Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site whuxl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!orb
From: orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Re: America-bashing
Message-ID: <686@whuxl.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 25-Jul-85 12:50:01 EDT
Article-I.D.: whuxl.686
Posted: Thu Jul 25 12:50:01 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Jul-85 23:39:28 EDT
References: <3268@drutx.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Whippany
Lines: 64

> >Image is what we were discussing. Somebody was upset at the suggestion
> >that the rest of the world hates America. They wrote a long letter about
> >how wonderful we really are. Maybe it's true, but it's our image that
> >counts in this situation. A friend of mine returned from England and
> >told me:
> 
> >"Depending where you are, Russia and America are first and second on the
> >list of the most hated country."
> 
> >Food for thought.
> 
> >Charles Forsythe
> 
> A few questions (no answer required; just think about it): Is the hate
> justified?  Does it, in turn, justify attacks?  Can those who hate us be
> made to like us instead?  Even if it is possible, is it up to us to make
> it happen?
> 
> The point is that I think it is rather naive to believe that people who are
> attacked must have deserved it; that becoming nicer or more docile will
> insulate you from hate.
> David Olson
> ..!ihnp4!drutx!dlo

There are a number of reasons why the rest of the world hates America.
These have nothing to do with "image" or irrational hate but history
and current facts.
For one thing, the rest of the world sees the 6% of the world represented
by Americans consuming over 50% of the world's resources. (this has probably
shifted somewhat lately but the basic imbalance remains)
Third World countries and even European countries look around and what
do they see? American corporations everywhere extracting their resources.
The current trade deficit doesn't change the control by American-based
corporations - what has changed is that these corporations begin to
manufacture overseas instead of in America so they can get cheap,
non-union labor.  But the ownership and control of these corporations
is still predominately American.
Countries like Nicaragua have vivid remembrances of being occupied by
US Marines for years to protect the holdings of the United Fruit Company.
The Vietnamese remember that the US came in to help the French
retain Indochina as a French colony after World War II.
The Iranians remember that the CIA deposed the democratically elected
Iranian president, Mossadegh in favor of the Shah in 1954.
Now the South Africans notice that the Reagan administration has been
shipping the South African government arms- arms which they see
used against their own struggle to eliminate apartheid.
People in Western Europe (as contrasted with their governments) see
more nuclear weapons being crammed down their throats to suit
American views of the nuclear balance - while Europeans see themselves
as most likely to be the first to be fried if such weapons were ever used.
 
Over 100 countries signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Pact to voluntarily
agree not to develop their own nuclear weapons.  Yet as part of that
agreement, the Soviet Union and U.S. agreed to limit their own nuclear
weapons.  They haven't -- instead they have doubled their nuclear arsenals
in the last decade.  If the superpowers decide to have a nuclear war
the whole world would pay the cost if the Nuclear Winter effect is valid.
Regardless the whole world would pay the cost of massive poisoning of
the whole ecosphere.
The fact that the rest of the world could be wiped out due to
either an American or Soviet unilateral decision to launch 
a nuclear attack does not make either country well-loved.
      
        tim sevener  whuxl!orb