Is the USA uncivilised?

[laklak]

The bit about the bears is actually true, there was a momma and two largish cubs on the porch two nights ago. And last week a cougar (or a catamount, as they call them up here) walked past the driveway while my brother in law was unloading the groceries. Passed by not 10 feet from him, didn't pay him the slightest mind.

Sod bears, I couldn't live without a bus every 10 minutes within 200 metres of my door (I've never lived anywhere where that wasnt true and nor would I)

You really wouldn't like it here. No such thing as public transportation, if you're too poor ass to own a car then you get to walk.

[Blind groper]

No bears around here. But about 3 weeks ago, I sat on my front deck and watched 3 Orca (killer whales ) swim past. From that front deck I have watched dolphins (2 different species), pilot whales, Brydes whales and a wide range of sea birds, and schools of fish frothing the surface of the sea.

Not that this has anything to do with how civilised anyone is. Having buses or supermarkets close or far is not relevant either. Just how people behave.

[Seabass]

One of the reasons I started this thread was simple curiosity, to see how people reacted. So far I feel edified. It is always so interesting to see how people's true natures come out when they are aroused.

Another reason was to give certain Americans a reason to think. To get out of their smug little red necked boxes, and look at themselves, and use their brains. So far, I seem to have failed in this.

About two thirds of Americans are smart enough not to need this nudge, of course. They are the open minded, rational ones who already have a good balanced view. The other one third are reacting as one would expect.

I just ate a hamburger with a full 1 lb... oh sorry, 0.45359 kg patty.

https://slaters5050.com/menus/food-menus/#burgers

That was definitely uncivilized.

[piscator]

It is what it is.

[Audley Strange]

This is a genuine question...

...My personal view is that the USA is essentially lagging behind the rest of the western world in matters social. This would seem to make it 'uncivilised' by comparison.

Seems a very broad brush with which to tar 300 million or so people based on what exactly? Do you have many examples or is this a construction build up from mass media content? In my limited RL experiences with Yanks I have found them amongst the most civil, pleasant and friendly people. They can tend to be a bit brash from time to time, but I don't think you can make a comparison with any other country, since all of them have their flaws and high points.

So no I don't think they are any more or less civilised that the rest of the west.

[Blind groper]

Audley

As I said earlier, I think that roughly two thirds of Americans are good people, and as individuals, quite civilised.

But that is not what I am discussing here. Every nation has a kind of overall culture that exerts an influence on the way things are done. In the USA, my own observations (my opinion, if you like) would suggest that there are unhealthy and uncivilised aspects to that culture.

Take the overseas military actions the USA seems to indulge in every few years. Obviously, if a country is attacked, it has justification in retaliating, such as after the Pearl Harbour attack. In the same way, if a nation has a signed military alliance agreement with another nation, and the ally is attacked, then it is reasonable to expect them to provide military aid. This could be used to justify the first Gulf War, where Kuwait was helped.

However, outside those two circumstances, war is hard to justify. When George Dubya Bush attacked Iraq, there was no moral justification, and that was a seriously uncivilised thing to do. Even the attack on Afghanistan is dubious, since it was in retaliation for an Al Qaeda action, and attacking the Taliban and the people of Afghanistan meant attacking the wrong target.

The days of yore saw kings of European nations attacking each other for personal gain. Today, that behaviour is not acceptable and has to be seen as uncivilised. The USA attacking Iraq (for oil??) and Afghanistan (for political reasons) is not too different to those old sins of royalty, and must also be seen as marks of an uncivilised culture.

[Ian]

[Warren Dew]

Take the overseas military actions the USA seems to indulge in every few years. Obviously, if a country is attacked, it has justification in retaliating, such as after the Pearl Harbour attack. In the same way, if a nation has a signed military alliance agreement with another nation, and the ally is attacked, then it is reasonable to expect them to provide military aid. This could be used to justify the first Gulf War, where Kuwait was helped.

No, it couldn't, since Kuwait was not then an ally of the U.S., and in fact was on worse terms with the U.S. than Iraq was.

[Warren Dew]

This is a genuine question.

Couple of definitions.
I consider there to be several kinds of 'civilised'. A nation with high technology could be said to be technologically civilised. That is not what I am talking about here. Instead, I am talking of social civilisation - how people behave.

Nor am I talking of individual Americans, some of whom are wonderful people. Rather, the overall American culture, and such behaviours that are widespread.

Most Americans eat with their forks in their right hands, when they aren't eating with their fingers.

That should answer your question right there.

[JimC]

Take the overseas military actions the USA seems to indulge in every few years. Obviously, if a country is attacked, it has justification in retaliating, such as after the Pearl Harbour attack. In the same way, if a nation has a signed military alliance agreement with another nation, and the ally is attacked, then it is reasonable to expect them to provide military aid. This could be used to justify the first Gulf War, where Kuwait was helped.

No, it couldn't, since Kuwait was not then an ally of the U.S., and in fact was on worse terms with the U.S. than Iraq was.

So, are you saying that the US is even more uncivilised than BG thinks?

[JimC]

In view of the post here: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... w#p1513462 and in the light of previous warnings, Seth is suspended for 24 hours.

[Warren Dew]

Take the overseas military actions the USA seems to indulge in every few years. Obviously, if a country is attacked, it has justification in retaliating, such as after the Pearl Harbour attack. In the same way, if a nation has a signed military alliance agreement with another nation, and the ally is attacked, then it is reasonable to expect them to provide military aid. This could be used to justify the first Gulf War, where Kuwait was helped.

No, it couldn't, since Kuwait was not then an ally of the U.S., and in fact was on worse terms with the U.S. than Iraq was.

So, are you saying that the US is even more uncivilised than BG thinks?

More warlike, anyway.

Britain was supposedly the greatest civilization in the world when it had a world spanning empire established and maintained through force of arms, so I find it questionable whether warfare relates negatively to how civilized a nation is. Thus the forks observation, which is a better indicator.

Of course, really civilized countries don't allow knives at the table.

[Audley Strange]

Audley

As I said earlier, I think that roughly two thirds of Americans are good people, and as individuals, quite civilised.

But that is not what I am discussing here. Every nation has a kind of overall culture that exerts an influence on the way things are done. In the USA, my own observations (my opinion, if you like) would suggest that there are unhealthy and uncivilised aspects to that culture.

Take the overseas military actions the USA seems to indulge in every few years. Obviously, if a country is attacked, it has justification in retaliating, such as after the Pearl Harbour attack. In the same way, if a nation has a signed military alliance agreement with another nation, and the ally is attacked, then it is reasonable to expect them to provide military aid. This could be used to justify the first Gulf War, where Kuwait was helped.

However, outside those two circumstances, war is hard to justify. When George Dubya Bush attacked Iraq, there was no moral justification, and that was a seriously uncivilised thing to do. Even the attack on Afghanistan is dubious, since it was in retaliation for an Al Qaeda action, and attacking the Taliban and the people of Afghanistan meant attacking the wrong target.

The days of yore saw kings of European nations attacking each other for personal gain. Today, that behaviour is not acceptable and has to be seen as uncivilised. The USA attacking Iraq (for oil??) and Afghanistan (for political reasons) is not too different to those old sins of royalty, and must also be seen as marks of an uncivilised culture.

Ah. Well that is a different question BG. You seem to be asking, does the U.S.A an aggressive interventionist regime, rather than, are its people civilised? If you equate the excesses of rulers with the people of a nation we could almost all be condemned as barbarians.

[JimC]

I've already indicated that I think the term "uncivilised" is fraught with difficulty, and is a very vague way to refer to a multitude of societal aspects. However, it is still worth exploring; and it would also be, if we were to discuss negative aspects of any other country's society...

[pErvinalia]

Here's the view I woke up to this morning from the back porch. What price civilization, eh?

Nice, Lak. I wish we had real mountains here in Australia. I'm right next to the highest mountain in Southern Queensland, and the top of it is probably only 5000 feet.