It seems to me foreigners have rather more reason to comment on American politics than Americans have to comment on the politics of other countries – simply because right now, at this stage in history, the U.S. is the most important country on earth – the only remaining military superpower, the biggest national economy, and the most overwhelming influence on world culture; therefore, the results of American elections and the decisions made in Washington affect everybody in the whole world, directly or indirectly.
No, it’s quite in keeping with Sisyphus’ Stone’s previous posts about “Yanks”.
I’m surprised he keeps getting away with it.
Ha, ha, ha! Thanks, friend Brutus! I guess you missed my posts about wanting the death penalty to be more widely applied and maybe make it a bit more interesting, like bring back public executions using the guillotine? However, vis-a-vis your postings, I am most happy to be considered by yourself to be one of the other side. 
Because not being part of nor having to live within our system, it is a rare foreign who really knows what they are talking about. Oh sure, non-citizens know some facts, but most are just like us, victims of your own media interpretations but yet lacking in understanding of the big picture in other countries.
Perhaps so many foreigner’s like to post about our politics because their own leaders and events are so boring? Or ours are just so interesting? There must be a reason why some non-citizens spend SO MUCH TIME here telling us why we suck, or who we should vote for, or how good or bad our economy is, or how our laws work or should work, or this or that, etc., etc…
Nup, he was right. You were whooshed. Hyperbole sometimes accomplishes what reasoned arguments doesn’t.
And that was the first post that I have use the sobriquet, Yanks. I usually use Seppos. A more apt rhyming slang metaphor than ‘Yanks’.
I was going to mention this earlier in the thread: that an impression exists in America that it is always clearing up everyone else’s mess so why should it have to listen to the advice/opinions of the fools who make that mess.
I would suggest, however, that, at least for the second half of last century, America was the chief mess-maker, it just managed to do its business in others’ backyards, so maybe it could do with that advice/those opinions after all.
And, of course, this century has not got off to the most auspicious of starts.
So, you’re saying that you initially posted for the sole purpose of getting a rise out of someone? Huh. Interesting.
You seem to have read a few things into my post that I wasn’t implying.
Many people aren’t well informed about their own domestic politics, and what you say doesn’t contradict my statement. What is important is whether or not the person is informed, and whether or not his arguments are convincing. There’s no reason to dismiss them on the mere basis that he’s a foreigner, or to complain if he actually manage to influence people.
[/quote]
Perhaps so many foreigner’s like to post about our politics because their own leaders and events are so boring? Or ours are just so interesting? There must be a reason why some non-citizens spend SO MUCH TIME here telling us why we suck, or who we should vote for, or how good or bad our economy is, or how our laws work or should work, or this or that, etc., etc…
[/QUOTE]
The reason has been posted many times in this thread. What happens in the US has much more impact in the world that what happens in, say, Mali. So, people are generally way more aknowledgeable about and interested in the USA than Mali. Though I’m quite certain Malian politics are probably as fascinating as US political issues. But they don’t have the same impact and coverage.
(I just discussed about his country with a Malian, and found what he told me very interesting, though I was totally clueless about his country. That’s why I picked this example)
Many people aren’t well informed about their own domestic politics, and what you say doesn’t contradict my statement. What is important is whether or not the person is informed, and whether or not his arguments are convincing. There’s no reason to dismiss them on the mere basis that he’s a foreigner, or to complain if he actually manage to influence people.
The reason has been posted many times in this thread. What happens in the US has much more impact in the world that what happens in, say, Mali. So, people are generally way more aknowledgeable about and interested in the USA than Mali. Though I’m quite certain Malian politics are probably as fascinating as US political issues. But they don’t have the same impact and coverage.
(I just discussed about his country with a Malian, and found what he told me very interesting, though I was totally clueless about his country. That’s why I picked this example)
Disingeneous. Trolls intend to get a rise of people. Hyperbole is intended to be fun or to help making a point. The fact that some people don’t get it doesn’t mean that the poster is troling.
The “legwork” isn’t revealing what you think it is.
None of the posts cited in that thread can be reasonably viewed as “trying to silence dissenting voices”.
“I find your opinions meaningless” is not terribly constructive, but it does not exactly represent the march of the jackboots either.
I don’t know, Jackmanii, the phrase
certainly seems to convey more than just “I find your opinion meaningless”. It’s more akin to “Mind your own business”, which is exactly the sentiment Brutus claims the right doesn’t espouse when it comes to people expressing opinions on the policites of countries other than the one in which they reside.
Yes, it has that air of “People who live in glass houses…”.
If a poster is such a weak, easily intimidated creature that that sort of rejoinder discourages them from posting, then they are not going to be able to tolerate any sort of routine debate here.
That wasn’t the point behind this part of the debate and you know it. Brutus said
and jshore provided an example from the Doper right that proves Brutus’ assertion false. Brutus is thus shown to be talking out another orifice besides his mouth. End of story.
I disregard virtually everything Brutus posts (does saying this mean I am trying to “silence” him?).
Again, I don’t think it’s useful to flat-out dismiss political observations from abroad on the grounds that they are from furriners; I also am not impressed by the cries of “Help, help, I’m being intimidated”. The odds of losing pungent foreign commentary on the SDMB are about the same as there being a shortage of fire ants in Texas.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
No one is talking about a reasoned reply to non-US posters. What Sam is talking about is questioning his right to post about US politics simply because he’s Canadian. I’ve seen it happen at least once in the last month alone. I won’t name the poster, but he/she has already contributed to this thread and should at least have the courage to adimit it him/herself.
[/QUOTEThen it ought to be easy to provide a link, shouldn’t it? First “have the courage” to make sure that that’s *really * what it says, though.
It isn’t and doesn’t - the problem is with the “if an argument is convincing” part of that. An argument from someone with no, or little, stake in the results is automatically less convincing, just as shallow, ideological, fact-flouting arguments are.
I’ll join you in noting that following politics can be a fascinating spectator sport, as well as a fine way to educate oneself about other lands and peoples. But you do have to hold yourself back from “masquerading”, as you put it, instead of respecting the stakeholders’ responsibility for the outcomes, a responsibility you do not share for most of their domestic matters. I don’t think much about Mali either, but I’m not about to tell them how to manage their own households either as long as I have problems with mine.
Nope. In fact, the opposite is just as likely to be true. Someone who is not emotionally involved in the outcome might be able to see the situation more objectively.
However, if you really feel that way, the rest of us will oblige you and discount all non-US posters who agree with your positions in the future.
Well, this was the thread I was thinking of when I made my earlier post. If that’s just trying to be fun or help making a point, I don’t think the distinction from trolling is a particularly useful one.
And Sisyphus, just FYI, it’s not the first time you’ve used the word “yanks”, although that’s really quite beside the point.