This has come up several times during the interminable dinner-table political arguments. My father will respond to some comment about America needing to change X with something along the lines of, “Look at Syria! Or North Korea! I bet the people there would love to live in America! This is a great country!” (Now that I think about it, he never seems to object to criticism of liberal American policy, but I digress). And I say, “That’s not really a meaningful comparison. Or really complimentary in the first place.” And this sends Dad on a rant about how we liberals don’t appreciate America because we’re demanding an unachievable utopia, blah blah blah. You know, the usual friendly discourse you get when a family’s politics run the gamut from Tea Party to Tumblr.
Anyway, politics aside, I think favorably comparing America to some bonfida dictatorship or third-world hellhole is… stupid. It’s like saying, “Well, Bob sure is nicer than Hitler.” Okay, that’s technically a compliment, but Hitler is so far to the Nasty end of the Nasty-Nice scale that it tells you nothing about Bob. In fact, it makes Bob sound horrible himself, if Hitler is the first thing you come up with that he’s worse than. If you want to talk about how good or bad America is, you need to compare it to other wealthy, industrialized nations.
This makes sense, right? I’m not crazy? Is there some more succinct way of putting it I can use?
America sure is a great country, but it would be the height of arrogance to presume that it is the best that it could possibly be, and that there is no room (or justification) for improvement.
Sometimes it’s not even a valid argument. According to a consensus of reliable estimates, the USA has a higher penal incarceration rate than North Korea. Which means that, either, the USA citizens are exposed to more criminals, or that there is a higher likelihood in the USA of just being rounded up and sent off to prison for trivial offenses.
The USA and Nortk Korea might be the only two countries in he world where no foreign-origin TV channels are routinely carried in most markets on basic cable. So most Americans who watch Canadian TV must be doing it through pirate internet streams, which can be subject to criminal prosecution.
(Generally, Mexican or Canadian TV stations are carried on basic cable only in border markets where they can also be picked up over the air. Or in high-priced premium tiers.)
It’s a good argument because, well, it is better to live here, no matter who you are. And if you’re in prison, the likelihood is that you did something legally justified to be there. Now if the law putting you there needs to be changed (e.g., possession) we have avenues to change the law, unlike in North Korea.
I’m honestly happier to be me in America than Kim Jong-un in Korea – and that’s not a spur of the moment thought. Dictator in a shit hole versus my awesome life in America? Yeah, I won the lottery.
You are conflating lack of foreign channels due to being banned, and lack of foreign channels due to lack of economic market demand for it. And I think you know the difference perfectly well.
Doesn’t matter. If people cant get foreign channels, they experience a deprivation. The reason why they can’t get them has nothing to do with the fact that they are not there, which to some extent limits the quality of life.
And in part, it is government culpability. In the US, here is a severe penalty for any dissemination of broadcast material containing certain content (mostly obscene) to be aired. So the cable industry insulates itself against this government threat, rather than to take the chance of letting something go on the air without prior censorship.
None of the published estimates of North Korean incarceration are based on government data. Numerous watchdog organizations try to make careful and reliable estimates. Most such organizations are anti-Kim, and probably therefore overestimate the rate, and even then, it is lower than Americans incarceration rate.
*
While the United States has 707 incarcerated people per 100,000 citizens, for example, China has 124 to 172 per 100,000 people and Iran 284 per 100,000. North Korea is perhaps the closest, but reliable numbers are hard to find; some estimates suggest 600 to 800 per 100,000. (See “Incarceration rates per 100,000” chart.)*
It also might be that the US has a better functioning judiciary and law enforcement system to deal with a similar crime rate, or even (a bit fancifully) that North Korean society isn’t prosperous or well developed enough to support a healthy amount of crime.
It may be difficult to buy authentically Swedish food in the United States, due to the USA not being Sweden. That is light-years different than if the government sends people to a labor camp for the crime of possessing or eating Swedish food.
Don’t forget to factor in the number of people in those countries who, instead of being imprisoned, were summarily executed or simple disappeared. Those tactics certainly help the incarceration ratios…
Are you telling me that if I move to the US (which I had been seriously considering until Nov. 9) then it would be impossible/illegal for me to stream the TSN and Rogers curling broadcasts, which are also carried on their web site? I would expect to pay something for it, just as I pay to stream, say, MLB games.
