An honest question for discussion: Where, when and why did the US begin to fall?

Finally home! Ok let's get to it shall we?

Awesome answers from most. All opinions welcome here and most folks put more than two words into it...

I realize that it likely isn't one single event/presidency/etc that made things bad (again...IF you believe things are bad) but great answers

a reply to: theMediator

It's funny that this was the first answer as I am nearing 65% now of the book....I read through some more while waiting for work to close....really slow day...So my version of the current book is Woodrow Wilson by John Milton Cooper, Jr.

Again...being new to reading about political history, I can't run and say "well I have a strong critique on so-and-so's works" as I have read two WWII books, 1 WWI and 3 and a half bio's...so I am not exactly well versed. What I will say is that I like a few of his early moves (more to the point...promises) and the fact that he had some ability to stick it to Congress. The problem I have solely based on the book is that Cooper is clearly painting a light and rather heroic version of WW. Clearly he has issues with race and other things, but at the same time, when Wilson would do something rather anti-intellectual, it seems like this author is barely glossing over it and then immediately returning to how great he was. I know it's impossible to get a truly unbiased version of...well anything...but I almost feel like this is a case of "thou dost protest (too little)."

He definitely struck heavy chords with labor and agriculture but the more and more I look at my own liberalism, I see that while agree with many core tenets, it becomes pretty crystal clear if I remove my blinders that regulation is good....in moderation. Well before, and during WWI, I remember reading one specific part of a chapter describing opening a crapload of new government regulation agencies, up to and including the Fed Reserve. Now, again appreciating the liberal sentiment of justice (true justice) for all, I see two whoppers of a problem with Wilson. First, he really wasn't that hardcore into justice. Barely made a move on women's suffrage, didn't care much for Jewish people, and despite telling the world he was anti-machine, he made very machine-like moves to nab support from labor-specific populations. That aside, second, was the nonstop new agencies. What disturbs me the most, agency wise, was reading about the Committee on Public Information where he legitimately had what I think are disinfo agents (depending on your bend and take of the war). People ready to go on cue to interrupt rallies and anti-war protests...people ready to make speeches on how America was fulfilling its duty, etc. That seems terribly distrustful of the pubic he was supposed to represent. Not to mention the draft which he left out of intro speeches then dropped on folks and said..."so yeah...America!"

Again, not a hardcore history buff so I have a ton to learn...but I am starting to feel that while I do wholeheartedly agree that regulation is needed...it's going and gone way too far. Thanks for the response.

Now then....

I really need to learn to multi-tag...seriously....

Skywatcher2011

I can't deny that I my 2008 vote was squandered a bit. Frankly I didn't believe the other party in either election was better. I like social progress...but I know a lot of folks mention the economy but also mention the constant cycle of Executive Actions. You feel the same about that?

NthOther

I am still forming opinions. I've always recalled in very young elementary school the lesson of Lincoln was simple. He took on the war to free the slaves. Then you move up a few grades and they add on, he wanted to preserve the union. But my question would be (totally unbiased on my part) do you feel states should be able to leave whenever they want? Do you see any cons to allowing such a thing? Thanks!

TinfoilTP

I've heard this from non-ATS discussions as well. A war that we had no business in. Oddly enough, back to Woodrow Wilson, the quote and meaning of "a world safe for democracy" seems pushy perhaps. Almost in the same light as our pumping out thousands on nuclear and thermonuclear warheads and telling everyone else "hands off please." Do you feel Kennedy had any good in his years in the WH?

babybunnies

Interesting take. It seems very contradictory...though I may be projecting on you. You say the concept of USA on the decline is false. I think that is a perfectly valid opinion especially considering some CT's have on occasion bit into the slightest idea of what they think is "evidence" and rode it despite being shown differently. However, then you confirm and accept the pain of 18 trillion in debt and rampant corruption. So may I ask what would happen to this country to make you call out that we are in decline? Thanks!

hubrisinxs

Thanks for the good, fair comment. I will likely make Truman and FDR my next (to continue my war streak). I have to agree that despite foreign affairs, we need to work on what is inside these borders first. I liken it to the whole idea of a romantic relationship. If you aren't confident, strong and independent on your own, you are likely not going to be enough for a partner. I'll also look up the Lies... book as well.

DISRAELI

Absolutely will check that out. I love you idea of viewing someone through a completely external lens. Thank you!

eisegesis

Do you feel a concept like a New Order is desperately needed or a terrible idea? Thanks!

Lazarus Short

Thanks for the extra info on the Civil War and after effects. Not sure I ever though about the transition to corporation following those deadly years. Do you also feel that further regulation through government has in effect, strengthened the 'corporation?' Thanks!

xuenchen

I thank you for the 'response' but I was hoping (as per my request) to get more than a hit and run answer. What of FDR do you think really knocked us sideways?

chaolais

Thanks! good response to think about. I have to ask, if you were to rank the post JFK presidents, who would be the best in your opinion?

HUMBLEONE

Thanks for joining. But as above, can you elaborate? Obviously you don't owe me a thing and I know I can google, but frankly I was setting this up more so to ask, why as opposed to just a simple "who" answer. Thanks!

Fromabove

see above...can you offer more? Even if it's biased, I will take it

madenusa

Awesome response! I am absolutely going to break into that era and what you posted. Thank you!

whyamihere

I am working on being honest. At first I was bothered by your response. I took a moment to sit back and get over myself and I like what you say. I suppose I could have really re-written one part to say what/when/etc was the beginning of decline. Fair point to you and thank you!

Cynic

Thank you! I need more read up on QE but I noticed here and other places outside of ATS, a common thread was that the Fed did a lot more damage then good. So is your overall sentiment that we have wants and needs as a people but have generally been tied to a log and unable to achieve?

So, roughly 1973. That's when your regular family started getting screwed, at least.

operayt

Thanks for joining! It's I think the third time this was mentioned about funding the war effort in the 1860's. I definitely noticed this has continued so I have s follow up question if I may.

1. Eisenhower was famous for talking about the horrors of the military industrial complex. Do you think that said complex existed even before Eisenhower? I ask because again (sorry I am fixated on Wilson right now) WWI created a lot of jobs and as a result of Wilson's multiple decisions, we seem to suddenly have more regulation and ability for government to control or be a large bearer of the fruits of industry. I have to wonder if it was already well in place and has gotten worse or if Eisenhower was right in saying it was coming soon

Kali74

First...hello! been a while

Second, thank you for the comments. I really like that you talked about Clinton's recovery movements being 'built on stilts.' I feel like that is a realistic view. What do you feel was the last President/Congress that wasn't in a corporate pocket? Thanks!

Aliensun

I love that you diverted. To be fair, you are right. It does not have to be political. However, I think it's a touch unfair to assume nobody knows who Dr. Spock was and I promise I didn't use all this time to look him up. His books were practically the bible on raising back then. I know he also had hard left leaning. Was there something he really stirred up in people?

Semicollegiate

Great words to ponder. I like your last thought. What do you think a potential nail in the coffin would be if we truly did fall?

WeRpeons

This is a huge part of what got me thinking about this thread...and thank you for responding!

I've always been a humanitarian at heart and will likely never betray that. (mind you I am no assuming you aren't) but I have seen a great deal of efforts we've made fall flat because of the sudden support some oppressive regime had. We offer food, money, healthcare to ailing countries and it seems like 2% of it actually gets to the pockets and stomachs of the hurt and poor. Do you feel like we should take a stance of no involvement? Decreased involvement? Or perhaps more regulated and controlled involvement? Thanks!

phew

ok...

Thanks all of you!

Having read the OP's question, when and what caused the decline of the United States of America can be traced to several things (and these are not in order):

1) Nixon. Nixon, while he was a 2 term President, did more damage to the country that the country has not yet recovered from. His actions as President, to his leaving office, cause the confidence to further erode in the Presidency of the United States.

2) McCarthy: Sen. Joseph McCarthy, caused a lot of problems in the country with his witch hunt for those he claimed were communist. Thousands of peoples lives were ruined to the point where even talking to the wrong people was enough to get those black balled and forced to spend time in jail or a loss on a level that made life hard for years. Even those who were the best and brightest were affected.

3) TV. Many years ago, if you go back and read this speech, it was stated at the very begging of the TV era, that it would be bad for the country. Edward R. Murrow, stated that TV would either be a tool to enlighten the population or dumb it down.

4) Adverts: Following the end of World War II, if you look at many of the adverts, it set up a deadly trap for the population. Gone was the lessons from before World War II, where people did for themselves, living within their means, and now it was buy on credit and you deserve this or that. It started a downward spiral that has not yet reached rock bottom.

5) Various groups, like Unions: When the Unions and other social movement groups got in bed with the politicians, they stopped worrying about the very people they were protecting and started to look to the politicians that they donate to, to get political favors and laws that they were to seek passing. Ask yourself this: Do you think that if say the Republicans did not get funding from the NRA, that those politicians would vote differently on gun laws? Most of the voting record of the politicians show more about their affiliations.

6) Politicians that really enjoy the job. At one time, getting elected to office, was considered to be bad for a person, a kind of punishment. Now they reveal in it like pigs at the trough.

7) The US foreign policy since the end of World War I. Lets just say the USA is very good at making enemies and those who we support sometimes will turn around and bite us. Take Cuba and Iran, the USA got involved, Castro was at one time seen as a hero to the American people, till he turned around and decided not to do as the current government wanted, and then he was the enemy. Iran, at one time had a democratically elected prime minister, who the USA did not like and that came back later to cause the rise of the fundamental cleric. Even Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh came to the USA and begged for assistance to have Vietnam free of France, and the USA said no, it would not back such, so he turned to the only other country who would held, and that cause the conflict that cost lives, man power and money. Even the current armed conflicts have not turned out so well.

trick question

the US is always getting better, once in a while we get some set backs but generally, things are getting better for everyone. soon everyone will get health care and our society will start fairly taxing those that exploit capitalism for their benefit. every generation has their "good ol days", its just an illusion of a world that benefits only them but not everyone.

racism is going down, civil rights are getting better, there's more education going around, and people are living longer

a reply to: KyoZero

The global warming policies could get maximally draconian, being a "good" cause and all.

Either the Fed will crash the dollar, or the Debt will get massively heavy. Something unforeseen could come from that.

Traditionally, war has been reputed to be the restorer of economies, or at least major distraction. A bigger war could lead to anything governmentally speaking.

I think mostly the die is cast. The economy will degenerate until no one has children, (poor people disappear in one generation) or everyone moves off the grid.

originally posted by: NthOther
The United States ceased being a "free" republic when Abraham Lincoln waged war on the states that no longer wanted to associate with a tyrannical federal government.

Liberty is meaningless when you don't have the option of leaving.

Finally someone gets the reasoning behind the War of Succession (no , not the Civil War. There was no such occurrence) and the beginning of the end for the US. Yes there have been events and Federal Admins (including the current one) that have seriously accelerated the decline. But that was the beginning .

Best answer and

Those that blame Obama for America's "downfall" should take a close look at the rat's nest he inherited from the previous administration. If anything, he helped prevent ensuing chaos from causing further damage early on in his presidency. That in itself does not mean he was has not made mistakes, as every administration has skeletons hanging all around the White House.

The consensus that America is failing at all is very context sensitive. How people view it depends largely on what they do for a living, their level of education and personal beliefs. There is no collective answer that will be agreeable for anyone.

In a nutshell, I would not want to live anywhere else, and can it be improved? Certainly.

a reply to: Gothmog

Finally someone gets the reasoning behind the War of Succession (no , not the Civil War.

It was a battle over heir to the throne? Interesting. Two questions:
1) Who died?
2) Who were the claimants?

a reply to: Phage

He meant secession...

still it is funny

Everyone is delusional. After Eisenhower left the Office. Truman tried to prevent war against China causing WW3.

www.youtube.com...

Everyone who votes for presidents that do war today are a bunch of idiots. We should be looking up to the Stars after Soviet Union fell.

You can blame the Bush for the big fat Middle East problem. That why ME is a fking mess. Don't interfere with foreign affairs unless you got great proof of WMD and actually have god dam proof about it shown to the population. Now we can no longer trust West media because it is full of lies.

a reply to: theMediator

I have to agree with this being Wilson's fault that this all started. I think that there were other presidents that did their part as well. But lets be honest,after 911 EVERYTHING went to hell in a hand basket. It was like disaster on meth or something. There went our rights,and almost everyone's common sense with it. "Oh I am afraid! Let the Government protect us please!" Dumb asses.

The middle east and their coveted oil fields and religion brought us down. That is humiliating but true.

When Bill Clinton uttered the immortal words, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky."
The White House became a world wide cocktail party joke, and hasn't recovered. Most of you younger members probably don't rember the hundreds of cartoons, cigar jokes and the ensuing impeachment proceedings.

The US lost a lot of credibility during the Clinton administration and I truly hope we don't have to go through another with Hillary.

1943.

That's when the other Allies convinced America that "playing dirty" for a good cause was the right thing to do. Begrudgingly at first, then with more and more acceptance until now where it is grasped with gusto.

US of A fell from It's continued special place in history during the 1960s ...

it began with the One - Two Punch.... we went from the Lower 48 States into the expansionist 50 States

then came the utter downfall event(s) ...
The Dark Time; when the cabal of Sinister Forces (non governmental persons) conducted the JFK Assassination followed by the RFK & MLK killings....
no fewer than 5 federal agencies and the puppet-masters of the Dark-Government were involved but the proof will never be received by the human collective mind....

a reply to: MOMof3

You should probably avoid generalising that to "Middle East" since it's not exactly true. It's Saudi Arabia and their Wahhabism that the US is supporting for a multitude of reasons, one of which is their oil.

The U.S. officially fell during the Civil War. Slavery was well on its way out. The fight was over the autonomous rights of the States to self govern... and that is the truth left out of the history texts.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

I understand your point. But we also have troops getting wounded or killed or in danger in a large swath every day. So, that is pretty much the ME.

a reply to: MOMof3

Actually, that specific problem comes from within. The US is ultimately responsible for why the Middle East is the way it is today.