So if America dissolved any assemblance of a representative democracy, you’d call it the same nation? I can call a cow a horse, but it wouldn’t ride nearly as well and it probably couldn’t clear those jumps on the course. Assuming the name remains the same, a nation is defined by more than it’s label. It’s defined by it’s people, politics, and policies.
It kind of confuses me that you don’t see a nation’s founding documents as defining the nation itself. Can you help me understand that?
Of course. Nations are not immortal, but they are longer-lived than political systems. Poland ceased to exist as a state with the partitions of the late 18th Century, but the Polish ethnocultural nation survived through all the decades of foreign rule, ready to re-emerge as a nation-state in 1918. Since 1789, France has been through five monarchies, five republics and a period of fascist rule, yet through it all France has remained France, the same national culture. China has a national history going back almost 3,000 years, through numerous imperial dynasties, periods of political division, foreign conquest and occupation, most recently Communist rule; but it’s still the nation of Confucius. America is an ordinary nation-state like France or China, not an idea-state like the Soviet Union, which, as soon as people lost faith in the system, ceased to make sense and shortly ceased to exist (but the Russian nation survived). The American nation certainly existed before independence from Britain (though how long before is debatable).
Some of this stuff I actually support like the establishment of NAU.
Now that, I believe, is a wholly unsupported statement. IOW, cite?
Also interested to see any support re: the USSR that it was a sudden “lack of faith in the system” among the populace that caused it to collapse in short order.
I get you, valid point.
Let me say that I would not feel this was my nation or my home anymore if the things I fear come to pass. I would not consider it to still be “America” and what the vision it was founded on stands for.
All states are “idea states.” Societal rules only matter as long as the people under them keep playing the game. Rules only have meaning because we give them meaning.
I would think though that there would be some degree of civil war within America should the government completely abandon it’s founding principles too quickly, so that could redefine the borders and perhaps create a new nation, though I find that unlikely with how pro-globalist the nations of the world have become.
Maybe we’ll have the “Republic of the US” and “America,” simliar to Ireland’s split (though I imagine the Republic’s territory would be more the ratio of Northern Ireland).
I guess America stands apart to me, because its history as a nation is so young, so fresh. We’ve really only had this autonomous government, and it was rather unique to anything that had been done up to this point.
If this social experiment ceases to have the original intent, I just see it as the death of a nation. I’m not even patriotic in the modern sense of the word. I am patriotic about the ideals stated by our founding documents and to me, those ideas are the most important piece of this country.
I would cite the Revolutionary War.
I would in turn cite the Articles of Confederation.
adding: both of which events, of course, were subsequent to effective independence (or at least rebellion). It was the Revolution (military and political) that formed the nation, not the other way around. And as shown by the weakness of the central government under the Articles, they still had a ways to go even after military action was concluded.
A very cogent argument for exactly that thesis is made in this book, which you should run right out and read.
As I recall, the order of events was: (1) Gorbachev ordered “Glasnost.” (2) Glasnost quickly got entirely out of hand. (3) The generals staged a coup to restore order and prevent secession of such errant union republics as Lithuania. (4) The coup failed in the streets because the people stood up to the troops and the troops refused to shoot them. (5) Gorbachev was restored to power. (6) Somehow it worked out he hadn’t been, because nobody believed in the system any more. All the union republics including Russia declared independence and made it stick.
Those who think we can grow out of this mess , have forgotten the jobs are gone. The factories have not laid off workers and continued on with a smaller crew. Nope, they are gone. They have been moved abroad for cheaper labor and weak environmental regulation. The Chinese ,and people of India can grow out of this mess. We can not. We had power when we were the nation that could buy the most goods in the world. There is power when you are needed as a market. That too will end. We had power when we built things and exported goods. Those days are gone. There is a new semi-permanent unemployed class ,that once was middle class. Now they are expendable.
What is scary is, what will America look like when we stop warring. There are many soldiers and contractors who would come home to find little chance for work. War is our biggest export. There would be a blow to our economy. More workers chasing fewer jobs, with unions destroyed, will result in lower wages. There will be a permanent non working class.
America will change. There will be an extremely rich class and a huge gap down to workers. We have allowed them to concentrate the political power in the hands of the chosen rich class. The map will still say The United States, but it will be the place they wanted to make it into. We lost.
It’ll take at least a couple of weeks before Amazon can ship it to me, any chance you can tell me what the argument is? 'Cause if we’re just going by book titles, lemme tell you about the chariots of the gods . . .
Well, I guess it falls to interpretations of history, but wasn’t the whole chain of events propelled by economic factors?
Lithuania and others had been wanting to break away for decades, and I doubt you could have found anybody in the peripheral republics who “believed in the system” during the same period of time: they were kept in line not by an idea, but by brute force (also largely the means by which they had been brought into the fold in the first place).
Per my rough understanding, it was only when the failures of central planning came to a head – coupled with a military that was driven to outspend the US, and only succeeded in outspending its own fiscal resources – that Gorby made a desperate ploy toward “restructuring” and “openness.”
Openly exposing the lies of the Soviet state for what they were – leaving not even a fig leaf of legitimacy – of course didn’t help, but really only served to push an already toppling wall, in my view.
Military spending is throwing money down the toilet. It doesn’t produce a single useful thing, rather it destroys useful things. So cutting the military budget isn’t going to ruin our country, rather the reverse. Our entire deficit could be eliminated if we eliminated our military.
You know, does anyone in this thread remember the late 60s and early 70s? Remember when we had regular riots? Remember when we had actual revolutionary movements? Remember double digit inflation, double digit unemployment, all at the same time? Remember when the Soviet Union had 1000 nuclear missiles on a hair trigger pointed straight at us? Remember when totalitarian communism was spreading?
I guess not. Give you guys one economic downturn and you act like it’s the end of the world. America can’t be an ordinary country in your eyes–if we’re not the toppermost of the poppermost, we’re gonna have a road warrior scenario with cannibal mutants combing the wasteland for canned goods.
Thing is, the worst disasters any first world countries have experienced were Germany and Japan during WWII. Both countries absolutely flattened, the bulk of the young male population dead, industry completely destroyed, buildings with four walls still standing as scarce as hen’s teeth. And both countries recovered. The world recovered.
You know though, after hearing the pants-pissing in this thread, you’re starting to convince me. If America has turned into such a nation of whiner and quitters and crybabies, maybe we are finished. Oh, the rich are grabbing power? How about you quit bellyaching and take to the fucking streets and stop them? We’re spending too much? How about you elect some goddam representatives with some backbone instead of whining? Corporations too powerful? How about we form a mob and start hanging CEOs from lamposts? Or is that too hard?
Take a look at what other countries have gone through in the past few decades. Plenty of other countries have managed to transform from authoritarian oligarchies into normal countries. Fuck, some countries have transformed from totalitarian communist dictatorships–run along the lines of Orwell’s 1984–into somewhat normal countries. But the United States can’t manage to hold on to our 200 years of freedom? We’re just going to piss our pants in terror when the hired goons of the wealthy threaten us? We’re just going to roll over and die because some other country on the other side of the world has a slightly higher rate of economic growth?
I guess we’re screwed after all, with this sort of citizenry.
There sure are a lot of pessimists here. The U.S. has faced much worse than the current situation – and survived. Other countries have faced much, much worse than the current situation – and survived.
The federal government bought 'em and voted 'em into this union, and damnit, they can take 'em out!
There are some big issues, but the public isn’t united. Some want more government regulation, some less. Some want an expanded War on Terror; some diminished. Et cetera. There’s a sense that the status quo is flawed, but no consensus on which way to change.
Gonzomax is right, we are the walking dead and don’t know it yet. We traded our industrial capacity for numbers on a balance sheet that went to the top 10%. The middle class is dying and Limbaugh makes $112,000 per day while preaching the rich are the ones getting screwed. Just yesterday our local talk radio station is bragging about the new program change, starting in March Glenn Beck will grace our airwaves. We have had it.
I’m more concerned about it becoming Spain, basking in the memory of the days when it was rich and ruled the seas and could afford to be decadent, while everything crumbles around it until eventually the fascists take over.
Yes, I often wonder where people get the bizarre ideas I’m seeing here.
C’mon, that’s Marxist talk! 
And…