3 ms·

Well, if the hegemon had done something productive rather than waving their dick with invasions / bombings / sanctions / political interferences / etc. etc. the

by FpUser 4y ago

Well, if the hegemon had done something productive rather than waving their dick with invasions / bombings / sanctions / political interferences / etc. etc. they might have had more sympathetic view from the outside.

ThrowawayR2 4y ago
I knew somebody would pop up to reflexively say this. Let's be clear, I didn't say the hegemon was good, or nice, or just. What I said is that the situation could get much, much worse than it was under the past hegemony.
- FpUser 4y ago
  >"situation could get much, much worse " Yes it could. And one of the reasons is that over long time nobody will tolerate hegemon telling them how live their lives. Hegemon must be smart enough not to be one but that is not what we have.
- annadiru 4y ago
  It's not reflexive to critisize US foreign meddling. It IS reflective because it requires considerable consideration to puncture the fabric of US internal propaganda and reach these conclusions. The problem is that it's built on a web of lies and treachery. That's not a very smart attitude to take between whole nations of people. Maybe it is if the end goal is further ethnic domination, subjugation, and/or exterminaton-- which the US has done and still does, systematically. There are bearings a country can take, foreign relations wise, that over the long term that lead to better outcomes and just quality-of-life improvements in general. Benevolence and smart relationship management com ined with military dominamce has immense soft power, of which the U.S. has left unexplored. I just found this reading up on S.Pacific politics: Weiner, Tim (9 October 1994). "C.I.A. Spent Millions to Support Japanese Right in 50's and 60's". The New York Times. Retrieved 29 December 2007. Add japan to the laundry list where these organized, professionalized, politically motivated paramilitary "groups" involve themselves in the democratic process of other nations, with absolutely no control or oversight from the very society they comes from.
  - oldcigarette 4y ago
    Don't confuse the US before the collapse of the soviet union and now. There is a reason it is in the position it is - it actually did stuff countries liked such as rebuilding the world after WWII. When the soviet union collapsed the US needed to pivot - instead a bunch of inept politicians have been doing expedient nothings for 30 years.
seventytwo 4y ago
Pretending that “the hegemony” has done nothing but terrible things is intellectually dishonest.
- FpUser 4y ago
  I am not pretending. I just mentioned bad things sine those are the reason we are getting deeper in shit. Good things were done by many sides but it is irrelevant in the context. I am not dishonest at all. Maybe you are.
  - seventytwo 4y ago
    And the fact that you attribute good things to “many sides”, but bad things solely to “the hegemony” shows no bias whatsoever!
    - FpUser 4y ago
      Whether I have a bias or not is irrelevant. It does not negate who the hegemon is.

by FpUser 4y ago

ThrowawayR2 4y ago

I knew somebody would pop up to reflexively say this. Let's be clear, I didn't say the hegemon was good, or nice, or just. What I said is that the situation could get much, much worse than it was under the past hegemony.

FpUser 4y ago
>"situation could get much, much worse " Yes it could. And one of the reasons is that over long time nobody will tolerate hegemon telling them how live their lives. Hegemon must be smart enough not to be one but that is not what we have.
annadiru 4y ago
It's not reflexive to critisize US foreign meddling. It IS reflective because it requires considerable consideration to puncture the fabric of US internal propaganda and reach these conclusions. The problem is that it's built on a web of lies and treachery. That's not a very smart attitude to take between whole nations of people. Maybe it is if the end goal is further ethnic domination, subjugation, and/or exterminaton-- which the US has done and still does, systematically. There are bearings a country can take, foreign relations wise, that over the long term that lead to better outcomes and just quality-of-life improvements in general. Benevolence and smart relationship management com ined with military dominamce has immense soft power, of which the U.S. has left unexplored. I just found this reading up on S.Pacific politics: Weiner, Tim (9 October 1994). "C.I.A. Spent Millions to Support Japanese Right in 50's and 60's". The New York Times. Retrieved 29 December 2007. Add japan to the laundry list where these organized, professionalized, politically motivated paramilitary "groups" involve themselves in the democratic process of other nations, with absolutely no control or oversight from the very society they comes from.
- oldcigarette 4y ago
  Don't confuse the US before the collapse of the soviet union and now. There is a reason it is in the position it is - it actually did stuff countries liked such as rebuilding the world after WWII. When the soviet union collapsed the US needed to pivot - instead a bunch of inept politicians have been doing expedient nothings for 30 years.

seventytwo 4y ago

Pretending that “the hegemony” has done nothing but terrible things is intellectually dishonest.

FpUser 4y ago
I am not pretending. I just mentioned bad things sine those are the reason we are getting deeper in shit. Good things were done by many sides but it is irrelevant in the context. I am not dishonest at all. Maybe you are.
- seventytwo 4y ago
  And the fact that you attribute good things to “many sides”, but bad things solely to “the hegemony” shows no bias whatsoever!
  - FpUser 4y ago
    Whether I have a bias or not is irrelevant. It does not negate who the hegemon is.