lukethethird
unknown member
Are Americans morally superior to those of other nations?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Are Americans Morally Superior?
- Thread starter lukethethird
- Start date
Uh, what?
You ellected Trump, did you not? And GWB before him?
You ellected Trump, did you not? And GWB before him?
I've never met someone to declare this, have you?
The United States for a considerable amount of time has been the biggest perpetrators of violence in the world, and has been recognized as such.
I have. When you get nationalism strong enough, all violence that serves that nationalistic fervor becomes moral and all criticism of it becomes immoral. There are people that believe the US behaving like world police is a good thing, and not at all ironic considering the widespread corruption and abuse by our police.
Granted, I think it's a minority view. But even so a dangerous one due to how quickly minority views can get a foothold with tools like the EC, voter suppression, predatory redistricting, intense backdoor lobbying, etc. It should be taken seriously.
I've definitely met many people who believe America to be the best country/nation/culture in an incredibly nationalistic way, accepting the supposed supremacy of American worldview, institutions and history.
I've never met anyone who was conscious enough of this dogma to claim that American's were morally superior as an axiom though.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
That all depends on who gets to define what morality is.
No, although it does seem to be a large part of our national mythos.
I suppose one could make an argument on a relative scale, at least in terms of how America measures up to other major powers. The infamous "lesser of two evils." At our worst, we were never as bad as some of the older nations with longer histories.
Here's a site which might put some perspective on the question: Twentieth Century Atlas - Historical Body Count
Only two items on the above list have anything remotely to do with the United States (Atlantic Slave Trade and Conquest of the Americas), and even then, those items would include all of the Americas, not just the U.S. And even then, the U.S. didn't really exist until our Independence was recognized by Britain in 1783, so anything immoral that happened prior to that can be blamed on European countries, not the United States.
So, one could argue that America has a relatively cleaner history than some of the other major powers in this world.
Honestly I think that one of the most sacred principles enshrined in our European civilization is that we ought to defend and protect nations' right to self-determination.
The definition of nation (or people) is extremely difficult, yet we all agree that a nation is a group of people who recognize themselves as one spiritual entity that brings a community together, based upon language, culture, traditions, and juridical system.
The USA were created as the beacon of our civilization, since they fought against the British Empire because they wanted to have the right to determine themselves. Then the French Revolution followed and the social revolutions in 1848 followed.
That said, there is a spiritual bond between Europe and America, and I guess there is also the tendency many have to consider ourselves superior to other cultures, morally and ethically.
But that's not true. Meaning: that only through restless self-criticism and mutual respect we can set an example, and cooperate with other nations which are very different than us.
Different doesn't mean superior or inferior: it just means different.
But war is the worst thing ever, and that vilifies and degrades our civilization. Since I have always thought that WW2 would be the last tremendous war, because the terrible memory of that war made us all evolve into a much better species.
But that was not the case: people in the West, both here and overseas speak of war, as if it were something normal.
We are over the notion of war.
That's what you can hear in Germany and in Italy that were the most affected and the most traumatized by that experience.
I wish that the repudiation of war became real in the US too.
The definition of nation (or people) is extremely difficult, yet we all agree that a nation is a group of people who recognize themselves as one spiritual entity that brings a community together, based upon language, culture, traditions, and juridical system.
The USA were created as the beacon of our civilization, since they fought against the British Empire because they wanted to have the right to determine themselves. Then the French Revolution followed and the social revolutions in 1848 followed.
That said, there is a spiritual bond between Europe and America, and I guess there is also the tendency many have to consider ourselves superior to other cultures, morally and ethically.
But that's not true. Meaning: that only through restless self-criticism and mutual respect we can set an example, and cooperate with other nations which are very different than us.
Different doesn't mean superior or inferior: it just means different.
But war is the worst thing ever, and that vilifies and degrades our civilization. Since I have always thought that WW2 would be the last tremendous war, because the terrible memory of that war made us all evolve into a much better species.
But that was not the case: people in the West, both here and overseas speak of war, as if it were something normal.
We are over the notion of war.
That's what you can hear in Germany and in Italy that were the most affected and the most traumatized by that experience.
I wish that the repudiation of war became real in the US too.
Altfish
Veteran Member
You've got to be joking.
Secret Chief
Very strong language
I think a mod should move it to the jokes section. ("A very stable genius" was a very funny punchline).
Honestly I think that one of the most sacred principles enshrined in our European civilization is that we ought to defend and protect nations' right to self-determination.
The definition of nation (or people) is extremely difficult, yet we all agree that a nation is a group of people who recognize themselves as one spiritual entity that brings a community together, based upon language, culture, traditions, and juridical system.
The USA were created as the beacon of our civilization, since they fought against the British Empire because they wanted to have the right to determine themselves. Then the French Revolution followed and the social revolutions in 1848 followed.
That said, there is a spiritual bond between Europe and America, and I guess there is also the tendency many have to consider ourselves superior to other cultures, morally and ethically.
But that's not true. Meaning: that only through restless self-criticism and mutual respect we can set an example, and cooperate with other nations which are very different than us.
Different doesn't mean superior or inferior: it just means different.
But war is the worst thing ever, and that vilifies and degrades our civilization. Since I have always thought that WW2 would be the last tremendous war, because the terrible memory of that war made us all evolve into a much better species.
But that was not the case: people in the West, both here and overseas speak of war, as if it were something normal.
We are over the notion of war.
That's what you can hear in Germany and in Italy that were the most affected and the most traumatized by that experience.
I wish that the repudiation of war became real in the US too.
Actually, I don't think Europeans (or Americans, for that matter) were really on board with the idea of nations' self-determination until after WW1, which was then considered the "War To End All Wars" (how little we knew). The idea of multi-national empires, such as the Ottoman Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the Russian Empire were considered antithetical to the idea of national self-determination. On the other hand, there were socialists who believed in an international brotherhood of working people, emphasizing class unity across national lines. They would say that the leaders of nations used the common people as cattle and cannon fodder, while the upper classes kept all the spoils for themselves.
It's kind of astounding when you think about it. Who are the people who go to war? In their civilian life, they might have been hard-working, honest people, who were kind to their wives and children, kind to their neighbors, generous to the less fortunate, and on the whole, honorable and ethical in their own communities. Basically good, moral, decent people (while acknowledging that no one is ever perfect and there are plenty of exceptions).
But they hear the patriotic call from their national leaders. Their community mobilizes and it's seen as an obligation and duty to the community and the nation that able-bodied good men must put on a uniform and go to war. Those who didn't do that were called dishonorable cowards and slackers (and possibly even traitors) - worse than common criminals. A man with honor and standing among his peers is not going to shirk what he believes to be his moral obligation to his neighbors - so he, like his peers, will go off to war.
Once he gets there, what does he see? On the other side of the battlefield, he sees people who probably came from towns and villages just like his. They, too, were likely hard-working, honest people, who were kind to their wives and children, kind to their neighbors, generous to the less fortunate, and on the whole, honorable and ethical in their own communities. Under any other circumstances, these people would have absolutely zero reason to be fighting each other - except those reasons decided by people in sovereign, national governments, who are exercising their right to self-determination.
I don't regard any nation, region, or culture as overall "morally superior" or "morally inferior" to any other. They all have pros and cons, and they may be more suitable or less suitable for someone to live in depending on what that person is looking for in a country.
Aren't you the guy who once tried to convince me that the detonation of Fat Boy saved lives?
You will have to understand if I don't trust your genocide meter.
Nor your bias meter, for that matter.
Besides, I have not forgotten who you voted for in 2018 either. So don't presume a moral high ground. It will not be granted, not by me.
No.
"Fat Boy" has no meaning.
Why do you believe this.
I've a low opinion of your values too.
But why do you want to go there?
To put you in your place, I guess. Or alternatively, to warn you on what to expect when you try to provoke me, which is only fair.
Just because you like to point fingers and call people names ("genocide" seems to be a recent favorite) does not mean you know what you are doing.
And it is not in me to forgive people from voting for Trump once. Votes are meaningful events with lasting consequences. They demand reason and responsibility.
You lack the cajones, little fella.
It's hypocritical to cite only Republicans
in a list of awful Presidents, while ignoring
bad Democrats.
But I forgive you for supporting war
mongers, genocide, & islamophobes.
Try a little tolerance.
You wish!
You can do better than wasting our time like this, Revolt.
You can do better than wasting our time like this, Revolt.