posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 06:56 PM
I understand where you are coming from, but just to fill you in, the vast majority of those complaining about the US and their/its current state of
affairs are actually citizens of the United States. Born and raised most likely. I think you and I differ on our interpretations of the complaints
against the US however, and here is why: I do not think people complain about what is happening in this country because they feel things are so much
better anywhere else, but rather because they do not wish to see the US turn in to what some of those other countries are.
I would be fooling myself if I thought that the majority complained about the US for the reason I described above, because most simply are not that
mature, and are not thinking in such broad terms. I would argue that the majority are short-sighted and are more apt to complain when something
directly affects their lives, OR directly conflicts with their belief system, whether those beliefs are well-founded or not. So I do agree with the
idea that some of the naysayers need to be verbally slapped around a bit, although you did not say that, haha, or at least educated on their
ignorance. The majority of the world, population-wise and area-wise, truly is worse than the US, or any modern "democratic" country for that matter.
But, I do not think this means no one who lives in one of these countries should not complain. We have reached this current state and level of
civility over time, and we would not have reached this point had everyone not complained. Complaining, in my mind, is done whenever there is a
problem. Obviously, as I mentioned earlier, some people are going to complain over things that are selfishly motivated, and often times that is not
what we need to listen to. The complains we need to listen to are from those who actually have the bigger picture in mind, those who see where folly
will lead, and the damage that may potentially be done to this country's future, which affects all its inhabitants.
So we should probably analyze the motives of a person who "bashes" the US, or complains about anything related to the US, before we judge what they
are saying. This is the rational thing to do. As an example, I constantly complain about 2nd amendment violations, police brutality, et cetera, not
because I am concerned about how this will affect me personally, but how will affect our country and its future. I have laid out my arguments on this
topic in a logical, concise manner in various threads found across ATS, and hopefully my words in those posts make my motivation apparent.
But instead of everyone replying to those specific arguments I make on the issue, they completely ignore them, and instead start bashing my ideas
simply because they do not agree with them. These are the same people who likely complain all the time about things that affect them personally, while
ignoring all the other issues and aspects of issues that are important, but do not affect them. Then there are those who are not affected personally,
but who "feel" they are personally involved because they are emotionally involved. They have beliefs that are ingrained in bias instead of logic,
and likely grew up with those ideas. You will find most of these people in the democrats versus republicans arguments, and you will see that they
mostly argue from a position of bias, not logic.
The only reason I am offering these examples is to both show that we should analyze motive whenever someone is complaining, as well as attempt to
detect whether they are presenting some logical argument or issue, or simply complaining from a position of bias. I was just pondering how many
racists fit into this latter category, although often times their bias is disguised in the form of logical arguments. And of course personal bias can
be presented through logical arguments, but often times the writer's zeal and context clues give them away. Anyway, to sum up my main point, I think
all of us should analyze any complaints in the following manner: first determine where the plaintiff is coming from, and if this person is found to be
biased and not interested in true change, then just ignore them.
If they are sincere and seem to be presenting a complaint for the sake of changing things for the better, then we must give their complaints some deep
thought, while at the same time ensuring that our personal biases do not affect our perception of the plaintiff's claims, ensuring that we give them
a fair analysis and response. Some will say this post was a waste of time, but I disagree. I have found that attempting to truly understand where
another person is coming from is key to not only to changing things for the better, but also to compromise, which is usually more apt to occur than
outright change, at least in my opinion.