International opinions on the USA Presidential election

[FrekeChild]

Hey all of your PSers from Canada, England, Australia, and elsewhere, what is the feel about the election in your parts?

I''m curious as to what the rest of the world is thinking about this election. (And I''m sure I''m not the only one!!)

 

[arjunajane]

Hey Freke, thankyou for starting this.
I am happy to offer mine and my Fi's views, we are Australian.
To sum up, the majority of Australians cannot stand Bush - this is true regardless of how they vote here. He is ridiculed and has little to no respect.
From my point of view, McCain and Palin are viewed as an extension of the issues that have plagued Bush's term.
Palin's conservative views, lack of experience and media gaffs do not bode well here. Of course, I don't know all the details, but also what I have heard about her strong-arming people in Alaska is not good.
Also, refusal to talk to the media - not good. If there's one thing Aussies dislike, its a politician who abuses their position or is not well-versed.
She is generally viewed here as dangerous and incompetent.

I know what you will all say, she is only running for VP. But I think the views of McCain's age and health are warranted.

As far as McCain himself, I haven't seen as much coverage.
If the media coverage here is anything to go by, Obama is definately the favourite. He would surely be the pick in our household - not because we are Democrats or Obama-lovers or anything, simply because he is the better candidate.
Aussies of course always like the underdog, so that doesn't hurt. But we simply agree with his policies more.

For some background, in elections here I will vote on policy and candidate, not on party lines. However, usually my vote falls with the Australian Labor Party as they are slightly more liberal.

 

[AGBF]

It was a good idea to ask that question of international members, FrekeChild, and I enjoyed reading your response arjunajane. As I started to think of some other countries from which we have Pricescope members, I realized that many of them are professionals. They may not feel comfortable discussing politics, even if it is just to give a dispassionate description of their counrties' outlooks. (One tends to shoot the messenger.) If Serge or Paul Slegers or Vincent Pardieu gave us a negative desciption of how the United States is viewed, how would we feel?

That said, I heartily encourage international members who have the interest to comment on the US elections, vendors and other industry professionals included!

Deborah

 

[Rhea]

I''m American living in England. Nothing to do with the actual politics, but the election coverage shocked me on a recent trip to the States. I forgot what a mud-slinging event it was. Politicans in England seem to talk more about the issues and actual answer the press''s questions. In America politicans seem to dance around issues. The media doesn''t help, they sensationalise everything and don''t pressure for the answers the way press in other countries do. It''s really disheatening to have lived in both countries and see the differences.

 

[ksinger]

What is more interesting (appalling?) is the attitude of some Americans towards the criticism, implied or otherwise, of people from other countries.

I read this one yesterday, at The Vancouver Sun. Scary stuff. No wonder they think we''re whackjobs sometimes....

Palin blog postings draw fury from down south

 

[swimmer]

Just got this video from my cousin in Tel Aviv, captures a very wide swath of the Israeli population's feelings.
link

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 9/28/2008 8:31:30 AM
Author: Addy
I''m American living in England. Nothing to do with the actual politics, but the election coverage shocked me on a recent trip to the States. I forgot what a mud-slinging event it was. Politicans in England seem to talk more about the issues and actual answer the press''s questions. In America politicans seem to dance around issues. The media doesn''t help, they sensationalise everything and don''t pressure for the answers the way press in other countries do. It''s really disheatening to have lived in both countries and see the differences.

I agree Addy, it has also shocked me how "dirty" US politics seems to be. Of course in Aust they will have a laugh and criticize each other in Parliament, but its almost always just about policy or what they say to the media - very rarely are people''s family or private lives called into question ..
I also agree the press seem to be a bit "easier" on them too when it comes to answering questions.

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 9/28/2008 9:28:30 PM
Author: swimmer
Just got this video from my cousin in Tel Aviv, captures a very wide swath of the Israeli population''s feelings.

link

Thanks so much for posting!

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 9/28/2008 3:23:22 AM
Author: arjunajane
Hey Freke, thankyou for starting this.
I am happy to offer mine and my Fi''s views, we are Australian.
To sum up, the majority of Australians cannot stand Bush - this is true regardless of how they vote here. He is ridiculed and has little to no respect.
From my point of view, McCain and Palin are viewed as an extension of the issues that have plagued Bush''s term.
Palin''s conservative views, lack of experience and media gaffs do not bode well here. Of course, I don''t know all the details, but also what I have heard about her strong-arming people in Alaska is not good.
Also, refusal to talk to the media - not good. If there''s one thing Aussies dislike, its a politician who abuses their position or is not well-versed.
She is generally viewed here as dangerous and incompetent.

I know what you will all say, she is only running for VP. But I think the views of McCain''s age and health are warranted.

As far as McCain himself, I haven''t seen as much coverage.
If the media coverage here is anything to go by, Obama is definately the favourite. He would surely be the pick in our household - not because we are Democrats or Obama-lovers or anything, simply because he is the better candidate.
Aussies of course always like the underdog, so that doesn''t hurt. But we simply agree with his policies more.

For some background, in elections here I will vote on policy and candidate, not on party lines. However, usually my vote falls with the Australian Labor Party as they are slightly more liberal.

It doesn''t seem to matter if you are labor or liberal. Australians in general seem to detest Bush, and therefore the Republican Party by association. TGuy is labor, his parents and sister liberal and they all agree on Bush.

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/28/2008 3:23:22 AM
Author: arjunajane
Hey Freke, thankyou for starting this.
I am happy to offer mine and my Fi''s views, we are Australian.
To sum up, the majority of Australians cannot stand Bush - this is true regardless of how they vote here. He is ridiculed and has little to no respect.
From my point of view, McCain and Palin are viewed as an extension of the issues that have plagued Bush''s term.
Palin''s conservative views, lack of experience and media gaffs do not bode well here. Of course, I don''t know all the details, but also what I have heard about her strong-arming people in Alaska is not good.
Also, refusal to talk to the media - not good. If there''s one thing Aussies dislike, its a politician who abuses their position or is not well-versed.
She is generally viewed here as dangerous and incompetent.

I know what you will all say, she is only running for VP. But I think the views of McCain''s age and health are warranted.

As far as McCain himself, I haven''t seen as much coverage.
If the media coverage here is anything to go by, Obama is definately the favourite. He would surely be the pick in our household - not because we are Democrats or Obama-lovers or anything, simply because he is the better candidate.
Aussies of course always like the underdog, so that doesn''t hurt. But we simply agree with his policies more.

For some background, in elections here I will vote on policy and candidate, not on party lines. However, usually my vote falls with the Australian Labor Party as they are slightly more liberal.

I am not trying to be snarky AJ, just wondering which one of the bolded statements are true. Do Aussies think Obama is the favorite or do they think he is the underdog? Or does Aussie media favor Obama, while Aussies think he is the underdog? I am confused. I would be interested in which candidate is favored in countries with less similarities to the US as well.

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 9/29/2008 12:50:39 AM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/28/2008 3:23:22 AM
Author: arjunajane
Hey Freke, thankyou for starting this.
I am happy to offer mine and my Fi's views, we are Australian.
To sum up, the majority of Australians cannot stand Bush - this is true regardless of how they vote here. He is ridiculed and has little to no respect.
From my point of view, McCain and Palin are viewed as an extension of the issues that have plagued Bush's term.
Palin's conservative views, lack of experience and media gaffs do not bode well here. Of course, I don't know all the details, but also what I have heard about her strong-arming people in Alaska is not good.
Also, refusal to talk to the media - not good. If there's one thing Aussies dislike, its a politician who abuses their position or is not well-versed.
She is generally viewed here as dangerous and incompetent.

I know what you will all say, she is only running for VP. But I think the views of McCain's age and health are warranted.

As far as McCain himself, I haven't seen as much coverage.
If the media coverage here is anything to go by, Obama is definately the favourite. He would surely be the pick in our household - not because we are Democrats or Obama-lovers or anything, simply because he is the better candidate.
Aussies of course always like the underdog, so that doesn't hurt. But we simply agree with his policies more.

For some background, in elections here I will vote on policy and candidate, not on party lines. However, usually my vote falls with the Australian Labor Party as they are slightly more liberal.

I am not trying to be snarky AJ, just wondering which one of the bolded statements are true. Do Aussies think Obama is the favorite or do they think he is the underdog? Or does Aussie media favor Obama, while Aussies think he is the underdog? I am confused. I would be interested in which candidate is favored in countries with less similarities to the US as well.

Sorry if my statements were not clear - I guess what I was trying to say is Obama gets more favourable media coverage, hence as the majority of Aussies will have limited knowledge of the race and its issues and will gain their views from the popular media, he will transpire as the favourite.

I also mean he may be viewed as the underdog by some, because he is African American. As we all know, it will be a historic time if he is voted in.
And as you may also know, Australia also has a history of racism toward indigenous peoples.

I'm not sure why you thought these were incongrueous, would you mind to elaborate? cheers !

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 9/29/2008 12:30:39 AM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 9/28/2008 3:23:22 AM
Author: arjunajane
Hey Freke, thankyou for starting this.
I am happy to offer mine and my Fi''s views, we are Australian.
To sum up, the majority of Australians cannot stand Bush - this is true regardless of how they vote here. He is ridiculed and has little to no respect.
From my point of view, McCain and Palin are viewed as an extension of the issues that have plagued Bush''s term.
Palin''s conservative views, lack of experience and media gaffs do not bode well here. Of course, I don''t know all the details, but also what I have heard about her strong-arming people in Alaska is not good.
Also, refusal to talk to the media - not good. If there''s one thing Aussies dislike, its a politician who abuses their position or is not well-versed.
She is generally viewed here as dangerous and incompetent.

I know what you will all say, she is only running for VP. But I think the views of McCain''s age and health are warranted.

As far as McCain himself, I haven''t seen as much coverage.
If the media coverage here is anything to go by, Obama is definately the favourite. He would surely be the pick in our household - not because we are Democrats or Obama-lovers or anything, simply because he is the better candidate.
Aussies of course always like the underdog, so that doesn''t hurt. But we simply agree with his policies more.

For some background, in elections here I will vote on policy and candidate, not on party lines. However, usually my vote falls with the Australian Labor Party as they are slightly more liberal.

It doesn''t seem to matter if you are labor or liberal. Australians in general seem to detest Bush, and therefore the Republican Party by association. TGuy is labor, his parents and sister liberal and they all agree on Bush.

Tgal, that is 100% correct, as I mentioned above. His term has pretty much been viewed as a comedy of errors here.
Our ex-PM John Howard being seen as constantly "sucking up" to Bush didn''t do him any favours either..

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/29/2008 2:20:29 AM
Author: arjunajane

Sorry if my statements were not clear - I guess what I was trying to say is Obama gets more favourable media coverage, hence as the majority of Aussies will have limited knowledge of the race and its issues and will gain their views from the popular media, he will transpire as the favourite.

I also mean he may be viewed as the underdog by some, because he is African American. As we all know, it will be a historic time if he is voted in.
And as you may also know, Australia also has a history of racism toward indigenous peoples.

I'm not sure why you thought these were incongrueous, would you mind to elaborate? cheers !

I tried to elaborate in my reply to your post; I didn't mean you were saying anything incongruent, I was just confused if Obama is viewed as an underdog or as the favorite in Oz. You cleared it up, thanks! Obama gets more favorable media coverage but he is the underdog in that he is trying to accomplish something unprecedented. It is interesting to hear these perspectives from across the pond.

I think most Americans, myself included, believe this is Obama's race to lose and it would be a HUGE upset if he doesn't pull off a win.

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 9/29/2008 2:51:16 AM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/29/2008 2:20:29 AM
Author: arjunajane

Sorry if my statements were not clear - I guess what I was trying to say is Obama gets more favourable media coverage, hence as the majority of Aussies will have limited knowledge of the race and its issues and will gain their views from the popular media, he will transpire as the favourite.

I also mean he may be viewed as the underdog by some, because he is African American. As we all know, it will be a historic time if he is voted in.
And as you may also know, Australia also has a history of racism toward indigenous peoples.

I''m not sure why you thought these were incongrueous, would you mind to elaborate? cheers !

I tried to elaborate in my reply to your post; I didn''t mean you were saying anything incongruent, I was just confused if Obama is viewed as an underdog or as the favorite in Oz. You cleared it up, thanks! Obama gets more favorable media coverage but he is the underdog in that he is trying to accomplish something unprecedented. It is interesting to hear these perspectives from across the pond.

I think most Americans, myself included, believe this is Obama''s race to lose and it would be a HUGE upset if he doesn''t pull off a win.

Correct! apologies about the misunderstanding.. I''m glad you guys are open to international views.

 

[katebar]

I echo AJ summation of how we *see* the Presidential race here.The press here IMO are pro Obama. Also completely correct on George Bush. He is seen as a figure of fun here and the war in hugely unpopular. In face I have friends from both sides of politics and I can't recall anyone saying anything in support of his polices or his political nouse.
I know this will upset som people but that's how it is.

 

[LaraOnline]

Date: 9/28/2008 10:57:57 PM
Author: arjunajane
I agree Addy, it has also shocked me how 'dirty' US politics seems to be. Of course in Aust they will have a laugh and criticize each other in Parliament, but its almost always just about policy or what they say to the media - very rarely are people's family or private lives called into question ..

I also agree the press seem to be a bit 'easier' on them too when it comes to answering questions.

It does seem as if the everyday American is more politicised than the 'common man' over here. Flags on cars, in gardens etc etc, there's a real sense of nationalism that really leaves the mainstream Aussie cold. We really hose down the 'nationhood' over here, we mistrust it as a cynical manipulation of sentiment... except perhaps in relation to sport. I don't think we raise flags or sing national anthems in public schools any more, do we? I'm not sure, but there was a big debate about that a few years ago.

This seems to rub off on the mainstream interest in politics. While many people have a passing interest in politics, as a rule, Australians seem fairly uninformed about politics, although they do tend to take the right to vote seriously. However, their vote may be based on a rather ad-hoc or emotional response to the issues on the front page.

I'm going to differ from Arjuna, and say that most of our political reporting is not as indepth as is available in the US. Most of our reporting is fairly shallow, and does run a lot on personality politics - just like the weakest aspect of political reporting in the US.
Journalists here also hound politicians on really silly subjects, and, like the US, personal issues like marriage troubles, or illegitimate children, are really used to 'dog' politicians. One newly installed opposition party leader, Troy Buswell, was brought down after journos found out he had made a joke - four years earlier - about a woman's attractiveness by playing the fool and sniffing her chair in front of an audience presumably all men).
He was seen as one of the few politicians with the ability to lead the party at the time, and the party hung on to him for months, but in the end the media would not let it go, and he resigned from his post.

The journalists here tend to follow the traditional, time-honoured line of journalism, which is to report from the perspective of the 'common man'. However, most reporting is personality based, with generally an antagonistic news filter. Generally, a socially progressive, leftist version of events is interpreted and conveyed in the media. We tend not to have long-winded, rambling political essay which seems quite common in the US. Our magazine style is informal, but always 'easy to read', with short sentences. Our media is not for intellectuals!

However, as economic knowledge has evolved, journalists here seem less interested in the protectionist politics of the past, and this has seen a more sophisticated political analysis emerge in some areas.

I would like to comment more... but in fact, I'm just talking about Australian politics!

I have to say that I was surprised that Sarah Palin's choice to continue a pregnancy with a Down Syndrome child was made much of as evidence of her extreme anti-abortion sentiment. I didn't think continuing with a pregnancy in that situation would be seen as a weirdly religious or extreme thing to do?

It makes me really wonder about the acceptance of disability in the US...

 

[ksinger]

Well right now I'm reading a book called Dark Ages America. It is clearly left-leaning and pretty darn bleak if you want to know, but the chapter I'm on is attempting to shed some light on why the Arab world despises us so, and the analysis is well supported with writings and other analyses that go way back. Now THERE is an area that we Americans would do well to try to understand. And I can tell you, simply parroting the "They hate us 'cause we're free" tripe, ain't it at ALL.

I'm glad this thread is open too. I WANT to know what the criticisms of America are. I want to mull them over for ways of looking at the situation(s) that I've never considered before. IS there merit in the views of people outside the US? Are there ways they can help us see better who WE are? I don't want to BE that "ugly American" who assumes we are beyond reproach, or the rest of the world is populated by idiots who don't understand anything. I'm personally tired of seeing my own country as an international bully. I know we have interests to protect just like any country, but I feel we've gone waaay too far in our assumption that the rest of the world should unreservedly welcome our export of our culture and political structure, even at the point of a gun. Just like every imperial power has eventually received its comeuppance, so now I truly believe we are beginning to see our own. The mental shift away from the belief in our own superiority and exceptionalism is going to be a hard shift to make for the collective mindset of most Americans, I think. We've been raised on it. But Britain survived its fall from imperial power, and so, I believe, will we....but it won't come without pain. Change never does.

The next 20 years are going to be an interesting ride, no doubt about it.

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 9/29/2008 7:07:36 AM
Author: ksinger
Well right now I''m reading a book called Dark Ages America. It is clearly left-leaning and pretty darn bleak if you want to know, but the chapter I''m on is attempting to shed some light on why the Arab world despises us so, and the analysis is well supported with writings and other analyses that go way back. Now THERE is an area that we Americans would do well to try to understand. And I can tell you, simply parroting the ''They hate us ''cause we''re free'' tripe, ain''t it at ALL.

I''m glad this thread is open too. I WANT to know what the criticisms of America are. I want to mull them over for ways of looking at the situation(s) that I''ve never considered before. IS there merit in the views of people outside the US? Are there ways they can help us see better who WE are? I don''t want to BE that ''ugly American'' who assumes we are beyond reproach, or the rest of the world is populated by idiots who don''t understand anything. I''m personally tired of seeing my own country as an international bully. I know we have interests to protect just like any country, but I feel we''ve gone waaay too far in our assumption that the rest of the world should unreservedly welcome our export of our culture and political structure, even at the point of a gun. Just like every imperial power has eventually received its comeuppance, so now I truly believe we are beginning to see our own. The mental shift away from the belief in our own superiority and exceptionalism is going to be a hard shift to make for the collective mindset of most Americans, I think. We''ve been raised on it. But Britain survived its fall from imperial power, and so, I believe, will we....but it won''t come without pain. Change never does.

The next 20 years are going to be an interesting ride, no doubt about it.

Karen, thankyou for your post

It is refreshing to hear that you are open minded and keen for criticism and change. My Fi also read your post and was very impressed.
I know it may be a stereotype, but I will admit that Americans are *usually* viewed as flag-waving nationalists that have little to no interest, knowledge or regard for the international community.
I must say that my time on PS, actually getting to know many Americans, has helped dispel this image for me.
I look forward to further discussion with open minded and progressive people here !

I applaud your attitude, and hope there are others that agree .

 

[Samantha Red]

I am a brit and I would never be able to vote for Sarah Palin in any guise. She scares me with the lack of international experience she has and the strong possibility that she could be president at some point is terrifying. The US leads the free world and I think it is important for the person at the top to have some real understanding of international issues. I also have issues with her attitude to abortion. My view is clear that people should believe anything they like about it, but they should not be able to legislate against it and impose their own view on everyone. I see so many children in awful situations with terrible parents I wonder where the people are shouting for their rights now. She is getting a lot of flack on the more political, satirical, comedy stuff here in the UK at the moment.

I would love to spend time with her to understand her thinking on abortion and creationism though. I would find it very interesting.

 

[LaraOnline]

VERY interesting post, Ksinger! I guess that if there is any thread running through the international understanding (or ''impression) of American culture, I would have to say the perceived inwardness would be pretty high up there on anyone''s list.

It is interesting to see that an increasing globalisation, via the internet, other communications technology and travel, might mean a genuine change in (perceived) mindset for the American people!

Of the few Americans I have met in the past, I have been impressed with their friendly and open natures. However, the cultural impression conveyed via the media is one of unremitting inwardness.
That has to mean mistakes in international relations.

Should we talk about Israel / the middle east''s place in US foreign policy now? Uh-uh, just not going there... (runs and ducks for cover) Ugh, totally too hard basket. Or is that... basket case in general?!?!!

Kinda depressing sitting around waiting for WW3. Hopefully the elections will signify a renewed interest in ... ah geez...

 

[LaraOnline]

Date: 9/29/2008 7:23:30 AM
Author: Samantha Red
I am a brit and I would never be able to vote for Sarah Palin in any guise. She scares me with the lack of international experience she has and the strong possibility that she could be president at some point is terrifying. The US leads the free world and I think it is important for the person at the top to have some real understanding of international issues. I also have issues with her attitude to abortion. My view is clear that people should believe anything they like about it, but they should not be able to legislate against it and impose their own view on everyone. I see so many children in awful situations with terrible parents I wonder where the people are shouting for their rights now. She is getting a lot of flack on the more political, satirical, comedy stuff here in the UK at the moment.


I would love to spend time with her to understand her thinking on abortion and creationism though. I would find it very interesting.

I find Britain comes with its own interesting set of cultural parametres... as does Australia, of course. But, tell me Samantha, in and of itself, do you find the preference for continuing with a down syndrome pregnancy as an extreme thing to do? I thought that would be the regular thing, but I guess since screening is commonplace now, perhaps most people quietly abort these days? I found that aspect of the coverage of her a little strange. I have a disabled person in my family, so perhaps I was more attuned to that..?

Also, did you find it extreme that a teenager would elect to keep her baby rather than just have it automatically aborted? It would be quite a common choice over here - as is abortion! - but the community is not 'sold' on one solution over the other in such a clean cut way, I don't think. Although I guess that generally, educated people would be expected to have their child abort...?

 

[ksinger]

Date: 9/29/2008 7:35:40 AM
Author: LaraOnline
VERY interesting post, Ksinger! I guess that if there is any thread running through the international understanding (or ''impression) of American culture, I would have to say the perceived inwardness would be pretty high up there on anyone''s list.

It is interesting to see that an increasing globalisation, via the internet, other communications technology and travel, might mean a genuine change in (perceived) mindset for the American people!

Of the few Americans I have met in the past, I have been impressed with their friendly and open natures. However, the cultural impression conveyed via the media is one of unremitting inwardness.
That has to mean mistakes in international relations.

Should we talk about Israel / the middle east''s place in US foreign policy now? Uh-uh, just not going there... (runs and ducks for cover) Ugh, totally too hard basket. Or is that... basket case in general?!?!!

Kinda depressing sitting around waiting for WW3. Hopefully the elections will signify a renewed interest in ... ah geez...

It doesn''t surprise me one bit. And overall culturally, it''s hard to argue against that perception. As we slide down from our zenith, even in our own minds, it is human nature to get MORE defensive, not less. No one likes to face the fact that we probably aren''t top of the heap anymore. Many analysts I''ve read think we will simply become increasingly irrelevent on the world stage. I think this most likely...no war, no cataclysm...the world will simply start passing us by.... and it appears to be accelerating. Our accounting standards - which used to be golden - are now considered to be a joke, the world is becoming increasingly deaf to our Supreme Court rulings.....our moral high ground, which used to be real, is now in a deep dark hole...probably rotting somewhere in a secret prison....who''d have thought that the day would come when America would nonchalantly ADMIT to having secret prisons?? Depressing stuff....

And yeah, I''d avoid talk of Israel like the plague...even it is WAS allowed, which it is not I''m sure. That really WOULD start WW3...

 

[Samantha Red]

Date: 9/29/2008 7:38:30 AM
Author: LaraOnline

Date: 9/29/2008 7:23:30 AM
Author: Samantha Red
I am a brit and I would never be able to vote for Sarah Palin in any guise. She scares me with the lack of international experience she has and the strong possibility that she could be president at some point is terrifying. The US leads the free world and I think it is important for the person at the top to have some real understanding of international issues. I also have issues with her attitude to abortion. My view is clear that people should believe anything they like about it, but they should not be able to legislate against it and impose their own view on everyone. I see so many children in awful situations with terrible parents I wonder where the people are shouting for their rights now. She is getting a lot of flack on the more political, satirical, comedy stuff here in the UK at the moment.


I would love to spend time with her to understand her thinking on abortion and creationism though. I would find it very interesting.

I find Britain comes with its own interesting set of cultural parametres... as does Australia, of course. But, tell me Samantha, in and of itself, do you find the preference for continuing with a down syndrome pregnancy as an extreme thing to do? I thought that would be the regular thing, but I guess since screening is commonplace now, perhaps most people quietly abort these days? I found that aspect of the coverage of her a little strange. I have a disabled person in my family, so perhaps I was more attuned to that..?

Also, did you find it extreme that a teenager would elect to keep her baby rather than just have it automatically aborted? It would be quite a common choice over here - as is abortion! - but the community is not ''sold'' on one solution over the other in such a clean cut way, I don''t think. Although I guess that generally, educated people would be expected to have their child abort...?

Hi Lara I don''t find it extreme at all to continue with Downs pregnancy, quite the opposite. As a woman who has never been able to have a baby, despite wanting one, I would have gladly continued with such a pregnany myself. My fear stems from someone wanting to legislate against anyone making their own choices in this matter. I believe it is a very personal decision and one the state should not get involved in. I don''t have expectations about who should and who should not abort

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/30/2008 2:46:49 AM
Author: Samantha Red
Hi Lara I don't find it extreme at all to continue with Downs pregnancy, quite the opposite. As a woman who has never been able to have a baby, despite wanting one, I would have gladly continued with such a pregnany myself. My fear stems from someone wanting to legislate against anyone making their own choices in this matter. I believe it is a very personal decision and one the state should not get involved in. I don't have expectations about who should and who should not abort

I'm not trying to start a debate, Samantha Red, but would this include not paying for abortions in your opinion? Before I get flamed - I'm not trying to start a debate about abortion, I just want to know what government involvement is seen as permissible or impermissible over there. Also, how are political leaders/candidates treated in your country? Are any parts of their lives "off limits?" I am curious.

 

[LaraOnline]

Date: 9/30/2008 2:46:49 AM
Author: Samantha Red

Hi Lara I don't find it extreme at all to continue with Downs pregnancy, quite the opposite. As a woman who has never been able to have a baby, despite wanting one, I would have gladly continued with such a pregnancy myself. My fear stems from someone wanting to legislate against anyone making their own choices in this matter. I believe it is a very personal decision and one the state should not get involved in. I don't have expectations about who should and who should not abort.

Thanks for responding Samantha. I have to say, my bringing up this subject regarding Sarah Palin was not motivated by my political feelings, it was more a personal response.

I, too, have heard that she is an 'extreme right wing anti-abortionist', motivated by extreme rightwing Christianity, but I have never seen any actual evidence (that she would push to make abortion much less easy to obtain) in any of her speeches since her nomination.
Is that an actual policy of hers, or of her party?

However, I obviously am only viewing the election as a very casual observer! But, again and again, I have heard commentators say that she is an extreme anti-abortionist with a desire to legislate...and then they say only that she has continued a pregnancy with a disabled child, and that her own teenager is continung a pregnancy. It just didn't seem like 'evidence' of policy to me, just a personal preference that plenty of women of all political persuasions would share...

Staying on the abortion topic for a moment, I have always been voraciously pro-choice. I was the kind of precocious teenager that wrote pro-abortion letters to the local newspaper about the foetus being 'just a bunch of cells'.

However, having 'survived' my twenties, I actually think that there are many well-intentioned young people who have really internalised the whole 'right to abortion' concept to the point where they are not really making the most pro-active choices regarding their love-lives.

I'm not saying their all rushing off for abortions, but Australian youth of my generation seemed peculiarly apathetic about the direction of their love lives. Women, particularly, can suffer from having to socialise with really directionless guys who, at the bottom line, assume she will 'just have an abortion' if necessary - and yes, yes, it's terribly sad but at the end of the day it's lip service.

I think ease of access to abortion has contributed somewhat to a social malaise amongst youth...not sure how that affects my political feelings about it though. I'm still pro-choice.
I also think there has been a natural degree of correction - Gen Y is a lot more optimistic than Gen x - must have been all that grunge music we were listening to! The media emphasis on women's infertility problems, caused by overlong delay, has been made much of over here.
So the 'tone' has already changed somewhat (become a little more oldfashioned) when it comes to romance. Women in their 30s (my age) are still suffering the fall-out from their nihilistic youth,

but women in their 20s seem more confident about their ability to achieve marriage and children, and the worth of marriage and children.

Generally, it seems we are 'herd animals', and that our social morality is largely influenced by what we think other people think is acceptable. I think there has been some research on that.
Therefore, lowest common denominator laws, particularly regarding 'morality issues' can affect our individual lives directly, by having us all assume that everyone else in a community has lower standards than us, and therefore we should or must lower our own standards to fit in.
Even if those 'liberal morality' laws actually helps society flow more smoothly in a practical sense.
Hmm, I think I've gone off topic. But that's why I thought that the media presentation of Palin's personal choices was interesting, anyway.

 

[LaraOnline]

Date: 9/29/2008 8:23:03 AM
Author: ksinger
As we slide down from our zenith, even in our own minds, it is human nature to get MORE defensive, not less. No one likes to face the fact that we probably aren't top of the heap anymore. Many analysts I've read think we will simply become increasingly irrelevent on the world stage.

Well, I don't think 'irrelevancy' is a big problem. The US will always be 'relevant', just as the UK is incredibly important today.
In fact, I think life will get a lot more interesting, if the US assumes less of the capital-letters LEADERSHIP and spends more time listening to the views of other countries in the traditional diplomatic style.
In fact, I think the logical outcome would be that the American foreign policy position would become more subtle, and more nuanced.
A decline in relative economic strength might mean that the US political - and social - culture might become more internationalised in flavour.

 

[ksinger]

Date: 9/30/2008 8:45:16 PM
Author: LaraOnline

Date: 9/29/2008 8:23:03 AM
Author: ksinger
As we slide down from our zenith, even in our own minds, it is human nature to get MORE defensive, not less. No one likes to face the fact that we probably aren''t top of the heap anymore. Many analysts I''ve read think we will simply become increasingly irrelevent on the world stage.

Well, I don''t think ''irrelevancy'' is a big problem. The US will always be ''relevant'', just as the UK is incredibly important today.
In fact, I think life will get a lot more interesting, if the US assumes less of the capital-letters LEADERSHIP and spends more time listening to the views of other countries in the traditional diplomatic style.
In fact, I think the logical outcome would be that the American foreign policy position would become more subtle, and more nuanced.
A decline in relative economic strength might mean that the US political - and social - culture might become more internationalised in flavour.

Well, I didn''t mean TOTALLY irrelevant.

I only meant that we will - both literally and psychologically, (and the second is much more important) take our place IN the world as part of the world, not the sum total that many in this country seem to think we are. I''m not sure we''ll be a "super power" anymore. Pretty much what you said...

 

[LaraOnline]

LOL ksinger! To be "literally and psychologically...IN the world as part of the world, not the sum total (of the world)" possibly crushing to the US spirit! Hmm, it kinda seems like a maturing to me - a coming of age...
Even the end of WW2, which was a huge cultural watershed as far as the US taking a leading position on the world political stage was a view that was contested at the time.
All of this is very interesting. There''s a cultural study session in your post, right there - that the psychological impact on citizens is of primary importance, and leads to a *defensive* position...
I still think that perceived superiority comes down to the hip pocket somewhat, and that as long as living standards don''t fall overmuch, most Americans can still feel they live in the ''centre of the world''.
It all comes down to economics, doesn''t it?

 

[ksinger]

Date: 9/30/2008 9:22:38 PM
Author: LaraOnline
LOL ksinger! To be ''literally and psychologically...IN the world as part of the world, not the sum total (of the world)'' possibly crushing to the US spirit! Hmm, it kinda seems like a maturing to me - a coming of age...
Even the end of WW2, which was a huge cultural watershed as far as the US taking a leading position on the world political stage was a view that was contested at the time.
All of this is very interesting. There''s a cultural study session in your post, right there - that the psychological impact on citizens is of primary importance, and leads to a *defensive* position...
I still think that perceived superiority comes down to the hip pocket somewhat, and that as long as living standards don''t fall overmuch, most Americans can still feel they live in the ''centre of the world''.
It all comes down to economics, doesn''t it?

LOL! Oh lord, I do hope not! The man of the house and I have many a discussion of...whatever, with him inevitably starting in on the economics of it, and with me saying NO! Economics will NOT be applied to every situation we discuss! There is even one of his books that applies economics to romantic relationships - the tradeoffs, costs, etc. He trots it out sometimes just to zing me. Then it usually drifts to evolutionary biology and how THAT might apply. We never lack for conversation at our house!

And yes, I too see it as "growing up".

As an aside, that book I mentioned, "American Theocracy" (which he states up front is more economic than religious in its subject and slant) Phillips makes the point that the US feels itself unique, "the product of an altogether unusual process of federation and coming together". He then points out that "Rome, Haspburg, Spain when it was half of Europe, the Dutch when New York was New Amsterdam, and Victorian and pre-1914 Britain were just as cocky because they, too, had dynamic origins and also believed that they were different." He then lists circumstances that were common to most of the nations on his list. Without the examples he gives on each point (I only have so much finger power after all), they are as follows:

1. A popular sense of national decay, economic, moral, or patriotic.

2. An intensification of religion.

3. Conflict between faith and science.

4. Imperialism and military overreach.

5. The burden of excessive debt.

6. The decline of industry and the rise of finance.

7. and in the more modern examples of this, like the Dutch with wind and water, and the British with coal, he cites idiosyncratic fuel and energy successes.

Sound familiar?

He calls 4 of them, radical religion, oil vulnerability, global overreach, and mounting debt - "the 4 horsemen of hegemony past, chuckling at the inability of humankind to learn from history."

An exceptionally well-documented and well-written read, if a bit dense at times.

 

[LaraOnline]

How interesting...!


- very minor point this: would you say that a diminishing of patriotic fervour is a natural corollary of increased globalisation?

Kinda like finally getting out of your own country - and discovering that you DON''T have the best coffee / food prices/ cultural shows/ popular music /road systems (add own favourite example) in the world?

I know the author listed other examples of elements of a self-identifying group which could fall away, such as perceived economic success or moral authority... but I''m wondering if diminishing patriotism is something that all citizens - of every country - will be experiencing as we become more sophisticated, and aware of the other cultures and environments in the world...