So a host of people saying essentially, ‘no, your interpretation is not quite right’ and you feel compelled to do a ‘me too’ for the one post that agrees with you. Subtle.
Have you considered that it’s you that’s changed?
I’m not quite sure it’s really a comment about this message board or a swipe at people who think differently than you.
Serious question, in a thread alleging a decent of tone, quality of debate, and rise of pettiness, is this the appropriate venue for this type of jab?
It’s assertions like this that demonstrate to U.S. residents that your critiques of America lack evidentiary backing (American news media feature abundant coverage of foreign affairs, something that’s been true for many years).
I think you’d find a better reception to your posts if there were fewer dogmatic yet erroneous assumptions on your part.
This rather demonstrates what I am talking about. It is universally accepted that Average news coverage of other countries is considerably lower and of less intensity in the USA than most other countries; if one relied on broadcast radio and TV for information about most of the world, there s little international coverage unless it impacts directly on the US. In a less inward looking country there is considerably more international news. I vacation in the US almost every year and am in a position to compare local broadcasts of news content (in California usually) and compared with the BBC or any other place I visit, general foreign coverage is minimal.
Additionally the average American travels less abroad than almost any other rich nation, and when they do it is most often to Canada, Mexico or vacation spots in the Western Hemisphere. The take up of passports is historically very low in the US compared to anywhere else comparable. This also limits direct experience of other cultures.
I wonder if I could ask you what your experience of news coverage is in other nations and what your experience is of spending time in other countries?
I have spent limited time vacationing abroad, and my knowledge of foreign news coverage is based on occasional exposure to what sources like the BBC (there is a BBC channel on my satellite radio feed), U.K. newspaper websites, other international media opinion (as reported in local papers) and the odd story from al-Jazeera are saying. I do not feel that entitles me to pontificate on how informed residents of other nations are.
I remind you that you asserted that there is a “lack of general non-US news” in America. If you have something besides personal anecdote backing up this claim, I invite you to start a thread in an appropriate forum (we can add that thread to the master collection of Pjen’s “fascination with differences between cultures”, a.k.a. fascination with his belief that American cultures, mores and politics are greatly inferior to those of the U.K./Europe).
As to why Americans travel abroad with less frequency than, say, residents of the U.K., there are numerous reasons that have nothing to do with how allegedly parochial Americans’ interests are - namely, the enormous diversity of environments and experiences available in the U.S.* (much more than in the U.K. or similar countries), costs and difficulty of overseas travel, work culture that doesn’t provide for lengthy vacations, and also (to a lesser extent) avoiding the unreasoning hostility towards Americans by stereotype-bound foreigners.
*anything you want, we got it right here in the U.S.A. 
As I mentioned above, I am very pro-American in many ways becasue of where I grew up- to Brits I am certainly pro-American and seen as being the result of an American education. I piss them off talking about things that are different and possibly better in US culture.
Your last comment is a cause but not an excuse for US lack of understanding the rest of the world.
Yep. People disagree with you because they’re too stupid or uneducated to understand your enlightened point of view.
*But I am also aware that many [Europeans that spent time in the US] find it very difficult to understand or countenance other countries having different systems, yet seeing them automatically as inferior. *
You cannot deny the extreme defensive patriotism of American culture- God’s Own Country, self-assessment as the best country in the whole world in all things; other countries also have petty nationalism but few take it to the absolute extreme taken by many Americans.
This is going to sound a little jerkish, but have you considered that people simply didn’t pay much attention to your posts ten years ago?
If you have had the same strident views for all that time, and you’ve only recently started getting more flak about them, one hypothesis is indeed that the board has changed. Personally, I don’t think it has that much. I can recall lots of bygone posters who had strong views on the left and the right, and I can’t say that they were the exception back then.
So, another hypothesis to consider is that I think there is a tendency not to fully engage with newer members of the board. I think there’s a tendency to debate posters that you are more familiar with, rather than those less known. So perhaps your posts on your strongly held political views were glossed over ten years ago, but now more posters are willing to engage you, and what you are seeing is a more fervent debate because people are actually paying more attention to what you write.
My point of view is on variety rather than necessarily on correctness or appropriateness.
It fascinates me that countries maintain fairness and justice in different ways with a wide variety of written or actual civil rights, rules on gun ownership, penal policies, drug laws, abortion rules and so on.
No country or group of countries (or groups of States!) has a monopoly on what is right.
Some cultures are more open to ideas that contradict their own policies than others. Some remain tied to rules that may have been correct some centuries ago but now might be somewhat irrelevant.
To me, it’s a somewhat more negative place than it used to be in say… 1999. I don’t know what combination of 9/11, ownership changes, the Bush II presidency, and the 2008 recession caused it, but that’s what I see.
It used to be more light-hearted. More funny/silly threads about sex and body functions, etc… and rather less in the way of “deep” threads about atheism, current events, guns, poverty, wealth, investment, health care, etc… that ALWAYS end up some kind of hostile ideological slug-fest akin to the overly political threads.
That’s not to say that we didn’t have hostile ideological slug-fest political threads (we sure did!), but I just don’t remember nearly so many non-overtly political threads descending into combativeness as I see now. Maybe I just didn’t read them back then, but I don’t even remember reading them back then.
My Mother had a scrapbook of letters written to her by my teachers. Nonetheless, I am curious why comparing the 'Dope with other message boards is verbotten.
You write silly generalizations like this one. Then you get upset that a board composed of mostly Americans does not respond well to you?
:dubious:
This thread made me realize that many of of the bygone posters who were old school hard leftys are gone (Red Fury being the latest, if I’m not mistaken). Maybe it is just that Pjen is now in the front lines espousing those views in GD threads with less back up from other hard left and/or international posters. If we now have newer prolific GD posters like Ibn Warraq claiming to be generally a leftist but at the same time getting kudos from Shodan, it might be that the board has moved to the right in some ways.
I’ll deny that it exists in any significant amount on this MB. Just how pervasive do YOU think it is here?
Are you saying you meant to couch your complaint as U.S. folks don’t contain amongst them enough variety?
So anyone that disagrees with you is “irrational”?
And you wonder about the tone of responses to that kind of post?
Seriously?
Pjen, I disagree with you much of the time, but many posters are as opinionated as you, and you do not deserve being piled up on here. 
To be fair, they could just be “inhuman” rather than “irrational”. Oh, wait, that was “and”, not “or”, so I guess they are both.
I believe she said the death penalty was irrational.