Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Does the US stand for democracy in the world?

  1. Dec 22, 2005 #1
    Does the US stand for democracy in the world???

    I started this thread to finaly end with the myth that the US do their best to spread democracy and freedom. (On of the last justifications for the war in irak).

    So my point is: The united states in his history has actively supported a lot of dictatorship. And at the same time the CIA has violent overtrowed a lot of democracys and then placed violent and cruel dictatorships, mainly becouse of economic interests.. so here is my list:

    Edit by Moonbear: sorry, it's someone else's list. http://www.serendipity.li/cia/cia_time.htm Plagiarism is not permitted here.
    copyright violation
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 26, 2005
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 22, 2005 #2
    I think you've confused "democracy" with "egalitarianism, pacifism, and moral relativism and at the expense of liberty and at the risk of advancing dehumanizing collectivism." :biggrin:
  4. Dec 22, 2005 #3


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    "Do their best?" I've never heard anyone claim such a thing. So the premise here is a strawman, right from the get-go.

    The US, like all countries, acts primarily in its own self-interest. But, this fact cannot be construed to mean that support of democracy never factors into decisions, because it most certainly does - and decisions can (and of course often do) have more than one reason behind them.
  5. Dec 22, 2005 #4

    Cameon russ, you know exactly what i am talking about... I am tied of heard thigs such:
    "They want to kill us becouse we stand for democracy and freedom"
    "irak will be a beacon of democracy in the midle east"
    "We want to spread democracy"
    "We are in irak becouse we want to Free their people from a dictator"
    ETC, ETC.

    When you talk about countrys i talk about people.. Those who are in charge of the goverment, the inteligence comunity and in charge of big corporations.
    When you say: "The US, like all countries, acts primarily in its own self-interest. " In reality the people who runs the US, or "All countrys" acts on self interest. not in the interest of their countrys.

    1954 Guatemala — CIA overthrows the democratically elected Jacob Arbenz in a military coup. Arbenz has threatened to nationalize the Rockefeller-owned United Fruit Company, in which CIA Director Allen Dulles also owns stock. .

    1953 Iran – CIA overthrows the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh in a military coup, after he threatened to nationalize British oil

    1973 Chile — The CIA overthrows and assassinates Salvador Allende, Latin America’s first democratically elected socialist leader. The problems begin when Allende nationalizes American-owned firms in Chile

  6. Dec 22, 2005 #5


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Burnsys, I can't reply fully at this time, but plan to when I am able (probably after the holidays). I wanted to start a thread on the roots of terrorism and why other counters dislike the U.S., which you address in part in this thread. Because I agree many reasons Americans are told/and believe are not supported with evidence.
  7. Dec 22, 2005 #6
    The problem with the US is it has no where near enough experience in world politics, and way too much self-belief that it is the good guy. And uses very heavy handed approaches to most things, when a softly softly approach would yeild better results.

    Its the same with World Politics. Time after Time the rest of the world sees America do as it pleases, ignoring all past treaties or even advice. People also see the massive depths of Hypocracy especially in the current US administration actions, and words.
  8. Dec 22, 2005 #7


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I do - I'm just saying you are wrong because you are arguing a strawman. I've heard variations of all the quotes below - just not the one you posted in the OP.
    That is true (just read Bin Laden's statements!), but that has nothing to do with the statement you are arguing in your OP.
    That's a prediction and a goal, but that also isn't the same as what you are saying in the OP.
    That is true, and it is not the same as what you are saying in the OP.
    That is true (it is one of many reasons), and that is not the same as what you said in the OP.

    So clearly, as none of those are equivalent to what you claimed in the OP, your statement in the OP is a strawman.
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2005
  9. Dec 22, 2005 #8


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    What do you mean by experience? Are you talking about years in existence? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense...
  10. Dec 22, 2005 #9
    Please link and quote. i found this.

    Have you even read the list of all the democracys overtrown by US goverment, and dictator placed? let me do the count.

    I counted 15 democratic goverments overtrown by CIA coups and
    21 Dictatorships placed, suported and helped by the CIA..
    765884 People Killed.

    Just in the list i posted..
    Again russ, are you sure the US want to Spread Democracy ????
    Please, show me sources, historical facts, something. Remember that you also has to prove your statemets.

    Why did the us supported dictator saddam housen in the 80' then?

    Ok. the US kill people, and support dictators around the world for self interest.
    And about all countries... mmm. how much? The soviet union,, Nazi germany, and US in that magnitud.


    Yes russ, so The US has never overtrown any democracy, has never supported any dictator, and has never killed anyone. Keep lying to yourself
  11. Dec 22, 2005 #10


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Burnsys, you're missing Russ' point.

    Your VERY FIRST premise ("the myth that the US do their best to spread democracy and freedom") needs to be accepted before there is any point in expressing ANY of the rest of your argument.

    As Russ points out, NO ONE is saying that. YOU are putting those words in someone else's mouth, and THEN shooting them down, as if someone else spoke them to you.

    This thread could have been way, WAY shorter, thus:

    Burnsys: "The US is NOT doing their "best" to spread democracy and freedom."
    Everyone: "The whole informed world agrees."
    Burnsys: "Oh. Well then. There you go."

    All those "they hate us because we stand for love and freedom" arguments do not wash with any informed citizen. They're aimed at the Hee-Haw crowd (who arne't going to read your critique anyway).
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2005
  12. Dec 23, 2005 #11
    The US does not stifle democracy as Burnsys says it does.

    If nobody were able to legally hate the US, I would be concerned about the future of democracy in the world.

    If nobody were permitted to burn US flags, I would have great doubts about the future of freedom in the world.

    If nobody had the privilege to organize demonstrations against the US, I would question the future of freedom in the world.

    A lack of protest does not denote an ideal society. Countries with authoritarian regimes experience very few protests, yet such a vacuum is disturbing. Dead men do not protest.

    An abundance of protest does denote an ideal society. The protester's presence authenticates his vigor.

    To live in a nation without protesters is to be satisfied with a muted voice.

    To live in a nation with protesters is to have a voice with which to be satisfied.

    I would much rather live in a nation where protests are plain and easy to see than live in a nation where protests are "not seen."

    Protest... Count your blessings... Learn... Live
  13. Dec 23, 2005 #12
    Very true :smile:

    Without this how can it be called 'democracy' then?

    nice one :approve:
  14. Dec 23, 2005 #13


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Burnsys, you might want to cite the webpage you copy and pasted that list off, i'm sure thats forum rules.
  15. Dec 23, 2005 #14
    No I mean experience. You have only been engaged in "world" politics since WW1 more or less. And it shows...
  16. Dec 23, 2005 #15
    I think there might be a bit of a problem with the idea that any particular country can be better or worse at "world politics" due to the collective experience of it's generations of politicians, especially when you consider the nature of information and learning in the modern world.
  17. Dec 23, 2005 #16


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Bin Laden likes to muddy the water, but demands number 1, 2 in Bin Laden's http://observer.guardian.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,845725,00.html" [Broken] call for the US to give up our government and way of life. That statement was probably his clearest statement of intent/demands.
    Again, that isn't the issue here. If your desire was just to flame America for those, you should have titled the thread "see how terrible the US is?".

    You posted a statement you say you have seen/heard people say, but it isn't. It is a strawman and evading your own point won't make me let it go.
    Certainly: the US set up 2 extrordinarily successful democracies at the end of WWII.
    Read Bush's first speech on why he was going to overthrow Saddam (I've linked it half a dozen times - I'm sure you've seen it). It's in there.
    I didn't say that, Burnsys, you did. You are putting words in my (and a lot of other peoples') mouth in order to argue your strawman.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 2, 2017
  18. Dec 23, 2005 #17


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    How does a country retain experience through generations and does the fact that most of the rest of the countries in the world didn't exist until after WWI factor into this at all? Ie, Do countries like Russia, China, Japan, and Germany retain their experience despite radical changes in government?

    That assertion of yours doesn't make a whole lot of sense...
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2005
  19. Dec 23, 2005 #18


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Actually, his comments do make sense.

    A country retains its experience through its educational system and its cultural history - the history classes it teaches and the subtle viewpoints that always wind up embedded in any history book (it's a virtually inescapable 'flaw' no matter how hard an author might try to present an objective history).

    The change in government doesn't eradicate a people's cultural history. Most American history classes wouldn't be complete without covering the Magna Carta, something that occurred in a completely different country than the US.

    I'd still disagree with Anntech's post. Culturally, our history isn't that different from Great Britain's (in fact they were the same until a couple hundred years ago). There's definitely a different outlook about world politics, but it probably has more to do with the difference between a country separated from every major threat to it by large oceans and the outlook of countries that have been very aware of their neighbors' proximity to them.
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2005
  20. Dec 23, 2005 #19


    User Avatar
    Gold Member


    Nor is it envy of our wealth. The problem is when certain representatives of our country are hypocritical about freedom (associated with democracy), and use our wealth (and military power) in the wrong way, naturally there will be resentment from abroad. Burnsys’ list of hypocrisies is legitimate in this regard.

    As for the Hee-Haw crowd, have you seen recent stats on literacy in the U.S.?
    Or better yet, just don’t provide sources at all and then there is no worry about links, right?
    I agree to some extent, particularly about the rapid changes related to modern times.

    However, I’ve also stated more than once that if you look at American history, a good chunk was spent practicing isolationism. Then there is the America-centric mentality that prevails in the U.S., which we see for example by poor geography scores. Americans as a whole (and often it is apparent in our leaders as well--confusing Sweden with Switzerland) have the least amount of understanding and knowledge of other country's history, culture, language, etc.

    IN GENERAL (not in reply to any one specifically): I’ve also mentioned the “Power of Pride” to quote another cheesy (but right-wing) bumper sticker. Yes, throughout America’s history (short as it is), for the most part America has done well in the world (particularly in our earlier history when we finally entered the war against Hitler) on the basis of freedom and liberty that we have enjoyed here at home. But it seems Americans can’t take criticism very well (Power of Pride) so reflection on ways to do even better is difficult to achieve. I feel very blessed to live in the U.S., and have immense admiration for what the founding fathers created. But I wish other Americans would ‘grow up’ and get over themselves so we can work toward even greater achievements.
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2005
  21. Dec 23, 2005 #20
    No, you could go and google each item of the list and find for your own that they are very real and well documented. i did that myself.
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2005
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook