most importantly, it defeated the USSR, which was, as Ronald Reagan correctly pointed out, an evil empire.
- nosianu 5y ago
  As a former East German, 90% of that "defeat" was done by the USSR (and the Eastern Bloc) itself, not the USA. Credit where it is due, since you insist.
  - SyzygistSix 5y ago
    That defeat could have been deferred a long time if it was free to gobble up countries and bring them into the communist sphere.
    - rad_gruchalski 5y ago
      The USSR collapsed from the inside.
- Jenk 5y ago
  > it defeated the USSR Very arguably: no, it didn't. The USSR defeated itself. It overspent and was rife with corruption. They don't call it "the collapse of the USSR" for no reason. It couldn't maintain its own weight and fell in on itself.
  - Croftengea 5y ago
    Yes, every empire collapses under its weight, sooner or later.
  - op00to 5y ago
    Why did the USSR overspend? Was it trying to keep up with the west?
  - TomSwirly 5y ago
pmoriarty 5y ago
"the history is full of US meddling in democratic process of other nations" There's an interesting book about this called Overthrow.[1] [1] - https://www.amazon.com/Overthrow-Americas-Century-Regime-Change/dp/0805082409 https://www.amazon.com/Overthrow-Americas-Century-Regime-Cha...
pembrook 5y ago
Yes, the world is a chaotic reflexive system and trying to manipulate it always creates unintended consequences. The US absolutely does dumb stuff all the time, and power always gets abused. But for a contrarian view on the “US Bad” narrative, check out a book called The Accidental Superpower Here’s a good summary of the book: https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/your-book-review-the-accidental-superpower https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/your-book-review-the-a... It presents an interesting case that the relative peace of modern society is entirely due to US military over-investment brought on by the Cold War—which allows for uninterrupted global supply chains, safe global trade, and enforces the intertwining of economic interests through global markets. Absent the US existing, the world doesn’t suddenly become a utopia of people living happily ever after. Humans don’t have a great track record of being nice to each other. Unfortunately the alternative options to US power don’t look all that great.
- dncornholio 5y ago
  The amount of goodwill the US had from ending WWII is sadly running out. US felt invincible after it and tried to do the right thing. But did not actually manage to replicate to what they did in WWII. Backup these results with data is not the way to go. You have to proof the same results could have not been achieved without force. Which is impossible to proof IMO
  - pembrook 5y ago
    Sure, it’s impossible to prove what would have happened otherwise (given the chaotic reflexive system). But an interesting thought experiment, imagine, after ending WWII the US and its people simply sunk into the ocean. Then you’ve got a massive imbalance of power tilted towards Stalin and the Soviets with nuclear weapons and allied with China, vs a weak UK and France. While it’s impossible to prove the USSR wouldn’t have started caring about democracy and human rights and stopped caring about expansion on their own...I don’t think it’s a leap to say the world would be a worse place.
    - notsureaboutpg 5y ago
NicoJuicy 5y ago
The US made it possible that war is less wanted then economic relations. And the world is not perfect, but for whatever it's worth. I think the US does and did a fine job.
1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
You have to admit though, the US does have a history of producing good music.
- cies 5y ago
  Tell that to the generation of Viet women that have no men. How dare you on an article like this... But then sure, I have to admit. :)
- thorin 5y ago
  Not as good as the UK, and historically Germany and Austria, which have their own little problems in the past...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
nabla9 5y ago
US involvement in Vietnam was based on complete misunderstanding. The US is not know for their cultural or historical intelligence to begin with, but McCarthyism had wiped out many China and Asia experts from the State Department. US misunderstood the history of Vietnam and the goals of the belligerents. Vietcong also misunderstood the US. Ho Chi Minh and Vietcong were nationalists first, communists second. US feared the domino effect that had no change of happening with Vietnam. Vietnam would not side with China for any reason and China was prepared to go to war against Russia if Russia got too much influence in Vietnam.
- cies 5y ago
  > complete misunderstanding So admit it, say sorry, pay reparations.
  - ahefner 5y ago
    No.
  - Glawen 5y ago
    Say sorry, why not, but demanding to pay back I don't understand. It is not the same people in power nor the same population, why should they pay for their parents? It is preposterous. And where do you stop with this logic, neolithic?
    - SirLotsaLocks 5y ago
      They're still paying the price for what the US did to them, I don't think it's too uncommon for reparations to be payed by different people because usually reparations are on behalf of the government itself. If a different government took over the US then I think it would be a bit unfair to expect reparations. But as it stands it's the same government and a lot of the people who took part in the atrocities are still alive today, it's not like it happened hundreds of years ago.
roenxi 5y ago
There is no 'right' and 'wrong' side of history. There are complicated shades of grey coloured by propaganda. And if there was a right side of history, the US has a very credible claim to it. They've pushed science and the arts forward, promoted freedom as a cultural aspiration rather than rule by a monarch and generally acted as a credible supporting force for the greatest improvement of living standards the world has ever seen in Asia. There was a lot of cruelty, bloodshed and lies. But there has not yet been anyone in history who avoided that while being large. The US could certainly have been much worse.
- cies 5y ago
  You say: > There is no 'right' and 'wrong' side of history. But then you conclude: > There was a lot of cruelty, bloodshed and lies. [...] The US could certainly have been much worse. So you do accept there's a gradient of right and wrong. > The US could certainly have been much worse. But also a lot better! > But there has not yet been anyone in history who avoided that while being large. What we've seen is next level. This is due to the increase in mobility and world trade, sure. But it has been abused heavily, and seemingly to every extend possible. I dont know how it could have been worse without being a straight up dictatorship. (having only two parties come very close to being a dictatorship if you ask me; only one party better than the China the US like to bash so much lately). > They've pushed science and the arts forward, promoted freedom as a cultural aspiration rather than rule by a monarch and generally acted as a credible supporting force for the greatest improvement of living standards the world has ever seen in Asia. Tell that to the Vietnamese and North Koreans. Indonesia and Philippines also have a bit of a US hangover. Science is fucked nowadays. Very "proprietary", as by the US-push patent law. I think there is right and wrong. Read some Jesus and you know that ideas of what it good behavior and what is bad is not at all new. I'm not religious, but just to show that it is not merely the last decades that we know we should be nice to people and now do any horrible act for a bit of profit.
  - roenxi 5y ago
    There is a gradient of right and wrong. Most (realistically all) successful countries are on the wrong side of it. I mean, look at the path the Europeans took to get to the modern era. Short periods of it, like the last 2000 years, have involved questionable acts.
cm2187 5y ago
So the "right side" is a communist dictatorship?
- cies 5y ago
  https://www.fallacyfiles.org/eitheror.html https://www.fallacyfiles.org/eitheror.html
  - cm2187 5y ago
    If you have a war between two sides and you are calling one the wrong side, you are creating a dichotomy
throwaway6734 5y ago
>US looked like a force of good after WW2, but that deteriorated quickly. Not that other western nation states are holy, but the US seems to be the ringleader. Humanity has seen the most positive growth by far under Pax Americana. What's your alternative?
- SirLotsaLocks 5y ago
  >Humanity has seen the most positive growth by far under Pax Americana. It's not really much of a Pax Americana in the middle east or Central/South America. East Asia seems to be next too. "Pax Americana" has definitely been amazing for the west and it's friends but as countries like China and India start to challenge that, true colors will probably start to show as the existing world power(s) fight to keep that title.
  - throwaway6734 5y ago
    Global poverty has plummeted over the last 70 years
    - antifa 5y ago
      The United States is happy to accept all credit for any correlation, no proof of causation necessary.
      - throwaway6734 5y ago
        Since the US has been at the forefront of technological development, global stability, and investing in many of the biggest economic players today (south Korea, Japan, and Germany) it deserves significant credit for the current state of the world.
        antifa 5y ago
        > it deserves significant credit for the current state of the world. Ok good, so both the good things and the bad things they did, yes credit where credit is due.
joyeuse6701 5y ago
The Southern Vietnamese population in the US would strongly disagree with you. One shouldn’t forget what happened to them after the U.S. pulled out. It wasn’t a rainbows and sunshine reunification, but murder, anguish and famine.
ausbah 5y ago
I don't think the "other side of history" is much better most of the time
Dumblydorr 5y ago
While it is true that the US has done morally questionable and practically useless world-policing, it's not as cut and dry as you state. In both world wars, the US was undeniably a force for good, against the extremely evil Nazis, the extremely cruel Imperial Japanese, and helping more monetarily and supply wise in WW1. Furthermore, the US fought itself to free millions of slaves in it's own Civil War. While it's true the South attempted to leave to keep their slavery power, the other half of the US stomped them in the war. Outside of militarism, the US has generally been cruelly expansionist against Native Americans, and has seen a lot of atrocities on "its own" soil. Yet the colonists eventually established a nation today that is pivotal to the arts, science, technology, and even human rights, humanitarianism, and large scale philanthropy. How do we weigh all these? The US is not merely on the wrong side; we are a mixture of good and bad.
- marcusverus 5y ago
  > Furthermore, the US fought itself to free millions of slaves in it's own Civil War. This is simply not true. The North prosecuted the war to preserve the Union. It was only afterward that it was re-imagined as a war of liberation. This reimagination makes perfect sense from a propaganda perspective. After all, the Confederacy was a democracy. Its people voted to leave the Union. The Yanks, for the stated purpose of "preserving the Union" invaded a democracy and killed half a million of its citizens. Ingeniously, by pretending that the war was always about freeing the slaves, the US has people walking around celebrating a one-million casualty war as a sign of their country's morality! Woof! The truth is this: The Civil War was waged to preserve the American Empire in North America. The fact that it happened, in an unforeseeable confluence of circumstances, to result in the end of slavery, does not make it a moral war. [0]https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Cry-Freedom-Civil-War/dp/019516895X https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Cry-Freedom-Civil-War/dp/01951...
  - greedo 5y ago
    A democracy? Not for Blacks in the South...
    - 5y ago
bmmayer1 5y ago
> repeatedly on the wrong side of history Also repeatedly on the right side of history. It's really intellectually dishonest to ignore one over the other. > they cannot even face that I don't know who "they" are, but Americans are extremely self critical -- just look at this thread. It's also certainly the only of three global superpowers where citizens can be (and are) openly critical of their country's policies. > Red scare I'm sorry, have you ever lived in a communist country? > Supporting neo-liberal-to-fascist govts Yeah pretty much any time a country is a global superpower / police, it's going to make mistakes. But also, many governments the US has supported historically have had broad popular support on the ground, too, and the governments overthrown have been oppressive regimes. The regimes that take their place may often have also been oppressive, but that's not known without the benefit of hindsight. (Also there are legitimate victories in this camp too. Just ask any resident of South Korea.) I could keep going, but it seems like your main beef with the US is that it operates like a global superpower pursuing its own domestic and international policy. I don't know what you think the world would look like under another superpower like China or Russia, but given the treatment of those countries _towards their own citizens_ in Chechnya, Crimea*, Uyghur Xinjiang, and Tibet, it's hard to imagine your or my life would be much better off under those global regimes. I also challenge you to find a global superpower in world history that has yielded a more unshakeable global peace for almost a century.
fallingknife 5y ago
> the wrong side of history I can't stand this phrase. It reeks of the history is a narrative with good guys and bad guys point of view.
sebastianconcpt 5y ago
Tell me more about the communist contributions to human history without omission on its costs.
- antifa 5y ago
  Communism invented space travel, the mobile phone, and the artifical heart.
  - sebastianconcpt 5y ago
    Where's the without omission on its costs part?
rajin444 5y ago
> US looked like a force of good after WW2 Watching some of the US WW2 propaganda is really eye opening. We're the lesser of 2 evils, but that's not saying much.
dionidium 5y ago
> And they cannot even face that. Except for maybe the Germans, Americans have a credible claim to more "facing" of their sins than any other country on Earth. Have you consumed any U.S. news over the last 20 years? Wrestling with our past is practically the national pastime.
- pmoriarty 5y ago
  "Wrestling with our past is practically the national pastime." Most Americans don't care about politics, don't care about history, and certainly don't engage in any past wrestling. It's a relatively small, well educated elite who has that interest. The rest of the population would rather watch cat videos.
  - dionidium 5y ago
    Sure, but that's true of all people in any country at any point in history. When we say something like, "they cannot even face that," we're either talking about the portion of the population that pays attention to and discusses national issues or we're not talking about anybody at all, pretty much by definition.
    - pmoriarty 5y ago
      Still, you can't call something done only by a small minority of the population a national pastime. Watching sports is a national American pastime. So is drinking beer. Wrestling with the past is not.
simonh 5y ago
Things the US fought against: Japanese occupation of East Asia. Nazi occupation of Europe. Soviet occupation and oppression of Eastern Europe. Oppression of Iran by a theocratic fascist government. Russia again. Establishment of a nuclear capable unbelievably horrible regime in North Korea. More Russia. A regime in Afghanistan that murders girls for wanting to read. Lots of more recent Putin shit, for details ask the populace of any neighbour of Russia on it's western side. So yes, they've done a lot of bad crap. Their history of supporting corrupt murderous fascists in latin America is a notable series of lows. Not that the communist alternatives were all that wonderful. However it's a very mixed bag. Take the US out of the post-war period, and does it really look a whole lot better? If you're going to go off on one about countries the rest of the world could have done fine without for the last 70 years I could probably name a few for you.

by cies 5y ago

cies 5y ago

Now I know HN is not all about jokes. But this came to mind in context of this most horrible war the Viet had to fight to gain independence from their colonial overlords: https://www.reddit.com/r/dankmemes/comments/6zefas/the_flag_of_the_united_states/ https://www.reddit.com/r/dankmemes/comments/6zefas/the_flag_...

noduerme 5y ago
Never mind the horrors inflicted by the North on their newly liberated Southern brethren, 800,000 of whom fled by boat (many to take up successful lives as immigrants in the evil, racist USA).

hansor 5y ago

You should investigate CIA/NATO funded clandestine operations such us GLADIO involving terror attacks in Europe against civilians. AKA "strategy of tension". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_Due https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_Due https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOC_1990_324_R_0186_01&from=EN https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:J... >The August 2, 1980 bombing of the Bologna train station which killed 85 people, is widely recognized as a Gladio operation. While it was initially blamed on the communist “Red Brigades,” eventually, right-wing and fascists elements were discoverd to be the culprits. Two Italian secret service agents and Licio Gelli, the head of the infamous P2 Masonic lodge, were convicted in connection to the bombing. >1969: “In Italy, the Piazza Fontana massacre in Milan kills 16 and injures and maims 80 [….] during a trial of rightwing extremists General Giandelio Maletti, former head of Italian counterintelligence, alleges that the massacre had been carried out by the Italian stay-behind army and rightwing terrorists on the orders of the US secret service CIA in order to discredit Italian Communists.”

jules-jules 5y ago
It's telling that mere links to factual information on Wikipedia can still garner downvotes on HN.

shp0ngle 5y ago

Eh, my relatives are South Vietnamese, Vietcong was basically mafia and when communists won, they were horrible to the South. Not saying Diem government was that good, especially in their last months their anti-buddhist paranoia made them insane; but yeah communists were bad against the buddhists too once they came into power. But yeah Agent Orange and napalm were horrible. There is no debate about that.

dash2 5y ago
Sorry that this got downvoted. Large numbers of Vietnamese refugees fled Vietnam after the North's victory.[1] Arbitrary arrest and torture remains widespread in Vietnam according to Amnesty International. These were incredibly interesting and inspiring pictures and it's a shame to see the top comment hijacked by juvenile America-baaad-ism. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnamese_boat_people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnamese_boat_people
- shp0ngle 5y ago
  Well nowadays the government is much better and basically tolerable. Torture and death sentences are still present, but I would not say widespread, unlike in the hardest years of communism. There are political prisoners, but it’s not random and widespread. Coincidentally, Vietnamese communist government nowadays tries to be Best Friend with USA.
  - cies 5y ago
    > Torture and death sentences are still present, but I would not say widespread Also in the US that you seem to defend...
    - altcognito 5y ago
      My Vietnamese friends would explain to you: They are happy to have worked hard here, own restaurants, get degreees and raise children in a system that is largely fair and representative. It does not lack problems but they would argue it is far fairer than communism.

guerrilla 5y ago

This file has a long list of some of those things. It has some bias and some things I don't think there's much evidence for but I think it's good entry point for starting to research: https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/us_atrocities.md https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/us_atrociti...

CamperBob2 5y ago

A controversial assertion. If there's a "wrong side" of history, there must also be a "right side." Who do you consider to occupy that position?

Jenk 5y ago
~~False.~~ Their does not need to be a right side just because there is a, or even many, wrong. Everyone can be shitty. e: not false, I misread.
- unishark 5y ago
  Wouldn't your view be in agreement with the poster? They aren't saying they personally believe there must be a right side but that the metaphor implies it.
  - Jenk 5y ago
    I think you are right.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
brobdingnagians 5y ago
Not a country or group, but individuals. The countless good people who work for what is right. Like Corrie Ten Boom who wrote The Hiding Place [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrie_ten_Boom https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrie_ten_Boom
cies 5y ago
I'd say post WW2 Scandinavia+Iceland has been rather exemplar. Bhutan comes to mind too.
- 5y ago

dash2 5y ago

You failed to mention the times the US was on the right side of history. Most importantly, it defeated the USSR, which was, as Ronald Reagan correctly pointed out, an evil empire.

nosianu 5y ago
As a former East German, 90% of that "defeat" was done by the USSR (and the Eastern Bloc) itself, not the USA. Credit where it is due, since you insist.
- SyzygistSix 5y ago
  That defeat could have been deferred a long time if it was free to gobble up countries and bring them into the communist sphere.
  - rad_gruchalski 5y ago
    The USSR collapsed from the inside.
Jenk 5y ago
> it defeated the USSR Very arguably: no, it didn't. The USSR defeated itself. It overspent and was rife with corruption. They don't call it "the collapse of the USSR" for no reason. It couldn't maintain its own weight and fell in on itself.
- Croftengea 5y ago
  Yes, every empire collapses under its weight, sooner or later.
- op00to 5y ago
  Why did the USSR overspend? Was it trying to keep up with the west?
- TomSwirly 5y ago

pmoriarty 5y ago

"the history is full of US meddling in democratic process of other nations" There's an interesting book about this called Overthrow.[1] [1] - https://www.amazon.com/Overthrow-Americas-Century-Regime-Change/dp/0805082409 https://www.amazon.com/Overthrow-Americas-Century-Regime-Cha...

pembrook 5y ago

Yes, the world is a chaotic reflexive system and trying to manipulate it always creates unintended consequences. The US absolutely does dumb stuff all the time, and power always gets abused. But for a contrarian view on the “US Bad” narrative, check out a book called The Accidental Superpower Here’s a good summary of the book: https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/your-book-review-the-accidental-superpower https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/your-book-review-the-a... It presents an interesting case that the relative peace of modern society is entirely due to US military over-investment brought on by the Cold War—which allows for uninterrupted global supply chains, safe global trade, and enforces the intertwining of economic interests through global markets. Absent the US existing, the world doesn’t suddenly become a utopia of people living happily ever after. Humans don’t have a great track record of being nice to each other. Unfortunately the alternative options to US power don’t look all that great.

dncornholio 5y ago
The amount of goodwill the US had from ending WWII is sadly running out. US felt invincible after it and tried to do the right thing. But did not actually manage to replicate to what they did in WWII. Backup these results with data is not the way to go. You have to proof the same results could have not been achieved without force. Which is impossible to proof IMO
- pembrook 5y ago
  Sure, it’s impossible to prove what would have happened otherwise (given the chaotic reflexive system). But an interesting thought experiment, imagine, after ending WWII the US and its people simply sunk into the ocean. Then you’ve got a massive imbalance of power tilted towards Stalin and the Soviets with nuclear weapons and allied with China, vs a weak UK and France. While it’s impossible to prove the USSR wouldn’t have started caring about democracy and human rights and stopped caring about expansion on their own...I don’t think it’s a leap to say the world would be a worse place.
  - notsureaboutpg 5y ago

NicoJuicy 5y ago

The US made it possible that war is less wanted then economic relations. And the world is not perfect, but for whatever it's worth. I think the US does and did a fine job.

1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago

You have to admit though, the US does have a history of producing good music.

cies 5y ago
Tell that to the generation of Viet women that have no men. How dare you on an article like this... But then sure, I have to admit. :)
thorin 5y ago
Not as good as the UK, and historically Germany and Austria, which have their own little problems in the past...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

nabla9 5y ago

US involvement in Vietnam was based on complete misunderstanding. The US is not know for their cultural or historical intelligence to begin with, but McCarthyism had wiped out many China and Asia experts from the State Department. US misunderstood the history of Vietnam and the goals of the belligerents. Vietcong also misunderstood the US. Ho Chi Minh and Vietcong were nationalists first, communists second. US feared the domino effect that had no change of happening with Vietnam. Vietnam would not side with China for any reason and China was prepared to go to war against Russia if Russia got too much influence in Vietnam.

cies 5y ago
> complete misunderstanding So admit it, say sorry, pay reparations.
- ahefner 5y ago
  No.
- Glawen 5y ago
  Say sorry, why not, but demanding to pay back I don't understand. It is not the same people in power nor the same population, why should they pay for their parents? It is preposterous. And where do you stop with this logic, neolithic?
  - SirLotsaLocks 5y ago
    They're still paying the price for what the US did to them, I don't think it's too uncommon for reparations to be payed by different people because usually reparations are on behalf of the government itself. If a different government took over the US then I think it would be a bit unfair to expect reparations. But as it stands it's the same government and a lot of the people who took part in the atrocities are still alive today, it's not like it happened hundreds of years ago.

roenxi 5y ago

There is no 'right' and 'wrong' side of history. There are complicated shades of grey coloured by propaganda. And if there was a right side of history, the US has a very credible claim to it. They've pushed science and the arts forward, promoted freedom as a cultural aspiration rather than rule by a monarch and generally acted as a credible supporting force for the greatest improvement of living standards the world has ever seen in Asia. There was a lot of cruelty, bloodshed and lies. But there has not yet been anyone in history who avoided that while being large. The US could certainly have been much worse.

cies 5y ago
You say: > There is no 'right' and 'wrong' side of history. But then you conclude: > There was a lot of cruelty, bloodshed and lies. [...] The US could certainly have been much worse. So you do accept there's a gradient of right and wrong. > The US could certainly have been much worse. But also a lot better! > But there has not yet been anyone in history who avoided that while being large. What we've seen is next level. This is due to the increase in mobility and world trade, sure. But it has been abused heavily, and seemingly to every extend possible. I dont know how it could have been worse without being a straight up dictatorship. (having only two parties come very close to being a dictatorship if you ask me; only one party better than the China the US like to bash so much lately). > They've pushed science and the arts forward, promoted freedom as a cultural aspiration rather than rule by a monarch and generally acted as a credible supporting force for the greatest improvement of living standards the world has ever seen in Asia. Tell that to the Vietnamese and North Koreans. Indonesia and Philippines also have a bit of a US hangover. Science is fucked nowadays. Very "proprietary", as by the US-push patent law. I think there is right and wrong. Read some Jesus and you know that ideas of what it good behavior and what is bad is not at all new. I'm not religious, but just to show that it is not merely the last decades that we know we should be nice to people and now do any horrible act for a bit of profit.
- roenxi 5y ago
  There is a gradient of right and wrong. Most (realistically all) successful countries are on the wrong side of it. I mean, look at the path the Europeans took to get to the modern era. Short periods of it, like the last 2000 years, have involved questionable acts.

cm2187 5y ago

So the "right side" is a communist dictatorship?

cies 5y ago
https://www.fallacyfiles.org/eitheror.html https://www.fallacyfiles.org/eitheror.html
- cm2187 5y ago
  If you have a war between two sides and you are calling one the wrong side, you are creating a dichotomy

throwaway6734 5y ago

>US looked like a force of good after WW2, but that deteriorated quickly. Not that other western nation states are holy, but the US seems to be the ringleader. Humanity has seen the most positive growth by far under Pax Americana. What's your alternative?

SirLotsaLocks 5y ago
>Humanity has seen the most positive growth by far under Pax Americana. It's not really much of a Pax Americana in the middle east or Central/South America. East Asia seems to be next too. "Pax Americana" has definitely been amazing for the west and it's friends but as countries like China and India start to challenge that, true colors will probably start to show as the existing world power(s) fight to keep that title.
- throwaway6734 5y ago
  Global poverty has plummeted over the last 70 years
  - antifa 5y ago
    The United States is happy to accept all credit for any correlation, no proof of causation necessary.
    - throwaway6734 5y ago
      Since the US has been at the forefront of technological development, global stability, and investing in many of the biggest economic players today (south Korea, Japan, and Germany) it deserves significant credit for the current state of the world.
      - antifa 5y ago
        > it deserves significant credit for the current state of the world. Ok good, so both the good things and the bad things they did, yes credit where credit is due.

joyeuse6701 5y ago

The Southern Vietnamese population in the US would strongly disagree with you. One shouldn’t forget what happened to them after the U.S. pulled out. It wasn’t a rainbows and sunshine reunification, but murder, anguish and famine.

ausbah 5y ago

I don't think the "other side of history" is much better most of the time

Dumblydorr 5y ago

While it is true that the US has done morally questionable and practically useless world-policing, it's not as cut and dry as you state. In both world wars, the US was undeniably a force for good, against the extremely evil Nazis, the extremely cruel Imperial Japanese, and helping more monetarily and supply wise in WW1. Furthermore, the US fought itself to free millions of slaves in it's own Civil War. While it's true the South attempted to leave to keep their slavery power, the other half of the US stomped them in the war. Outside of militarism, the US has generally been cruelly expansionist against Native Americans, and has seen a lot of atrocities on "its own" soil. Yet the colonists eventually established a nation today that is pivotal to the arts, science, technology, and even human rights, humanitarianism, and large scale philanthropy. How do we weigh all these? The US is not merely on the wrong side; we are a mixture of good and bad.

marcusverus 5y ago
> Furthermore, the US fought itself to free millions of slaves in it's own Civil War. This is simply not true. The North prosecuted the war to preserve the Union. It was only afterward that it was re-imagined as a war of liberation. This reimagination makes perfect sense from a propaganda perspective. After all, the Confederacy was a democracy. Its people voted to leave the Union. The Yanks, for the stated purpose of "preserving the Union" invaded a democracy and killed half a million of its citizens. Ingeniously, by pretending that the war was always about freeing the slaves, the US has people walking around celebrating a one-million casualty war as a sign of their country's morality! Woof! The truth is this: The Civil War was waged to preserve the American Empire in North America. The fact that it happened, in an unforeseeable confluence of circumstances, to result in the end of slavery, does not make it a moral war. [0]https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Cry-Freedom-Civil-War/dp/019516895X https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Cry-Freedom-Civil-War/dp/01951...
- greedo 5y ago
  A democracy? Not for Blacks in the South...
  - 5y ago

bmmayer1 5y ago

> repeatedly on the wrong side of history Also repeatedly on the right side of history. It's really intellectually dishonest to ignore one over the other. > they cannot even face that I don't know who "they" are, but Americans are extremely self critical -- just look at this thread. It's also certainly the only of three global superpowers where citizens can be (and are) openly critical of their country's policies. > Red scare I'm sorry, have you ever lived in a communist country? > Supporting neo-liberal-to-fascist govts Yeah pretty much any time a country is a global superpower / police, it's going to make mistakes. But also, many governments the US has supported historically have had broad popular support on the ground, too, and the governments overthrown have been oppressive regimes. The regimes that take their place may often have also been oppressive, but that's not known without the benefit of hindsight. (Also there are legitimate victories in this camp too. Just ask any resident of South Korea.) I could keep going, but it seems like your main beef with the US is that it operates like a global superpower pursuing its own domestic and international policy. I don't know what you think the world would look like under another superpower like China or Russia, but given the treatment of those countries _towards their own citizens_ in Chechnya, Crimea*, Uyghur Xinjiang, and Tibet, it's hard to imagine your or my life would be much better off under those global regimes. I also challenge you to find a global superpower in world history that has yielded a more unshakeable global peace for almost a century.

fallingknife 5y ago

> the wrong side of history I can't stand this phrase. It reeks of the history is a narrative with good guys and bad guys point of view.

sebastianconcpt 5y ago

Tell me more about the communist contributions to human history without omission on its costs.

antifa 5y ago
Communism invented space travel, the mobile phone, and the artifical heart.
- sebastianconcpt 5y ago
  Where's the without omission on its costs part?

rajin444 5y ago

> US looked like a force of good after WW2 Watching some of the US WW2 propaganda is really eye opening. We're the lesser of 2 evils, but that's not saying much.

dionidium 5y ago

> And they cannot even face that. Except for maybe the Germans, Americans have a credible claim to more "facing" of their sins than any other country on Earth. Have you consumed any U.S. news over the last 20 years? Wrestling with our past is practically the national pastime.

pmoriarty 5y ago
"Wrestling with our past is practically the national pastime." Most Americans don't care about politics, don't care about history, and certainly don't engage in any past wrestling. It's a relatively small, well educated elite who has that interest. The rest of the population would rather watch cat videos.
- dionidium 5y ago
  Sure, but that's true of all people in any country at any point in history. When we say something like, "they cannot even face that," we're either talking about the portion of the population that pays attention to and discusses national issues or we're not talking about anybody at all, pretty much by definition.
  - pmoriarty 5y ago
    Still, you can't call something done only by a small minority of the population a national pastime. Watching sports is a national American pastime. So is drinking beer. Wrestling with the past is not.

simonh 5y ago

Things the US fought against: Japanese occupation of East Asia. Nazi occupation of Europe. Soviet occupation and oppression of Eastern Europe. Oppression of Iran by a theocratic fascist government. Russia again. Establishment of a nuclear capable unbelievably horrible regime in North Korea. More Russia. A regime in Afghanistan that murders girls for wanting to read. Lots of more recent Putin shit, for details ask the populace of any neighbour of Russia on it's western side. So yes, they've done a lot of bad crap. Their history of supporting corrupt murderous fascists in latin America is a notable series of lows. Not that the communist alternatives were all that wonderful. However it's a very mixed bag. Take the US out of the post-war period, and does it really look a whole lot better? If you're going to go off on one about countries the rest of the world could have done fine without for the last 70 years I could probably name a few for you.