A question to the Americans?, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times

reply posted on 3-12-2009 @ 05:07 PM by JohnPhoenix

Originally posted by AshleyD

We are undoubtedly heading towards a global system. No way to get out of it regardless of how much the people may want it.

My God, if you feel that way then you have given up already. they have beaten you! This is the very thing they want people to believe so they will go peacefully like sheep. Get mad as Hell and Fight!

reply posted on 3-12-2009 @ 05:11 PM by JohnPhoenix

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
Would you like to return to a foreign policy of Isolationism? and in todays globalised world, how would it be possible?

Not total isolationism. That is not possible. But we can and we must limit our involvement in international and global affairs to protect this countries national sovereignty. To do no less well, that's UnAmerican.

reply posted on 3-12-2009 @ 05:11 PM by 2000 Yards

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
Would you like to return to a foreign policy of Isolationism?

Not strict isolationism, because that would be impossible. But we certainly would like to not have to play World Police. It's too expensive, even for us!

No, what would possibly work better is if there was a large administrative and regulatory agency watching over world trade, and using agreed upon military force to stop anything that might interrupt that trade or cause pain and suffering to a lot of people.

Oh, wait. That's the New World Order. So, there you go.

reply posted on 3-12-2009 @ 06:46 PM by djvexd

We can do it. And I hope we will. Our military might can be upgraded to protect the homeland INDEFINATLEY, as well as we can work on the social problems at home without having to resort to global dictatorship. WE CAN DO THIS! We fix our problems at home THEN start to help others. We are the most generous nation on earth in the way of aid. Time to bring it back home and put the house in order.

reply posted on 3-12-2009 @ 08:28 PM by Ahabstar

Easy answer first, the US could become completely isolationist if everyone in the US could accept the following:

1. Profits. Not single industry be it manufacturing, textiles, farming will be very profitable. With only a 300 million base of consumers, anything produced or grown will have limited value as we could out produce our consumption of manufactured good with in 3-6 month for the year's sales figures. It is almost a balance point, because since people will work less things will also cost less to remain price competitive. Management would not make much more than labor at that point.

2. Variety. The old joke by Henry Ford about having a car of any color choice so long as you chose black will have a whole new meaning. There would not be enough demand to have umpteen car models from multiple manufacturer. So if Ford is the go to car maker, we will mostly drive Mustangs, F-150's and either a van or SUV for a "family car" due to the size and seating capacity.

3. Innovation. Products will not see vast improvements or radical design changes year to year. Design improvements will become changes to improve efficiency of the item and balance will be struck between value to the owner and cost to the manufacturer.

4. Self-growth. The way to get ahead will be determined by your ability to work for it. With the extra free time and lowered income, people will have to invent ways to spend their time. Self-education, self-employment, community building, social gatherings, etc.

I may have to think more on these things and how life would change, but this is a good start. Not all things are bad, some good things do come out of it. Some people would not be able to live this kind of lifestyle. Of course, it would have to be planned. It would take about 10 years to make sure things were set up correctly first. And that would take levels of agreement and concessions that I am not sure could happen with egos getting the way of (what I will call) progressive regression.

[edit on 3-12-2009 by Ahabstar]

reply posted on 3-12-2009 @ 08:38 PM by redoubt

reply to post by woodwardjnr

A question to the Americans? Would you like to return to a foreign policy of Isolationism? and in todays globalised world, how would it be possible?

Well, I don't think that becoming isolationalist would be, in any sense of the word, a 'going back to' move. The US has always had trade just as all nations do. But speaking for myself, I wouldn't mind seeing some kind of effort to balance trade so that the scales weren't so tilted as to beat the middle class to death.

Total isolationism would be all but impossible anyway.

reply posted on 5-12-2009 @ 09:09 PM by orwellianunenlightenment

reply to post by AshleyD

There is a problem ashley. While I agree that the war, war, war thing is detrimental, the problem is it is ironically the life blood of our economy. This nation derives the bulk of its wealth from foreign divide and conquer tactics, along with the exporting of fiat dollars. We are allowed to give dollars for goods because we are the world police. Because we have total hegemony in terms of force on the world stage, it is natural that others would accept our dollars. Take away the control, this country is 3rd world on its own. It could only be, say, 2nd or maybe even 1st if we move to a global system. But any global system seeking total control over the people instantly collapses. The globalists have to know this, and if they don't, it doesn't matter anyway. These forces colliding and integrating from all angles are going to teach the people. It is like millenia of history occurring over a several year period. It has a way of showing the author at the center of the cycles.

Nobody in this world escapes judgment. You shoot an arrow, it rotates around the world and hits you in the back. And we cannot blame our governments, as frankly, they are a reflection of the citizenry. One only has power over another if they let them. And our capitalist system says it is good to make a slave of others through paper, to be the master. The citizens want freeDOM, the right to freely manipulate and dominate their fellow human beings, but bitch about it when the government does the same thing. There are many things we must work out, but we must honestly look in the mirror.

reply posted on 6-12-2009 @ 12:21 AM by orwellianunenlightenment

reply to post by AshleyD

I forgot, regarding the golden goose, you are absolutely right. However, I think it is self-evident that the golden goose effect only works to the extent that the whole master/slave, domination/manipulation, divide/conquer dynamic doesn't implode. People can only take so much. The Lord only gives as much as people can bear. When people perceive themselves, they either swap roles and start a revolution, or the light busts a whole in their little system. They then try to use influence and alliances to get something flourishing in the midst of the warfare. People change, and so to does the world. We are co-creators of this reality, as I am sure you know. It is probably why you post here, after all. It is why I post here as well.

We can create a world with our thoughts, beliefs, and actions that is more reflective of heaven. It is our choice. We have choice whether we want it or not. It is time we use it, as these cycles are not exactly natural, but merely a reflection of the author of drama on this world. I think this author can sort of be personified as an androgynous goat, if you catch my drift. Sort of a whore/beast hybrid. This is the religion that makes the world go round. But it spins the world faster and faster until the author is self-evident. We then reject this author who is sort of an impostor God, and we gain a renewed perspective, one in which flourishing is possible. And it will take men and women working hand -in-hand for this to occur. Emotion without logic has no form, no definition; it creates chaos. Logic without emotion runs into a wall. Combine the two in love, and it becomes obvious what we must do.

reply posted on 6-12-2009 @ 12:25 AM by NightoftheComet

No because the last time the US tried to remain isolated Hitler killed several million in Europe. Stalin murdered millions in the Soviet Union. the USA has been a stabilizing factor in the world in the last century.

reply posted on 21-12-2009 @ 05:02 AM by zenser

If "isolation," in the sense of this thread, specifically means "military non-intervention" - which I think it does as opposed to literal economic / cultural / social / military isolation - the United States has never been militarily disinterested.

The difference, though, is that whereas the U.S. - in the pre-war period - was content to assert a sphere of influence constituting one hemisphere, in the post-war period the United States is asserting a sphere of influence constituting both hemispheres, which appears to be untenable.

U.S. involvement outside the western hemisphere has never served anyone's interest, including our own. Had the U.S. not been goaded into WWI by the UK, the Allies would have been forced to negotiate on gentle terms with Germany instead of continuing with their bravado of total war, the House of Hohenzollern would have continued to rule over an economically exhausted Germany, but not one operating under the impossible circumstances of the Weimar Republic; the Hapsburg-Lorraine dynasty may well have continued to sit on the Austrian throne, even if they lost the rest of the empire, and World War II would never have happened.

The US had no more business becoming involved in WWI than it did in the Napoleonic Wars. In the latter case we were bright enough to stay out, though barely.

[edit on 21-12-2009 by zenser]

reply posted on 21-12-2009 @ 05:19 AM by badgerprints

Originally posted by doctornamtab
reply to post by badgerprints

There is a big difference between "meddling" and all out war taking place in two separate countries for very little reason. The aid America provides other countries is for America's benefit. That's why the rest of the world dislikes us. Its because we've even taken a selfish capitalistic approach to giving. If its not going to return profits to us, its not worth spending money on in the first place.

Thats why millions go hungry and why America picks and chooses which countries it "helps" ie-sending troops and building bases or bringing them into the economic fold through massive debt. These are the only two factors in American foreign policy-war and money.

Perhaps if we changed our reasons for providing foreign "aid" it might improve our standing in the world and reduce terrorism by stopping the cycle of violence instead of perpetuating it.