What America thinks of the World

The following article is pretty indicative of the thinking of average Americans:

Americans not ruffled by world’s contempt

By Jennifer Harper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The rest of the world often entertains itself being annoyed with the United States. The opinion polls often show it. 
But that's nothing like American opinion of the global village. The inevitable experts say American scorn for foreign contempt is rooted in a fierce but amenable independence and an inner mettle. 
"What we think of ourselves does not depend on the opinions of others," says Matthew Spalding, director of the B. Kenneth Simon Center for American Studies at the Heritage Foundation. "And that is what it means to be self-governing, as our founders originally intended. It gives us great confidence." 
"We don't ignore world opinion, but we don't allow it to determine our fate. At our core, we have intellectual and moral independence in the very largest sense." 
Poll numbers support that, too. 
Almost six out of 10 Americans, according to a recent ABC News poll, are not particularly concerned that the relationships with France, Germany and Russia were bruised during the war against Iraq. 
Two-thirds of Americans are happy with their country's role in the world, according to a Gallup poll, and 64 percent think that our way of life must be protected "against foreign influence," according to a Pew Research poll. 
Though there was hubbub recently over an American boycott of French products — "freedom fries" and all that — one poll offers a reality check: In a Gallup/CNN/USA Today survey of 1,001 persons in late April, 67 percent said they don't even buy French products in the first place. 
There also appears to be some irony: U.S. foreign policy, pop culture and attitude irk the world. But the world still waits at the door. 
Indeed, a Carnegie poll in November of more than 1,000 foreign-born immigrants found that 80 percent of them, given the chance to "do it again," would come to the United States; 96 percent said they were happy; and 80 percent called this nation "a unique country that stands for something special in the world." 
U.S. relations with the world are rife with complexities, though. People worldwide "actually like Americans, and they continually think of us, yet we barely recognize they exist," notes Mark Hertsgaard, author of "The Eagle's Shadow: Why America Fascinates and Infuriates the World." 
The attitude has changed a little after September 11, "but there's still a self-centeredness. We see everything through the prism of our own experience. We've been self-contained for a long time. But we're not the only country to do that. I can't think of a more self-centered nation than China." 
Mr. Hertsgaard says the "if they don't like it, they can lump it" mind-set held by so many Americans could imperil the war on terrorism, as well as the global economy and other challenges, insisting that "we can't do it alone." 
But he concedes that the U.S.-centered attitude has a positive side. It stokes the conviction that "we can change things, that we can do better, that life can be different." 
Magnified by the war on Iraq, U.S. ire with waffling allies and rogue governments was particularly sharp earlier this year, prompting the New York Times, among others, to examine the "anti-Europeanism" phenomenon in the country. 
**"The current stereotype of Europeans in easily summarized," wrote Timothy Garton Ash in February. "Europeans are wimps. They are weak, petulant, hypocritical, disunited, sometimes anti-Semitic and often anti-American appeasers ... their values and their spines have dissolved in a lukewarm bath of multilateral, transnational, secular and postmodern fudge." **

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20030620-120850-2509r.htm

Here is an interesting debate going on at BBC

What the world thinks of America

** "We don't ignore world opinion, but we don't allow it to determine our fate. At our core, we have intellectual and moral independence in the very largest sense." **

That is a very perceptive and, IMO, accurate assessment. A combination of geography, military might, and powerful economic engines gives us a much greater ability to determine our own fate than all European countries. Their strength is more and more dependent upon sacrificing nationalistic indices in favor of a borderless society. They need a single currency, a single economic union, and multilateral combinations of military forces to survive and progress into the future. Their future more resembles becoming like states in the US subservient to a larger European Union.

And, because they have to give up their own indices of nationalism and independence, they think we should to. It bugs the heck out of them that the same forces driving them toward multi-lateralism, world courts, etc. which emasculate their own sovereignity are not present with respect to us.

We are quite simply not interested in having our values and our spines dissolve into their lukewarm bath of multilateral, transnational, secular and postmodern fudge.

Re: What America thinks of the World

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Ohioguy: *
"At our core, we have intellectual and **moral independence
* in the very largest sense."
[/QUOTE]

hmmm... "moral independence".

>>We are quite simply not interested in having our values and our spines dissolve into their lukewarm bath of multilateral, transnational, secular and postmodern fudge.<<
... Simultaneously, other countries may also not be interested in having their values and spines dissolve into a satellite version of the US.

At our core, we have intellectual and moral independence in the very largest sense."

This has to be the quote of the century. Morality and United States do not go together. The whole concept is laughable.

Which is fine Nadia, but the U.S. isn't going to stand by and allow countries to be headed by those who will become future threats.

Kaleem, take some time to educate yourself on the amount of AID the U.S. tax payers give to the rest of the world and then you can lection the U.S. on morality.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
Which is fine Nadia, but the U.S. isn't going to stand by and allow countries to be headed by those who will become future threats.
[/QUOTE]

Pre-emptive action, in other words. Which is fine, but then - you guys get to determine who is and is not a "future threat". To me, the incestuous monarchical elites of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia might seem like a fair choice for "future threats". To others, President Islam Karimov of dictatorial Uzbekistan might seem like one as well. Iran doesn't (to me). Do only the ones with the greatest military might get to decide this issue?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
Do only the ones with the greatest military might get to decide this issue?
[/QUOTE]

If it is our military might that is going to be used and our soldiers who are put in harm's way, then yes we get to make our own determation. In circumstances where others agree with our positive determination, then there will be a coalition of forces doing it. In circumstances where others believe there is justification to go in and we don't, they can do their thing without us. When we think there is reason and they don't, we'll do it ourselves.

Idealism sucks when the Realists don't know reality.

The Question is not one just of what the World thinks of the US and vice versa, the question is one of right and wrong. A country which shows that it determines threats on the basis of faulty intelligence and is determined to spill blood so that some people suffer in a way worse then they did, while also possessing the capacity to destroy the World several times over is a country which is a very real danger to World peace. As Pakistan and India have shown, going to War normally does not bother the World much, but when a country which has nukes goes to war everyone notices.

Its funny how the US is always ready to lecture the world on morality and such issues, but is perfectly prepared to sell these "WMD" to these "potential threats". Funny how they only seem to "threaten" the US. Not only that but the hippocrasy of the US is what is also so annoying. Guantanomo bay.... and then they question other countries about their human rights violations.........and a death chamber without trial??
The world does not have anything against the average Brad or Todd or Mary-Lu, its the god-damned, self-appointed extremeists that are in power that have recently begun to irratate the average world citizen.

And frankly, the people of the US should try and awaken from their self-righteous slumber and wonder why the large majority of the world is now hostile and in many places "Anti-American" and proud. That, I think is what Sept, 11 was all about. A pretty big hint as far as hints go..that there is something fundamently wrong with American international relations.
The people of the US can also stop expecting the world to be eternally grateful for the help that been given. As far as my education takes me, other countries with richer culture and history have played a larger role in shaping the modern world.

And the invasion of Iraq, followed by the distribution of all major projects to large companies that are linked to the government-rather than to the Iraqi people??? Not so morally sound Mr President.