Stop the America-bashing!

[Spiffor]

You shouldn't overestimate the power of the lobbies. Although it is clear to me that lobbies are inherently evil, they do not represent a plot of some CEOs manipulating the puppet Bush. They have some power, at the expense of the legitimate, elected institutions. They participate in the decisions, and demand some policy to be done in their interest rather than the whole country(s interest. They often get satisfaction, but not always : lobbies are one of the numerous pressures a President has to take into account (froeign country, objective situation of the economy, obeying the law and the constitution etc.). Each of these pressures takes bits of power from politics, and makes the power very dissolved in a leading class. There is no small secret plot giving orders and being always obeyed. There are many people giving orders and being sometimes obeyed.

[Whoha]

"The US government is run by corporations in the interest of corporations. The elections are paid for by corporations. Look at the bush administration, how many corporations are represented? These are the people who make US policies.
This is not something that I have thought up, this was first coined by a US president named Isenhower(sp).
The US government maybe an elected entity but by no means represent the US public. As I said the interests of corporations are first and foremost in the bush admistration. If pleasing a few voters here and there will keep him in power longer then so be it he will do what he has to do, but not a bit more. The thing that gets me is the US publics willingness to go along with this. Why? Look at military spending.. "

WEEEEEEEEEE!

"Can you really justify this? the missle defence plan? In case you haven't realized the threat is not the Soviets anymore but terriosts. This is not something missle defence will have a deterence on. "

China, rogue terrorist states,etc. Saddam did launch missiles at Israel in 91.

"But what it will have an effect on is the corporations that cator to the pentagon and the pockets of those who in fact sit on boards and commities within the US government itself!! It is plain and obvious for anyone to see this corruption if they look through the constant barrage of media that the bush administration spews at the public. How many of the US citizens on this board sound like regerjataed cnn comercials?"

Whats good for business is good for america, and vice versa. Can you post some cnn commercials? i doubt it


BUt the majority of the US public in its self interest and ignorance of facts will continue to chant USA no matter what the truth. Its a pity, nothing lasts forever.

[Beren]

Originally posted by SpencerH
Gotta have some specifics

Well, America increased the numbers of North Vietnamese infiltrants in the South Vietnam to maintain international support for the war.

[SpencerH]

Beren,

I'm not sure what war in Vietnam you're thinking of, but there was no international support for the Vietnam war that I remember.

The North Vietnamese infiltrated South Vietnam virtually at will, they needed no help from America.

[Beren]

Originally posted by SpencerH
Beren,

I'm not sure what war in Vietnam you're thinking of, but there was no international support for the Vietnam war that I remember.

The North Vietnamese infiltrated South Vietnam virtually at will, they needed no help from America.

There was international critisism and that didn't really help America.
And I am not saying there were no infiltrants, I am just saying America exaggerated the ammount of infiltrants.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Beren

There was international critisism and that didn't really help America.

Exactly, so whether they did or didnt exaggerate the number of North Vietnamese in South Vietnam doesn't really matter. They may have attempted to manipulate the opinions of other nations in this way, but it didnt work.

[Beren]

Yes!! My point is that America does that kind of s h i t.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Beren
Yes!! My point is that America does that kind of s h i t.

As does every other country!

[CRAZY]

no spence not like the US!! The US medals in others affairs way more then any other. And for doing so somtimes pay the price and suffer the america bashing that you have seen in this thread.

Has it been that hard to figer out? This is what everyone on this thread oposed to the US has been trying to say, but yet you blind american patroits keep marching on, just like blind lemmings!

[Arrian]

Point taken Crazy, about meddling in others affairs. That always causes problems. I also agree that our government is overly preachy, and paints a picture where America is perfect, and this inevitably results in us falling short of that ideal.

However, I repectfully submit that if we didn't "meddle" at all, we would be lambasted for isolationism: "Look, America is shirking its responsibility! As a Superpower, America should be active in the world! But no, they curl up in a shell! Damn selfish Americans - they only care about themselves!" What's the standard European criticism of US involvement in WWI/WWII? - "You guys came in late. We were fighting for years before you showed up." That's isolationism for ya. Only after WWII was the U.S. an interventionist power.

But when we do "meddle" we apparently can't do ANYTHING right. No matter what we try to do, it seems we're wrong. I'm not saying the United States hasn't made big mistakes, and been responsible for terrible things, because it has and is. Personally, I tend toward isolationism. It's easier, frankly.

But explain this: every European or UN official I have heard or seen quoted has said that the USA be involved and work to bring peace to Israel/Palestine (I use this as an example, it's not the only one). WHAT? On the one hand, people demand that we get involved. Meanwhile, the USA is accused of heavy pro-Israel bias (fair enough, we are allied to Israel and we give them heaps of money), and therefore supposedly cannot be a fair broker (I happen to agree, and wish this was handled via the UN somehow). So here is the message I'm getting:

We want you involved, because you're the only one with the influence necessary to bring peace, but you can't possibly bring peace because you're biased. That, my friends, is what I call a no-win scenario. What if an American-backed peace plan finally succeeds in bringing the conflict to an end? Do you think anyone will stand and cheer? Hell, no. All we will hear is "America should have done this, that or the other thing years ago and it all would have been peachy!"

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I personally would make a number of changes to U.S. foreign policy if I could. But I doubt that even then the America bashing would stop, or even drop off. I suppose I'm a pessimist on that one.

-Arrian

[Spiffor]

Arrian, I like your analysis, it seems very true to me.

I'd like to see the US more isolationistic, just to know if it's better or worse (of course, I'm expecting this was better). That's why I wanted Bush to be elected, even if I'm left winged. Guess I'm pretty bad at guessing the future

[Dauphin]

America should be more like Europe when it comes to isolationism.

Whine about everyone elses involvement, but don't get involved yourself.

Edit - Found another censored word, despite its innocuous usage. .

[Eddin]

About the Bin-Laden tape... I have several reasons to believe it's a forgery made by CIA (I'm usually against such conspiracy theories, but this is a noteworthy exception)

Anyway, I DO think he did it, the tape is just sh*te

Let me explain why:
1: Bin Laden was hardly visible (it could have been anyone)
2: The tape was of horrible quality (why would a wealthy man tape his speech with such a shabby homecamera?)
3: The tape was actually found (which I think is most odd... why would someone allow it to exist?)
4: Why would ANYONE tape such a discussion? What good does it do?

Anyway not really a point, since I think Bin-Laden is the evildoer anyway.

[Eddin]

Originally posted by lorddread


You Europeans got the wrong impression of the 2000 election. Gore didn't have a landslide in the popular votes. He won the popular vote by a couple of thousand. The popular vote doesn't matter though in our presidential elections. It is the Electoral College which is won by winning 51% of the Electoral Votes> Look at a map of the country the Bush carried. He won almost the entire country. Only certain cities did he loose in. Once again get your facts straight!

He got his facts straight. What (I think) he was trying to say is that the Electoral colledge is a crappy system. And I think it is. Though it usually doesn't matter, in such cases when the PEOPLE (the first word in the compound of DEMOcracy, that which you so fiercely defend) vote the same as the college. But when that doesn't happen, you get something else... I wouldn't call it democracy. In fact, the only reason why you have an electoral colledge is because the 18th century Americans were afraid of the dumb masses...

Finally a moderate European

I consider myself fairly moderate. Though not always

2. So what! You weren't doing anything constructive. Chamberlain tried talking Hitler out of WWII, guess what happened........

Yes, and Rabbin tried to talk his way out of war with the palestinians... Or Kofi Annan... Ethiopia and Eritrea.

Your argument is quite flawed.

Tell that to the 250,000 Bosnians raped and killed. The 120,000 Croates.

I mourn for them. All I'm asking of you Americans is to acknowledge your own mistakes and perhaps even apologise... is that so hard?

[Eddin]

Originally posted by lorddread


Sudan replaced the US on the UN Human Rights Commission. A country that still practices slavery, murder of its citizens because of their religion, drug smuggling, torture, money laundering and murder of foriegners. Yeah good choice huh?

No... but neither would the US be... and that is my point. Though I think the international community gave this as more of a wake up call for the US.

Europe is not a US lackey. We can't stand many of the policies of your governments, nor can we understand how as a group you stay together. You are as difficult for us to understand as we are to you.

We are not together... people thinks os, but we are being driven apart... the rise of rightwinged parties shows that. And I must say I am quite pleased with the latest actions... Europe finally showing spine.

Btw, now YOU should get your facts straight. What governments in Europe complaint about is the speed by which it happened, and the denial of the US to take some time to build up a multilateral force. And as the attack didn't hit us (we are selfish too) we weren't too rash. And though the US's rashness payed off... it might have been very bad.

I am sorry you feel ill because I defend what my country feels it must do because others in the world won't. When you get a little older (out of college and into the real world of the job and family) your opinions will change. It is good to be an idealist when you are young. It helps you develop goals you wish to accomplish as an adult. But please don't criticize me because you don't like my country. I do not bash any other country, but I will point out that no country is entirely blameless today.

As will I. All I'm trying to point out is the fact that some things should not be proud of. My mother and father have been to America, adn they feel the same. America scares them. Will go into detail if you want me to.

I am terribly proud of my country and what it stands for. Many nations in Europe beat immagrants, we accept everyone. You have quotas for how many from this country or that, you let in. We do not. People from 83 nationalities worked at the WTC towers. I have neighbors from Azerbijan. Friends at work from Mongolia. I have worked for Russian bosses. Our third largest ethnic group is Latino.

Well congratulations... it's fine you are getting along well... though you will have to admit there are many foreigners who are not allowed inside your borders (latino's perhaps?). I don't know the exact figures, but if you would send me some comparison between US and EU admission of refugees and hatred against them... I'd love to have them.

Our constitution is copied and forms the basis for 19 other countries. Our dollar is the world benchmark for currancy.
We are the worlds largest exporter and importer. Our schools train the best doctors in the world. Engineers come from India, China, Germany, France, Brazil etc, to come to schoold here and then stay here and work (although a lot of Indians are going home to the Asian Silicon Valley).

That does not say anything about the moral qualities of the US, only that you can make a big buck. Plus, the fact that your constitution is the basis for 19 others doesn't make it a good one.

I will admit that many of our policies especially in the 80's and in Central America sucked and were wrong. But just because you don't agree with our policies do not mean they are wrong.

Could you give me the boundary between not agreeing and wrong? That is a very debatable issue, wrongness is only made by the people judging. Not by a treay or charter, as the US has shown time and time again.

Finally, why should our country or any country have to ask another country's permission to exercise its authority and fullfill its duty to its citizens in time of war and need. If the world does not have the will to fight terrorism, does that mean we shouldn't?

Fight whatever you want, that is not my main complaint. As I said before... it's the US's selfserving attitude in world politics. And I will continue to whine until you have admitted you are self serving.

PS: I would like to know what policies you find sickening. The only policy I have heard in this thread so far was our backing out of the Kyoto treay. Which I explained why we did it.

I'm not really into treaties, and I do not claim to know much. But the ABM treaty comes to mind. The Death Penalty and the declaration of Human rights. Will try to find more.

Bring me examples of our flawed policies and I will discuss them with you. BUT get your facts straight first. Too many people here throw out wrong facts and then expect others to refute them!

Not to be rude... but I have rarely seen you backing your facts with websites or Encyclopedias.

[Denday]

America-- 300 years
England-- 1,500 years
France-- 2,000 years
China-- 5,000 years
Egypt-- 6,000 years

Nevertheless, in my opinion, for Europeans to say that America does not belong in Civ III is truly "arrogant". [/QUOTE]

I my oppion you are the one, being arrogant. America no way desrves to be put in civ 3
It is a colony not even 300 years old that is nothing.
1,500 years is long enough but 300 is not.

there were people in the UK more than 1,500 yeras ago and there were people in america 300 years ago but the wern't americans they were iroquis honestly because the country wasn't formed is no excuse
AND 300 YEARS IS NO WERE NEAR ENOUGH
YOU NEED OVER A THOUSAND
While your at it why dont we ad australia or NZ lets have fiji
Your comments are :rolleyes: greeeat
Come on just because your from america and you beleave your countries better than everyones does not mean it should be there in civ 3 you should be classed as britan.

Ps dont care about speeling
:angry: :angry: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by lorddread
I have never met anyone who works 20 hours a day in the US.

Figures. It's of course a little exaggerated, but not by much.
In comparison, the US has many more people struggling to attain subsistence than any European country. Having both a day- and a night job is no exception if you happen to be non-unionized, and that is without health insurance, too. Many don't make it and end up in the streets, or worse.

McCarthyism went out in the 50's during the hysteria concerning communism.

Even today quite a few people won't even get a visum to visit the US.

As for the patrols along the Mexican boarder, just because we allow millions of legal immegrants into our country each year, we wish to stop illegal immagrants. Nothing wrong with that.

I didn't say it was, it just proves that you don't accept everyone, you only accept the ones you brand 'legal'. You might want to look into how someone can become a legal immigrant in the US.

I am going to say something here that is going to touch off a firestorm but what the hell. The US Constitution is NOT based on the Iriquois one, but on the Masonic Constitution which was created in England, Scotlans and Ireland by their Grand Lodges.

A firestorm is not needed.
The Masonic Constitution of 1717(?) was much inspired by the Iroquois Constitution (initial version around 1460). The way of life of the Iroquois (and especially naturalism) was the talk of the day among Europeans, not just philosophers, in those times. By then Jesuit scribes had put much of the Iroquois way of life, laws etc. into European writing (and had developed an alphabet for the Mohawk language along the way).
In addition, the Founding Fathers were directly advised by Iroquois chiefs, with Canassatego leading the delegation, starting with the topic of forming a confederacy.

Actually US imports outrank our exports year after year.

Exactly.

I don't see foriegn dignataries going to Australia for Cancer treatments. Of for their heart conditions. No they go the Mayo Clinic or Cedar Sinia or Beth Israel.

That has to do with the system, not with the quality. If you're willing and able to pay you can get any treatment you want in the US. People go to eg South Africa for the same reason.
Further, the US specializes in surgery (highest profit!), which is just one field of doctoring.
And dignitaries often go to France where they get special treatment beyond the normal health regulations.
Regarding cancer treatment in particular, the Netherlands are right there at the top, but because of the bureaucratic health system (waiting lists) some people still have to go abroad for treatment (of many conditions).

What treaty did we sign? What magical piece of paper gave up our soveriegnty?

I'll let you ponder on that one a little longer.

Please note that in spite of the above I do think it was correct to include the US in the game. Arrogance is a feature!

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Ribannah

Figures. It's of course a little exaggerated, but not by much.
In comparison, the US has many more people struggling to attain subsistence than any European country. Having both a day- and a night job is no exception if you happen to be non-unionized, and that is without health insurance, too. Many don't make it and end up in the streets, or worse.

There probably are more people below the poverty line in the US than in the Netherlands. The problems of chronically indigent people in western societies are not limited to the USA however. Are you saying that in Amsterdam I wont find people living in the street? I've seen them there too?

Even today quite a few people won't even get a visum to visit the US.

Quite true. Just as there are people who wont get EU visas either.

I didn't say it was, it just proves that you don't accept everyone, you only accept the ones you brand 'legal'. You might want to look into how someone can become a legal immigrant in the US.

The USA does not accept everyone as immigrants but neither does any other country. My experience is that their selection criteria are not much different than Europes.

As for immigrating here, there are some strange rules and at the present time the bureacracy is quite inefficient. But again thats not much different than any other country. I have a friend who waited two years for his visa in a European country. When he was finally called down to get his visa attached to his passport it had already expired. Apparently, everyone laughed.

The Dutch physicians I have known were as good as any. I havent been impressed with socialized medicine (in general) though.

Please note that in spite of the above I do think it was correct to include the US in the game. Arrogance is a feature!

Then we should certainly include the Dutch.

[Whoha]

the editors of the game provided all the tools you need to add civilizations(they didnt have time as it was to fix all the bugs, you wanted them to work on adding civs instead of that?). The maintainers of this site provide many such civilizations. The important thing to remember here is that this is a game, and more then that, its infogrames's and firaxis's game, theirs to do with as they choose. Arguing over the correctness of adding America to the game is pointless.

[Beren]

Just another evidence that America bashing is a just cause:
Lynne Cheney and Joe Lieberman put up a blacklist of autority persons who are considered to have committed treachery. People were judged on what they said and called with name.
This is considered treachery in the report:
"we need to understand the reasons behind the terrifying hatred directed against the U.S. and find ways to act that will not foment more hatred for generations to come."
"It is from the desperate, angry and bereaved that these suicide pilots came."
"America should build bridges and relationships, not simply bombs and walls."

If this is treachery I am definately treacherous, but so are all of you... What vice-president's wife is saying is that these things should not be said. So it's not only true that critic is 'not done' in America, it's also treachery.

Report:
www.goacta.org/Reports/defciv.pdf
Reactions:
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1213-05.htm
http://www.dailylobo.com/main.cfm/in...id/174730.html

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Beren
Just another evidence that America bashing is a just cause:
Lynne Cheney and Joe Lieberman put up a blacklist of autority persons who are considered to have committed treachery. People were judged on what they said and called with name.
This is considered treachery in the report:
"we need to understand the reasons behind the terrifying hatred directed against the U.S. and find ways to act that will not foment more hatred for generations to come."
"It is from the desperate, angry and bereaved that these suicide pilots came."
"America should build bridges and relationships, not simply bombs and walls."

If this is treachery I am definately treacherous, but so are all of you... What vice-president's wife is saying is that these things should not be said. So it's not only true that critic is 'not done' in America, it's also treachery.

Report:
www.goacta.org/Reports/defciv.pdf
Reactions:
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1213-05.htm
http://www.dailylobo.com/main.cfm/in...id/174730.html

Beren

You cant be a traitor to the USA unless you're an american.

Did you read the report? It is not a blackllist of any kind. I could not find a single reference to traitors in it. It is simply a report pointing out tha discrepancy between the opinions of academics versus the "average man" in america with regard to the events of Sep 11 and the war on terrorism. The authors of this publication from ACTA (not Lynne Cheney or Sen. Lieberman) are attempting to bring this to light so that the people of this country can debate it. Surely there's nothing wrong with that?

I suggest you look up Lynne Cheney's stance on freedom of speech. I believe you'll find that she is one of its strongest advocates. She also believes, however, that others have the right to criticize and take appropriate actions against such speech. In this country right now its usually the conservatives who defend free speech and the liberals who attack it.

You may have noticed numerous quotations in the report by Brown University faculty. Brown is a university in the state of Rhode island (ivy league) where they recently had what amounts to a book burning. Campus newspapers that included a contradictory opinion with respect to reparations to african-americans for slavery were gathered up and burnt by the "liberal intelligencia".

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by SpencerH
...

Glad to conclude that you're not one of those who claim that the US are number one in everything.
No country is perfect (the number of the homeless in the Netherlands is rapidly increasing indeed, with the deterioration of the social system).
Stay proud, there is still plenty to be proud of for the both of us!

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Beren
Just another evidence that America bashing is a just cause:
Lynne Cheney and Joe Lieberman put up a blacklist of autority persons who are considered to have committed treachery. People were judged on what they said and called with name.
This is considered treachery in the report:
"we need to understand the reasons behind the terrifying hatred directed against the U.S. and find ways to act that will not foment more hatred for generations to come."
"It is from the desperate, angry and bereaved that these suicide pilots came."
"America should build bridges and relationships, not simply bombs and walls."

If this is treachery I am definately treacherous, but so are all of you... What vice-president's wife is saying is that these things should not be said. So it's not only true that critic is 'not done' in America, it's also treachery.

Report:
www.goacta.org/Reports/defciv.pdf
Reactions:
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1213-05.htm
http://www.dailylobo.com/main.cfm/in...id/174730.html

If you are not with us you are against us!
If you are not proud to be American you are against us!
If you think Bush looks like a chimp you are against us!

[lorddread]

Originally posted by Beren
Just another evidence that America bashing is a just cause:
Lynne Cheney and Joe Lieberman put up a blacklist of autority persons who are considered to have committed treachery. People were judged on what they said and called with name.
This is considered treachery in the report:
"we need to understand the reasons behind the terrifying hatred directed against the U.S. and find ways to act that will not foment more hatred for generations to come."
"It is from the desperate, angry and bereaved that these suicide pilots came."
"America should build bridges and relationships, not simply bombs and walls."

If this is treachery I am definately treacherous, but so are all of you... What vice-president's wife is saying is that these things should not be said. So it's not only true that critic is 'not done' in America, it's also treachery.

Report:
www.goacta.org/Reports/defciv.pdf
Reactions:
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1213-05.htm
http://www.dailylobo.com/main.cfm/in...id/174730.html

IF you had taken the time to read the report, instead of scanning it and then criticizeing our leaders, you would have posted the rediculous post above!

The report shows what most Americans already know. That the United States college and University system are run by socialists. Not just Liberal Democrats, but Ultra Leftists.

Lynne Chene did not write the report as any sort of black list. I could not image the firestorm that would sweep the college campus's if such a list was created. The lawsuits would pile up higher the the WTC's.

If you are going to take part in discussions within this thread, please get your facts straight. I will of course give you the benifit of the doubt as English is not your first language, that you didn't understand the purpose of the document. If this is so, in the future please have someone explain it to you!

Thank you.

Have a nice day

[Beren]

Originally posted by lorddread


IF you had taken the time to read the report, instead of scanning it and then criticizeing our leaders, you would have posted the rediculous post above!

The report shows what most Americans already know. That the United States college and University system are run by socialists. Not just Liberal Democrats, but Ultra Leftists.

Lynne Chene did not write the report as any sort of black list. I could not image the firestorm that would sweep the college campus's if such a list was created. The lawsuits would pile up higher the the WTC's.

If you are going to take part in discussions within this thread, please get your facts straight. I will of course give you the benifit of the doubt as English is not your first language, that you didn't understand the purpose of the document. If this is so, in the future please have someone explain it to you!

Thank you.

Have a nice day

If what you are saying is correct, it is referred wrongly somewhere on the internet. So that's not my fault and I have to admit I don't read entire reports, I just read what other people said about it. I am just too lazy to read that many pages.
But nevertheless, it was said on multiple occassion that the 117 remarks in the report were referred to as being treacherious. Of course this web site could have it wrong and just made something up...
(Idea for new signature: Maybe I am wrong, but you are more wrong.)

[lorddread]

Beren,

Never get the impression that I look down upon your ideals and beliefs. Young people such as yourself are full of ideals and view the world one way. As you get older, your perception of the world changes. It happens to all of us. Things we believed in as young adults, we find no longer are either important to us, or our views changed.

My view of the world is considerably different from yours. I respect your view, even when I believe it to be wrong.

America and Europe are 2 different nations. (I am thinking EU here). Our goals in the world while parelell (we both want world peace), we are trying to get there by different methods.

In our country, like yours, we are free to say almost anything. Exress our beliefs.

A problem we as a nation are facing now, is that during the 60's and 70's, radicals (hippies) wanted to change the world through revolution. They learned they couldn't do it.

Europe has radical politions (La Pen in France is an example), here in our country radicals cannot get elected because the people won't vote for them, so they take their message elsewhere, our colleges.

For decades they have spread their message in relative obscurity. We knew they were there, but didn't care. They have the right to speak their mind, just as I have the right to ignore them.

After 9-11 their views, because they are so radical, clashed with our society's views. The report documented this. We can point out how wrong they are, but we cannot censor them. Our constituion will not allow that.



The problem with what was reported in the report is that

[Dry]

Originally posted by lorddread
Europe has radical politions (La Pen in France is an example), here in our country radicals cannot get elected because the people won't vote for them, so they take their message elsewhere, our colleges.

This is not exactly my perception of it.
I have the feeling that Lepen's political views are far-right in Europe but would be seen as simple right in the US.
I think that Lepen in the US would not be considered as extremist. And this is the reason why you don't 'have' extremists.

OTOH, the few I have read in the report is far-left in the US, but in Europe could be seen as just left. Something between the socialists and the communists, but with a pinch of autoritarism (if what the report says is correct of course), so I would say something like the Greens.

Now, about the report. From what I have read (but I am no english native), my understanding is that it is meant to be a report about a situation, but it appear to be a list of examples with names. A report talks about statistics, and does not include names.
The fact that a 'study' it includes names, has some disgusting far-right smell. It is a technique used by far-right groups.
It is like putting a yellow star on the chest of the people.
To wear a yellow star does not kill you, does it?
It just tells the truth, isn't it?
Transparency, right?

That report has indeed a real strange smell.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Dry

I have the feeling that Lepen's political views are far-right in Europe but would be seen as simple right in the US.
I think that Lepen in the US would not be considered as extremist. And this is the reason why you don't 'have' extremists.

We do have both left and right-wing extremists in America, but they are usually not successful nationally. Nader was the most recent example of this. There have been similar candidates (to Lepen) in America who developed substantial followings at the local or state levels by appealing to patriotic "right-wing" values. All of them were eventually exposed as the neo-nazis that they are and soundly thrashed on entering the national arena. Based on that, I would say that Lepen would eventually be recognized as an extremist here also.

Based on my own experience though, I would say that the moderate American "right-wing" would be "far right" in Europe and moderate "left-wing" in Europe would be "far-left" here

OTOH, the few I have read in the report is far-left in the US, but in Europe could be seen as just left. Something between the socialists and the communists, but with a pinch of autoritarism (if what the report says is correct of course), so I would say something like the Greens.

I would actually put the academic-left further left than the greens. Some of them are more like "rabid-dog-stalinists".

Now, about the report. From what I have read (but I am no english native), my understanding is that it is meant to be a report about a situation, but it appear to be a list of examples with names. A report talks about statistics, and does not include names.

It is a report about a situation. Its simply that they are reporting the viewpoints of these academics to the american people. Most americans wouldnt guess that these people are teaching these views in American universities. This report simply brings their remarks out into the open.

The fact that a 'study' it includes names, has some disgusting far-right smell. It is a technique used by far-right groups.
It is like putting a yellow star on the chest of the people.
To wear a yellow star does not kill you, does it?
It just tells the truth, isn't it?
Transparency, right?

That report has indeed a real strange smell.

What smell would that be? Either they said these things or they didnt. If some of those academics were misquoted or their comments were taken out of context thats a problem, but one that can be dealt with in the courts. I'll bet that you wont see much, if any, of that though. Instead we'll see the kinds of attacks you have now posted in an attempt to side-step the issue. These academics certainly have the right to say those things but they also have to accept the responsibility for what they say and do. The american people have the right to know what is being said by these academics so that they can decide what to do about it.

This is not a report by the government. That fact alone makes it vastly different from wearing yellow stars. Its a report by a private organization who have as much right to state their opinions as anyone else in America. The endorsements by Lynne Cheney AND Sen. Lieberman should tell you something.

[Dry]

Originally posted by SpencerH
It is a report about a situation. ...What smell would that be?

Far-right smell.
One technique used by far-right people is to take a few chosen examples and make a generalisation. They will for example here in Europe, chose one given immigrate family, having many children and living from social care. They will pinpoint this family as parasites. If you argue that this is an isolate case, they will find a few more.
Usually 10 examples are enough to generalise that to 'all immigrates are parasites'.

This report takes some examples and may lead the reader to think that this is a general situation in all US universities.

I would actually put the academic-left further left than the greens. Some of them are more like "rabid-dog-stalinists".

I don't know what are the greens in your country, but some greens by us (Belgium, France and Germany) make me think to those old commies. Nice, sweet speach on paper and as long as they are in the opposition, and rabid-dog-stalinists when they are in charge. They don't know it, but they have the same flaw: they want to make your happiness against your will. This leads to stalinism.
Have you ever had greens in charge?
Ask the Germans about the laws they have 'thanks' to the greens.

[need to be confirmed by some Finn]
I have bee told that some nordic country (Finland?) had their nuke centrals closed, thanks to the greens. But as they need power for their factories, they buy it from the russians.
Great! They closed western technology nuke powers and 'help' Tchernobyl-like ones to survive.
Yeah, since they are in charge, I feel the world is a safier place.
[/need to be confirmed by some Finn]

[Spiffor]

I'm not an ecologist, but the Greens did not make happiness against the will of the people : they were elected to pass laws, which force people to be more respective to the environment, becuase for that matter, only a collective effort would be useful.
For example : the trash-plasticbags in Germany are horrible, and you pay fines if you have tto much non-recyclable garbage for your household. But I sure hope most of these materials are recycled.
People make rule for theselves, so that when everyone makes concessions, the life among others is more harmonious. It's called society. If the German truly hated these environement law, they'd elect someone promising to get rid of them.