Question to Gustaf and other European Posters

[Gustaf]

I don't understand why you're so bothered by it, but here goes:

1. First off, American politics affect the rest of the world rather a lot, so there's good reason for Europeans to take an interest in it.

2. If one is interested in politics, it's very natural to take an interest in international politics. That American conservatives are completely uninterested in the world around them doesn't mean that everyone live in little cocoons.

3. The whole "you don't know anything about us" is ridiculous. I don't think you would tell a a European professor in history giving a lecture on the Civil War to get out, b/c you're not from this country. One can be knowledgeable about other countries than one's own, even though Americans in general, and conservative Americans in particular seldom are. Maybe it's not us who are strange but you, but I suppose that would be a foreign concept to you, since the world evolves around your country. Conservatives are perhaps generally more absorbed with their own country, so that could be a reason for international debaters more often being left-winged.

It's perfectly OK for me if you have opinions on other countries. I am sure you have opinions on Islam or Iraq or China or the Soviet Union, though you probably had little or no personal experience of them. I find the notion that people need personal experiences to have opinions rather ridiculous.

4. Europe is different from the US politically, so most Europeans are left-wing by American standards. I am not though, I am clearly right-wing in Europe and dead centre in the US. If you check out the political tests I have posted as well as my "voting record" you would see that I am equally Democratic and Republican.

[Gustaf]

I can't speak for the others, but I personally find American politics very fascinating. Besides, whatever happens in America affects the rest of the world, so I guess it's in my own personal interest to closely follow political events in the USA.

Like Realpolitik I'm also extremely opinionated.

By the way, I find your suggestion that we are "subtly anti-American" rather offensive. I am a great admirer of America's achievements and its political system. Furthermore, I used to live in Chicago and have friends all over the USA. If anything it is your post which carries an element of subtle anti-Europeanism (not to mention xenophobia).

Yep. I think there is as much, if not more, anti-the-rest-of-the-worldism in America than there is anti-Americanism in Europe.

[Gustaf]

Gustaf and other European Posters,

I post at this site and several other forums that discuss American Politics, and at ALL of these forums, there are a shockingly high number of European posters who spend significant periods of time arguing about US politics. Can you please explain to me why you guys would spend so much time discussing the politics of another country, and why you think you are in any way qualified to make judgements concerning complex issues of American politics in light of the fact that you don't live in this country? I find this incredible. I would never go on a forum in England and try to tell Brits why the inhabitants of Leeds vote a certain way because I've never been there, so what makes it OK for you to try and tell me how people might vote in Alabama or South Dakota???

I find this trend of European posters very interesting, because they all fit the same modus operandi when it comes to their political ideology and posting style. Virtually 100% of the time they are well educated and decidedly LEFT of center in terms of their political ideology, always possessing a subtle anti-americanism that they generally hide very well until the debate gets heated.

So perhaps some of the European posters here could tell me what motivates them to spend so much time posting about American politics and why they feel qualified to have such strongly held opinions about something which they generally have little or no personal experience with?

I'm not trying to provoke a fight or be a jerk, but I am curious and looking for a coherent explanation. Thanks.

JMF---is that you?

Lol...JMF couldn't lie, he's a Christian. A lot of republicans have been muttering about these things before, I believe, so I'm not surprised. Comes with the world view, I guess.

[Gustaf]

Gustaf/Michael Z.,

I believe ALL of the available polling data will find that there's more anti-Americanism in Europe than vice versa. Americans LOVE European tourists and I can tell you that I was NOT loved when I went to Europe. I spent most of the time being told how arrogant we were as a people and how the United States was intruding on their culture. As for our attitude towards Europeans, it's extremely positive except for France.

That's b/c you are arrogant...look at this thread...I am sure you love the exotic tourists, like when you watch monkeys in a zoo, but it doesn't really count as liking.

[Gustaf]

Miami,

I'm not JMF whoever that is.

That's jmfcst, our beloved Atlas Forum member.  Check otu this thread from the old forum:

https://uselectionatlas.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/leip/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=13&topic=84&start=10


There are more but I can find them right now.  And that one I posted is a poor example, really.

He stated it somewhere on this forum rather recently as well.

[Gustaf]

Miami,

I know you think you are being terribly clever with this Sherlock Holmes thing about "JMF" but I am NOT this person. I just recently found this site less than two weeks ago and was not aware that there were past discussions on this "european" subject. If you like, please ask the moderator of this forum to check my IP address against this other poster. Contrary to what you might think, the questions I presented were not unique to one individual in terms of relevance.

Gustaf,

I love it. I'm arrogant...thanks for proving my point.

Well, you seem to think that people whoare not from your country aren't smart enough to discuss with you, I'd call that arrogant. You also have no interest in our country and think we should stay out and mind our own business. I'm sorry that people weren't nice to you when you visited Europe, that's really unwarranted considering how much you respect Europe. Maybe I should leave the forum as a gesture of sympathy?

[Gustaf]

Gusta,

You are building a "straw man" argument that I did not make in my previous posts. I didn't say you were not SMART enough to discuss some issues related to American politics, I just stated that you might not be familiar enough with certain aspects of them. For example, I find it hilarious when posters like yourself try to comment on what might happen and why it might happen in certain Southern states that you wouldn't visit at gunpoint because of the alleged lack of culture in those states.

Oh, I'm sorry, of course it isn't arrogant to suggest that my posts are hilarious, I can see how I overreacted there.

Where have I stated that I wouldn't visit Southern states b/c of lack of culture? You'e making up a lot of thing here, calling me anti-American, leftist, ignorant of America, all things that you have no knowledge about.

[Gustaf]

Maybe I should leave the forum as a gesture of sympathy?

I really hope you're joking Gustaf, I highly respect you and enjoy reading your posts.

Yes, I was joking. Glad to see that you don't think my posts hilarious b/c I'm a foreigner. Good that someone realises that people do not have to be completely absorbed with their own country only.

[Gustaf]

For example, I find it hilarious when posters like yourself try to comment on what might happen and why it might happen in certain Southern states that you wouldn't visit at gunpoint because of the alleged lack of culture in those states.

Did Gustaf ever individually say that? No. You appear to be throwing all Europeans into the same pot, directing the anger you're feeling at some people who pissed you off on the internet or on holiday against us. You're generalising, in other words.

Try not to judge people based solely on their national or cultural background.

I have actually stated repeatedly that I do NOT know that much about local politics of demographics in the US to give an opinion on a lot of issues. I have, for example, opted out of the "most dangerous liberals/conservatives" thread, b/c I didn't feel that I knew enough about it.

But Mark is probably very knowledgeable about Europe, he's been here, after all, and knows it all.

[Gustaf]

Michael Z,

Thank you for two very intelligent and accurate posts. I totally agree with you, it is dangerous and unfair to lump all people from a nation or continent together. That was not my intention an I'm sorry if it came across that way. I was referring specifically to certain posters here who all seemed to have similar political ideology.

I especially appreciate your admission that there is widespread anti-americanism in parts of Europe, and I appreciate even more your comment at the end about America and Europe being great long term allies. I agree with you and I assure you that unilt very, very recently, virtually all Americans shared our view. Unfortunately, a growing number of continental Europeans, including many of the most prominent leaders like Chirac, Schroeder, Fischer, etc...seem to believe that the post-Cold War world must be seen in different terms because the world is no longer "bi-polar" in terms of US and Soviet Union. The view of leaders like Chirac, and many prominent European academicians, suggest that the new world will include a bi-polar tension between the United States and Europe based on economic self-interest in the global economy. Thus anything which makes America weaker helps Europe. This is an unfortunate view, but it essentially explains the behavior of France and other nations. And when European nations take this dim view of US/Euro relations, the Neo-Conservatives (of which I am one) are forced to react in a rational manner and accept this as an unavoidable shift in international relations. This is VERY, VERY unfortunate, because the world will always be FAR safer when the United States and Europe are strong allies. But unless there is a change in the foreign policy of many European nations, this is the path we seem to be heading down in the 21st Century, and we head down this path to the peril of the entire world.

France has always been opportunist, they give amoral foreign policy a face. I wouldn't expect them to stand up for the West any time soon, unfortunately. Most of the other European countries should of course be part of the Western alliance.

[Gustaf]

Gustaf,

You are right about France over the long haul, though I find it amazing that the Mitterand government was actually "softer" on America than the Chirac government.

Unfortunately, it's not just France. Germany, Belgium, Switzerland, etc....all have taken this path. And it will happen in Spain as well once Azonar is out of power, and perhaps in Italy when the Bertulosconi years have passed.

And it's not just the leaders, it's rank and file citizens. How else can you explain polls which indicate that Europeans are essentially equally divided on the question of who constitutes the bigger threat to them...the United States or Islamic Terrorism?

Well, these people are kind of stupid, but I think the reason is that Islamic terrorism doesn't constitute much of a threat against Europe since we haven't pissed them off to such an extent. I think the polls you are referring to are about threat to wprld peace, not Europe in itself.

I did meet some Belgians on a train last year, and I remember they actually talked about how the US was being very aggressive against them, etc. But it's essentially nonsense.

I started a discussion on the relations between the US and Europe in this forum. The response from the Republicans on the forum was that who cares about Europe, they're incompetent, cowardly idiots, which the mighty US does not need. This seem to be the prevailing feeling among Republicans, and a great part of the reason why not even sensible Europeans regard the US as a friendly ally anymore. I do though, even though I have been losing faith throughout the last few years.

Americans generally seem to take little interest in the outside-world, convinced of their own virtue. That is, I believe, a bit arrogant, though most of you would probably retort that you are.

[Gustaf]

Michael Z,

Thank you for two very intelligent and accurate posts. I totally agree with you, it is dangerous and unfair to lump all people from a nation or continent together. That was not my intention and I'm sorry if it came across that way. I was referring specifically to certain posters here who all seemed to have similar political ideology.

I especially appreciate your admission that there is widespread anti-americanism in parts of Europe, and I appreciate even more your comment at the end about America and Europe being great long term allies. I agree with you and I assure you that until very, very recently, virtually all Americans shared our view. Unfortunately, a growing number of continental Europeans, including many of the most prominent leaders like Chirac, Schroeder, Fischer, etc...seem to believe that the post-Cold War world must be seen in different terms because the world is no longer "bi-polar" in terms of US and Soviet Union. The view of leaders like Chirac, and many prominent European academicians, suggest that the new world will include a bi-polar tension between the United States and Europe based on economic self-interest in the global economy. Thus anything which makes America weaker helps Europe. This is an unfortunate view, but it essentially explains the behavior of France and other nations. And when European nations take this dim view of US/Euro relations, the Neo-Conservatives (of which I am one) are forced to react in a rational manner and accept this as an unavoidable shift in international relations. This is VERY, VERY unfortunate, because the world will always be FAR safer when the United States and Europe are strong allies. But unless there is a change in the foreign policy of many European nations, this is the path we seem to be heading down in the 21st Century, and we head down this path to the peril of the entire world.

It goes without saying that I agree with the general tone of your post. I also worry about the future of the US/Euro relationship; like you mentioned, we're stronger together than divided. If anything, Kosovo and Afghanistan proved that there is room for a American-European alliance in the post-Cold War world.

That said, I fear (or at least suspect) that the likes of Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld seem to quite actively undermine the relationship with some of the policies that are being pushed through. I personally am sceptical as to whether the neocons' reaction is really all that rational, and whether we would really be in this mess with a Gore administration. It also bears pointing out that the same European countries which defied America over Iraq (namely Germany and France) gave the United States their unconditional support in Afghanistan.

Gustaf does have a point. Many Republicans seem to regard Europe as cowardly and useless; whether this is a reaction to European anti-Americanism is beside the point, resentment breeds more resentment, and I'm sure you can appreciate how a vicious circle can easily form itself there.

As for Germany, I have relatives there (my surname should be hint enough of that ) and the country is currently going through a bit of an identity crisis; you always have to bear in mind its post-Hitler trauma and the pacifism which resulted from that, and the way this pacifism is effectively being compromised by the war on terror. Many Germans simply don't want to go to war, no matter how justified it may be (and Afghanistan was obviously justified due to 9'11). Schroeder risked his political career for sending troops to Afghanistan (and even had to force a vote of confidence), so you can imagine how well a campaign in Iraq would have gone down, especially at election time. It goes without saying that Chirac is using that to his advantage, to manipulate Schroeder and Fischer. Obviously I'm sceptical with regards to Chirac's motives, but then who isn't.

Yes, Germany is still carrying the burden of WWII, unfortunately. Chirac...I will refrain from commenting on this [insert whatever you feel like]. Especially since I never been to France, and thus am in no position to do so. Schröder was being an opportunist though, he was clearly going down in the election when he went against the Iraq War and that gave him a narrow win.

[Gustaf]

Gustaf,

If any American takes the position that European support is irrelevant, then they are taking a very limited approach to complex problems. We may not NEED European help to defeat Global terrorism, we may have the military might and will (?) to do so all on our own, but WHY IN THE HELL WOULD WE NOT WANT HELP!!! The world will always be a better and safer place when the US and Europe cooperate.

Well, that's what I thought. I suppose you could check out the thread if you want, it was called something like "US-World relations in the long run", where my idea was to discuss the rift between the US and Europe and how to solve it, b/c I think it's horrible. As I said, the response wasn't very encouraging, there seemed to be little interest in it.

[Gustaf]

Ah, you should check out the best presidents thread, that seems to be where most of this debate was actually held at some point or another.

[Gustaf]

Huck Finn,

I also spelled John Kerry's name wrong in another thread today. Does misspelling someone's name constitute a lack of knowledge of that person? Do you dispute the fact that Aznar and Berlusconi are more pro-American than the average citizens in their respective nations? That, of course, was my main point, not the correct or incorrect spelling of their surnames.

You know, I doubt whether Berlusconi is really pro-American in a genuine sense, considering the fact that the guy is a crook who got into politics mostly in order to change the law so as to avoid prison. But it's true that they supported the Iraq War and their voters did not. Bus opposition to the Iraq War does not always denominate anti-Americanism though it of course does in many instances.

[Gustaf]

MarkDel,

As the United States are the only superpower left in
the world, Its ia natural for people outside the US
to be interested in American politics.
After all, the US have political and economical
interests is allmost all countries and try to influence
the politics of those countries. I suppose you agree
with this so I don't understand your unwillingness to
let other people comment upon the US, their government
and their politics.
And I have been in the US on holiday: 5 times for a total
of 20 weeks and in all parts of the country (except
Idaho and Montana!)

Greetings,

amvanveen

Why not come here?  We have awesome tourist attractions!  Next time you come to the US, you have to make sure to go to the Sawtooth Mountains, raft some of the best waters the US has to offer.  Idaho is great, my friend.

Feeling left out?

[Gustaf]

Apart from Likud, certain Democratic strategists who helped Clinton in 92 and 96 helped the British Labour Party's campaign in 1997. Although unsung heroes, they and campaign co-ordinator Peter Mandelson helped Labour and Tony Blair formulate a winning strategy in 1997 and 2001. As i mentioned on a previous topic, Labour will no doubt return the favour. I would agree that most European's have a dislike for Bush, as they did with his father and with Reagan, and yes they have a general likeness for the Carter's and Clinton's of the world, but that is because Europe is generally to the 'left' of America. Even the British Conservative Party would be appalled at some of the Republican policies put into practice. On a personal note, as a Catholic myself, my parents and grandparents idolised the Kennedy's and believe it or not were fans of Nixon. In the London Times, the recent New Hampshire primary, something that has very very little to do with the UK, had a double page spread, and the campaign is covered daily. The following of US politics is not just a personal thing, it is nationwide.

I don't have a dislike for Reagan...

[Gustaf]

Afleitch,

Perhaps you could enlighten me as to what specific policies of the Republican Party are so awful?

I'd guess the social conservatism. I read in the paper today about how the person responsible for schools in Georgia wanted to get rid of the "monkey to man thingy" and have the schools teach the bible instead. I think that sort of thing worries a lot of Europeans, who're generally more secular.

[Gustaf]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't have a dislike for Reagan...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why not?  Bush is his direct descendant in every aspect.

Not in my opinion. Also, Reagan was the right man for his time in a way, I am not sure GWB is. I hold Reagan in high regard.

[Gustaf]

Afleitch,

So if I understand your answer, you don't like the Republican Party because they are religious and opposed to abortion. So you allow symbolic issues that have little or no bearing on your life to lead you to draw broad conclusions about the viability of the entire party? Perhaps you could point out to me the legislation proposed by a Republican President that would OUTLAW ALL abortion? Or maybe you could point out the legislation proposed by a Republican President that would make it mandatory for US schools to teach biblical creation in classrooms?

The issues that you point out are issues of legitimate intellectual disagreement here in the United States, but the mainstream Republican Party does not push these issues in such a way that they would be MANDATED on the general population. Some far right wingers in the party do...but President Bush himself has stated that this nation is not yet ready to do away with abortion.

And as for your point on guns...well...gun confiscation has worked soooooo well for your country. Why don't you tell me what has happened to your violent crime, murder and gun crime rates since 1996???

Gun Control is the dumbest concept in the history of mankind. Let's think of the logic behind it...

Ok...we have a problem with CRIMINALS using guns...so why don't we make it a CRIMINAL act to possess a gun...that way, the people who WANT to commit crimes will be deterred from committing them because they'll be afraid to commit a CRIME by securing a gun. That's "circular logic" that might come out of the mouth of a 5-year old, yet is taken as gospel by proponents of Gun Control.

Don't pretend like you don't know about a lot of murderers, opposed to other crimes, are committed by amateurs.

[Gustaf]

And exactly how many professional murders are running around?

I don't know who you're asking, but my post was horribly constructed, so that was my point, in case it didn't get through. Murders usually aren't committed by professionals, since it is unprofessional to kill people. Therefore, gun control could well make a difference.

[Gustaf]

Just like to point out I'm a republican and I do very much enjoy learning about other countries politicol platforms and not to mention seeing other parliaments engage in debates can be educational and entertaining.

Good to hear. "other parliaments" That would have to be the UK. At least the Swedish parliament is SO BORING that no one would want to see it. Entertainment value ZERO.

[Gustaf]

Just like to point out I'm a republican and I do very much enjoy learning about other countries politicol platforms and not to mention seeing other parliaments engage in debates can be educational and entertaining.

Good to hear. "other parliaments" That would have to be the UK. At least the Swedish parliament is SO BORING that no one would want to see it. Entertainment value ZERO.

the Greek, Itallian, Japanesse and Chinesse parliaments are very interesting as well...

Chinese 'parliament'?  They have a parliament?  That would have to be a total farce.

I has something like 5,000 members.  All party loyalists who do little and get paid a lot.

Like in every parliament in the world...