Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
i think this pamphlet shows a grave misinterpretation of the situation.

America IS Warmonger
America IS a fundamentalist Christan nation.
America IS nationalist

It is a democracy that works perfectly, the population is well represented by their leaders,medias,corporations.

Europeans are getting post-national, post-religious and this state of mind cannot be reached in US, there is a large misunderstanding.

by fredouil (fredouil@gmailgmailgmail.com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 02:31:02 AM EST
Fredouil I don't understand your post

the original poster, calling himself European (but probably American due to his perfect English) calls upon Americans to rise in a new revolution because the leading classes in America have gone out of control and because normal democratic procedures cannot change the situation. Bush can wage war perfectly legally with the powers the US Constitution gives him, and what Congress and Senate can do about this (even with a democratic majority) is very little.

"It is a democracy that works perfectly, the population is well represented by their leaders,medias,corporations".

do you mean the US or what ? I beg to disagree. Our European democracies are surely flawd, but not to the level of the US one...

so where is the "misinterpretation" of the situation ?

by oldfrog on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 02:43:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Even if a large part can sometime fells inconfortable with Bush positions (and just recently), i dont think there is any matter for a "new revolution", they are not convinced that they have a real rulling/leading class and therefore will not act. They believe they are in control, if they work hard they will be rewarded, and the rest is god will.

it is a mistake to view the american leadership/democracy with European eyes because even if a part of the population can disagree more or less deeply with the leadership, it is only at the margin :

God makes America the greatest nation in the world (and thus everything is fine in US (at least better than anywhere else)) and the peace is dictated by the strongest, and the strongest has to remain america, no matter what, because they are the good guys.

They are not convince that they have a real rulling/leading class and therefore will not act

by fredouil (fredouil@gmailgmailgmail.com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 03:02:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]
OK I get you better. But beware of sarcasm when you use a foreign language, it can be misunderstood...

I don't think either that the US masses are "ready" for a revolution and I don't think that the original poster is to be taken literally. But I think that there is a growing insight within the progressive community that the current methods of action (blogging, letters to the editor, letters to congressman etc...) are pretty inneficcient and the belief that "only we get a good president" as a savior is disappearing too...

Ted Rall, who has quite a great audience is into the "street option" too even if he points out that it will probably not work either :


How do people in other countries react when their representatives fail to represent them? They march and yell and throw stuff at the police. Some riot.

Not here.

In the United States in 2007 we sit in front of our TVs and our computer screens and wonder why no one is out there marching and yelling (or rioting).

"I'm saddened, baffled and very angry," wrote a reader to the New York Times' editor, "as to why the American people are not demonstrating their frustration and outrage with        President Bush's continued failed policies and incompetence...Blogging is great, and calling one's representative is important, but I implore those with national networking and organizational skills to rally us in towns and cities so that our voices will finally be heard." Our kingdom for a leader!

Forty years ago, demonstrations against an equivalently unpopular war were routine. Students took over college campuses; marchers filled the streets of our cities. The most radical antiwar activists bombed ROTC and other military offices. Why are we so docile now ?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucru/20070109/cm_ucru/mildinthestreets

Obviously Bush will wage a a new war(s) (the "Milosevic logic") and I think this will create so much frustration that new action methods will emerge in the US progressive community. Look what "little" Cindy Sheehan has succeeded with... maybe she is a new Rosa Parks...

I'll probably be dead when they bury her with full honors.. who knows ?

by oldfrog on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 03:40:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"But beware of sarcasm "

there are no sarcasms, i think American democracy works quite well, and represents the true nature of America.

by fredouil (fredouil@gmailgmailgmail.com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 03:49:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
only to the extent that 50% +1 rules.  Or in the case of Bush v. Gore, not even 50%..

We're going through a bad patch but I sense the tide is turning.  The  conservative approach is proving to be awful at running the country and at dealing with the rest of the world.  The UK had Maggie, Spain Franco, France De Gaulle, etc.  No place is perfect.

by HiD on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:08:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Spain had Aznar.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:10:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
he didn't make much of a splash over here other than meeting with Cooter and Blair before the War so I can't really say I know the depths of his suckitude.  I reached back for an enormous f--kup.
by HiD on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:14:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Franco was never elected. We can go into the details of the fuck-up of losing the Civil War in another thread.

Oh, to know the depths of his suckitude you can start with

and then ask anyone who attended his lectures at Georgetown (yes, he was rewarded for his services with a round of that), as well as asking your congresspeople why he deserved a medal.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:22:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Good God.

<otherwise speechless>

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:41:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'd like that other thread.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill
by r------ on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 06:54:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
is Bush level pond scum.
by HiD on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 04:42:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I like that. "300 years of Suckitude: Spain since the War of Succession"

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:23:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
i do not see a huge difference between democrats and republicans, i do not see a huge difference between medias point of view.

the American State of mind is fundamentally different than the european one

by fredouil (fredouil@gmailgmailgmail.com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:29:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What, pray tell, is the "European state of mind"?
by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:42:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Right know we have our knickers in a knot over Russia.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:43:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But still. After 300 years of continental suckitude we have an awareness of consequences.

The US doesn't do consequences. The US can invade a country on the basis of naked lies and then look around a few years later and say 'Who? Us? What did we do?'

And then it can do it all again forty years later and still not see it as a problem.

The US is a teenager that wants to do whatever it wants, doesn't want to clean its room, wants the keys to the car even though it hasn't learned how to drive properly and will run it off the road, and believes it's infallible, invincible, and knows everything.

Clinton was at the moderate end of this spectrum. Bush is off at the crazy nutjob end. But it's the same spectrum, differing only in degree. And most of the racket is run by the one loose cabal which is based in Washington but controls most of the politics and most of the media. Some of the Dems are outside the loop, and genuinely populist, so the situation isn't quite hopeless. But many aren't.

Peaceful but firm civil unrest would be a good thing now. It's going to have to happen sooner or later, because after Bush surges he's going to want to surge again and again.

The planned war in Iran is going to mean a draft, and the only thing that's going to stop that is peasants and pichforks.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:57:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Brilliant post.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill
by r------ on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 06:53:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Seriously, with a couple more paras and a cite or two, you could diary this.

(Maybe we could get someone to cross-post to a US blog...)

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 06:59:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Excellent post, but I'd still like to see the "European state of mind" defined.  Unless it's nothing more than "aware of consequences"?
by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 06:59:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The European State of Mind doesn't exist any more that "the" European Values (and we saw what that was like during the Great Cartoon Controversy).

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 07:02:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks.  That was sort of my point.
by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 07:05:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Fredouil alludes to this, initially, with his comment

Europeans are getting post-national, post-religious

By post-religious, I presume he means quite secular in a sense that goes beyond attitudes about religion, and refers also to the role (and lack thereof) that religion actually plays in the average life of Marcel Bidochon, Jens Jensen or Hans Schmidt. Which explains why you'll rarely see European (some countries excepted, on the periphery even if, in the case of Poland, quite important) leaders make comments about how religious they are, because it simply does not play, whereas in America politicians run to the podium to declaim how religious they are, because it does.

By post-national, I presume he means a generalized disdain (again, there are exceptions, usually on the far right) for the jingo-istic and other trappings of the sort of rampant nationalism America has tended to display of late, a commitment to multilateral institutions and peace, as well as a general feeling that soft power, diplomacy and commercial advantage far outweigh military might in the general rightful scheme of international relations and our respective country's role in those. Which is translated, for instance, in our relatively small defence budget, as opposed to America's, which represents, to it alone, fully half the entire world's.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 10:54:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Heh, you're leaving out the Christian Democrats.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 10:58:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh yeah, I forgot. Bayrou.

He's polling, what, 8%?

Not quite what Arlette & friends on the other side of the left and center, but who knows, maybe the tendance will change.

Third-way - has a bad name, in France at any rate. That is, among the mainstream.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 11:12:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No, I mean the largest group of MEPs in the European Parliament is not post-national and not post-religious.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 11:17:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
My mistake. Was refering to oldfrog's reference to Bayrou and the UDF as being more along the lines of christian democrat. They are not in that eu parliamentary grouping, though, the UMP is, which quite frankly would have to be seen as a marriage of convenience given that UMP and christianism have relatively little, if anything, to do with each other. Have to say, though to a lesser extent, same about Forza Italia - there are Christians in the party, but certainly it is not a christian-oriented party.

CD is a heritage, that grouping also includes purely conservative (and secular) parties, like the UMP.


The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 02:20:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Europeans are getting post-national, post-religious

Well, except that they're not.

All of the things you say are indeed true of some Europeans in some European countries, but as we have repeatedly demonstrated here, there is less commonality among European approaches to all of those issues than people like to believe.  People see the Europe they want to see.  Yours sounds very nice.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 11:15:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You're right about the facts on the ground™, but I think he's probably right about the trajectory. Not to say that we can't be knocked off that path ...
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 11:18:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Not to say that we can't be knocked off that path

Indeed.  We were....

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 11:19:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh, I don't know. I'd say the long-term trend is still correct. You're just going through a bad couple of decades.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 11:21:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I am not sure I agree, maybe the good couple of decades ended two decades ago.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 11:25:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Three decades ago.

I'd say the last significant bit of truly progressive legislation in the US was passed, in bipartisan fashion and signed into law by a Republican president, in 1972, with the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts and the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency.

American "liberals"/(self-described left) think today of Jimmy Carter as a left President. He wasn't. Religiosity in the oval office, deregulation in the economy, beginning of the second cold war (US military arms build-up).

And we know what they've done since...

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 02:24:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
One can only hope.
by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 11:27:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think if the "surge" is perceived to work (and that is a bodybag counting exercise), there's a chance they'd be mad enough to bomb Iran. But not otherwise, and zero chance of a ground invasion under any circumstances.

You can forget any US based resistance for the time being, but I do think that the Russia, China, Far East etc nexus is another matter entirely.

I could see a sort of reverse Suez coming here.

ie in 1956 the US told the UK "we are going to pull the economic plug on you unless you stop playing silly buggers"

Same applies here, but with the boots on other feet.

"The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 07:19:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So, tell me... has anyone in the US noticed that we've been bombing Somalia for the last two days?
by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 07:59:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Getting even for Black Hawk Down!

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 08:02:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I had a Joke theory that George was working through a list of percieved insults to America in reverse in the style of a schoolboy bully. So it would be Iran next then Vietnam, then Korea then Germany (twice) then mexico and finally ending up with the UK.

I can't believe I missed Somalia out, (and I suppose I'd better add Grenada and Cuba in at some stage)

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 04:44:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 08:26:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The entire push against the Somali Islamic group has been well covered on cable news.  The 1/2 hour national evening news -- I've no idea, haven't watched those in a decade.  Prob got 30 seconds.
by HiD on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:02:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What I got of it so far, the only support for the "surge" is coming from Laura and Barney, maybe McCain (and I wouldn't be sure of the two last ones).

The surge is anyway to little, to late. The US would need about 120 000 men only in Baghdad to really clamp down on the insurgency...

Anyway it would mean taking sides in the civil war, which means that the Saudis would be fueling the Iraqi Sunnis with more support...

The outcome of this is not good for the US no matter what...

There won't be a regular invasion of Iran of course. But there might be an air/sea assault. Iran will probably retaliate by turning the Shiite lose on the US in Iraq... plus some blocking of the Hormuz detroit...

and your scenario becomes then more and more credible

by oldfrog on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 10:33:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
the over 50 armchair warriors are on board in some numbers.  (the fox spews demo)
by HiD on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 04:55:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Putting de Gaulle side by side with Franco and (gasp) Thatcher...not cool.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill
by r------ on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 06:47:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Very.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 06:55:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
arrogant Nationalistic control freaks, completely sure of their mission regardless of the facts or how the minorities rights would be affected.  De Gaulle sure fits the arrogant control freak model.
by HiD on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 04:58:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Not fair to de Gaulle to put him by Franco. By Thatcher - why not? He killed a lot more people, and was a lot more authoritarian. Plenty of talk here about historical amnesia among Americans. Maybe a bit about the French version? (and yes, there's a hell of a lot more to like about de Gaulle as well, but let's not forget the dark side)
by MarekNYC on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:23:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I have a weak spot for de Gaulle, because he was not glued to his throne. He resigned not once, but twice, the first for disagreement with the parliament about the constitution, the second for a minor electoral bad results. That means: without being constrained by the law nor thrown out by his lieutnants. He had taken no money and died without any, too.
MOre unique than rare by our top politicians.
For De Gaulle vs. Thatcher: let´s don´t forget there are almost 2 generations (35 years) between them. They were not playing by the same rules. Democracy and expectations improved, after all.
Both strong personalities, to be put mildly.

La répartie est dans l'escalier. Elle revient de suite.
by lacordaire on Thu Jan 11th, 2007 at 06:28:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
the American democracy has a clear deficit regarding the legislative. The executive and judiciary have too strong powers. The possibility of a motion of confidence doesn't exist in the US system, what I know of. Which would solve the actual problem.

The election system is at third world level. The amount of participating voters is the lowest of all western democracies...

so I do hope that this system DOESN'T represent the true nature of America.

by oldfrog on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 08:03:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Forty years ago, demonstrations against an equivalently unpopular war were routine.

Which is exactly why Bush didn't push for a draft. Too many people intentionally ignore points like this in order to score indignation points on op-ed pages and in blogs.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:06:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Reading this is like listening to Fox news from reverso world.
by HiD on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 04:56:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
We're back to this bullshit then?

America IS 300 million people, and roughly half of those who are eligible to vote do so, and roughly half of those vote republican, oops, except for this last election, but we will ignore that since it doesn't fit into your pea-brained frame.

America IS 300 million people, who speak practically every known language, practice practically every known religion, who live in cities and suburbs and rural areas, who are illiterate and who hold PhD's.

America IS 300 million people, many things but not homogenous and certainly not represented by a government which is at this very minute deciding to IGNORE the will of the people and of Congress and escalate the war in Iraq.

America IS not Europe, and hopefully one day everyone can get over that.

But in the mean time I suggest that if you and other Europeans can embrace such a simplistic, crude and imaginary definition of America, you would be wise to work on your own worldviews, which, despite the fact that you were born or live on a certian continent, seem to be lacking in some fundamental common sense.

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire

by p------- on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 08:58:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
To go back to the topic of the diary...

America IS 300 million people, many things but not homogenous and certainly not represented by a government which is at this very minute deciding to IGNORE the will of the people and of Congress and escalate the war in Iraq.

What is going to be done about that?

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 09:03:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
well an exact copy of the Hermione, is due to sail to Boston next year...

http://www.hermione.com/anglais/index_va.htm

by oldfrog on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 10:01:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What can be done about it?  

We marched in the streets and that didn't stop him.
We took control of Congress and that didn't stop him.
The Democrats have stated they will not support a surge, and are preparing legislation to stop funding for a surge, and that will not stop him.

Bloody revolution?  Good luck selling that to the majority who want to end the bloodshed.

Vigilance and 2008 are my best answers.  

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire

by p------- on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 02:48:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The world has turned more unforgiving towards the entire population of the USA since the re-election of GWB in 2004 - as I (and many others) feared it would do. The majority of the voting half of the USA population in 2004 catalysed the destruction of the dream of America for the rest of the world - despite commendable efforts and apologies. Of course the destruction of the appreciation for USA was already accelerating under the first presidency of George W. Bush. Already in 2003 the USA was the most resented -nation- of the world, if I remember right.

I am in awe of your intentions and efforts to set the record straight - but you're fighting the hardest thing there is: a narrative. Welcome to the club.

by Nomad on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 10:39:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
excellent.  but I would hope those here can think beyond a narrative for the sheep.
by HiD on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:15:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'd wade into this Fredouil, but somehow, I think it might be ill-advised...

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill
by r------ on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 10:28:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
America IS Warmonger
America IS a fundamentalist Christan nation.
America IS nationalist

It is a democracy that works perfectly, the population is well represented by their leaders,medias,corporations.

California has a a population and economy big enough to qualify for the G8 and none of that crap applies there.  Add in Washington, Oregon, most of the North East..And it's spreading.  This is why the fundies awoke and we're having a period of retrograde motion.  They're losing the long term battle and they know it.

You look at the US and see Georgia and Texas.  That's not the country.  We do indeed have our share of bigots and religious control freaks, but I don't think you are entirely free of that either.  The Roma would agree I'm sure.

Perhaps  you are so far out on the left wing that you can't see the difference between Bush and Gore or between Edwards and Guiliani.  I can.

I do find it amusing that Europe gets a gold star from you with Berlusconi running Italy for quite a while and nearly back in by a whisker.  You're not so perfect to be in position to throw rocks from your glass porch.

by HiD on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 04:54:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
America IS nationalist

American nationalism is similar in degree to European nationalism, the difference is that we have a lot more guns, other countries financing our wars on credit, and a distinct lack of historical guilt.

Europeans are getting post-national

In a world of expensive energy I can only see a retreat to nationalism. I wish I could see something different.


you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Wed Jan 10th, 2007 at 05:19:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series