The debate "America is not completey corrupted but should work on itself rather than interfering with others" was started by
November 8, 2017, 10:59 pm.
7 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 5 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
YoungVoicesof_Tomorrow posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
Nemiroff posted 7 arguments, historybuff posted 2 arguments to the disagreers part.
YoungVoicesof_Tomorrow, AntiTHEIST and 5 visitors agree.
Nemiroff, historybuff and 3 visitors disagree.
if it was an argument of which is a stronger force I think we can agree unity is stronger in numbers. but I think when it comes to a fight, it's the individuality people who fight harder. IDK why. maybe because it's a choice so they actually believe in the fight. but that's a bit off topic. it definitely is almost impossible. the only being that probably could put an unbiased opinion is God.but that is speculation of course.
non western countries around the world value unity over individuality. I value my individuality, but it is hard to make an objective argument for which is superior.
they have different values, and not necessarily worse. just different.
also, early America only valued male white landowners, so give people time. people will give up much for a full belly, but after the belly is full... well you already see dissidents like ai WeiWei cropping up.
true from a purely logical stand point China is pretty amazing. morally though they are lacking. though America can be the same we are also easier to change. we just need to realize what we are doing that's wrong and right. I think if we strive for that ideal of being the best but temper it with the ideal of helping all these nations in need we would be better off. (and a side note have a sit down and seriously do something about this debt which should of been taken care of long ago)
If you went to one of those shanty towns of favellas where people routinely starve to death, and offered people a life of controlled information but plenty of food and medicine, what do you think they would do?
I agree with you, but we are not talking about us. remember, people alive in China still remember being impoverished 3rd world farmers. they didn't go from o.k. to better, they went from starving to being well off.
well I had a freind take a trip there. they asked them about that place and the tour guide told them there not allowed to talk about it and that to them it never happened. that is horrible in my opinion. living a life that's a lie, good or bad, is still a terrible way to live. that's like if people were getting killed all over America and we didn't get to know about it or care as long as our lives arnt effected.
China isn't as bad as it's portrayed. it's communist and far more authoritative then the west, but it's authorities seem to generally care for the well being and prosperity of their population (after ensuring their party stays in power of course) much different then russia or other authoritative states.
if anything it's communist government is giving it a massive advantage. passing policies use our open markets while protecting it's companies.... which sucks for us, but great for the people of China.
restriction of speech and information is bad, but from what I've heard (anecdotal of course, but logical) most people don't care about googling tienamen square when they are happy, fed, and prospering. also tons of well earned national pride. as opposed to Russia where the vast majority are poor, miserable, and full of propaganda pride.
I don't think anyone wants America to invade other countries. but there will always be preeminent world powers that influence and affect the world. 10 years ago that was the US primarily. but China and Russia are gaining power every year and would love to supplant America as the preeminent world power.
America has alot of flaws, but I'd take it over China.
yes. we should not be physically invading other nations or setting up puppet regimes. that much we can all agree on. lol
To clarify I did not mean to isolate from the rest of the world, trade still can happen. Yes, helping other countries in desperate times is great, but when placing American groups in other territories, those other countrys can feel as if they are being pressured or watched.
But on a more basic level, why do you think there is a false choice between one or the other?
we have people in anticorruption committees and people in state department diplomatic posts. the two don't intersect and are made to focus on different things.
we can so both!
withdrawing from the world wouldn't help America. it would only reduce your already eroding power and prestige in the world.
I don't support invasions, but leading the world in trade deals and sending assistance to other nations is invaluable. it is what makes us a superpower and global leader. it lets us set the course for world policy. also that assistance is pennies (relatively speaking) and we get plenty of value out of it. (our language, our money, our systems are the world wide standard. our army is based world wide ready to pressure enemies and respond to anything instantly)
we do have to fight corruption at home but that has nothing to do with us being a global leader. A position we should not so easily give up to an eager China and Russia.