now why would they think that? :mosking:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaki ... 5845012315
Printable View
now why would they think that? :mosking:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaki ... 5845012315
May be because most Americans think that Russians drink alcohol more than others.
Well, isn't it? :DQuote:
Most Russians believe US is hell-bent on world domination
Over the course of the recent decades Russians have been exposed to a lot of political technology. I think that's the reason they do not believe the words, but the actions. Try and look at the actions objectively.Quote:
Only 8 per cent agreed that the US was "a defender of peace, democracy and order"
Also, the definitions of how the peace and order should look like and the notions of the virtues or the evils of democracy vary across the world. How would you translate into actions the slogan of "defending" all those? :unknown:
>Only 8 per cent agreed that the US was "a defender of peace, democracy and order"
So what is the ratio between Russians who want to move to America and Americans who want to move to Russia? Is this 8% of your population moving here?
You don't have to be Russian to believe that...
Just capable of logical reasoning... :angel:
But it looks like the quest for world domination was an expensive "hobby" for the US. Both the nation and most of the citizens are up to their ears in debt. Cannot continue as it is much longer.
(Unless the US decides that it doesn't need to pay off its foreign debts because the debtors are "un-democratic", terrorist or something like that. It would have to manufacture some conflict first. But defaulting on the payments would break the global economy which is the USAs reason for wanting to dominate the world in the first place! The only other option is to totally control some very oil rich country and get its oil at cost.)
I wonder if the US will find a way to hang on, back off graciously or go out with a bang, like some empires?
And if the US domination disappears, what country and language will replace US / English?
110% they are. Just look at this news story from today:
"CIA is manipulating public opinion in Europe about the Afghanistan war." http://www.dn.se/nyheter/varlden/cia-vi ... -1.1069019 This is on the front page of the main newspaper in Sweden.
But of course, no English language media will touch the story, apart from obscure websites like this one:
http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0326/cia...n-afghanistan/
This is based on a leaked CIA report on Wikileaks and the CIA isn't even bothering to deny it.
I don't like for European countries to be the pawns in their little chess games and I don't like being fed manufactured stories in media! Particularly not when their content is pushing an agenda that is not even remotely in my country's interest.
What do you expect them to think when the radical America hating Left-wing has control of almost all media outlets in the West and is constantly bombarding people with half truths and lies of omission?
I know sometimes these sorts of conversaions can become heated, and I don't want to go into a verbal battle with anybody, too great is my respect for you all.
But let me say this plainly and without guile.
There are maybe, possibly, 20 or 30 people in this country who actually have that goal in mind. No one else.
There are millions of Americans who are afraid, caught between a) their fresh awakening to the idea that Bush and his relations (tethers between which are often VERY well hidden - try to find the Rumsfeld-Rockefeller link - hidden, but it's there) saw to the attacking of the two buildings in New York and the innocents that Bush'n'co sacrificed to gain political control of 'hearts' and 'minds.' (Quick thought: before 9.11, had there EVER been a live plane crash filmed and published on news channels, EVER in ANYWHERE in the US? I could not find an instance - making it obvious its being displayed 'live' had something to do with its intent, imho.) and b) their freshly struck up dissent with so very many countries across the world, oh and c) their(our) just ever so recently having become broke ---- most Americans really have no clue what's going on here, even if they are of those self-encouraged elitist minds who THINK they do.
I only recently learned that the money that funded the last TWO American wars came from borrowed funds from China and Japan in the form of US Treasury Bonds. In other words, we had to borrow money to go fight that war.
I think we are mostly guilty of ACTING like a world power when we're not - akin to the guy in the bar who ACTS like he can win a fight with anyone there, and secretly hopes he never has to find out how wrong he is.
There are 20 or 30 people, those like Rockefeller Rumsfeld Cheney Shriver/Kennedy/Onasses etc., who truly do plan on world domination.
The rest of us hate those hidden faces of corruption and secret control, and we wish we could get out from under it.
But there is SO much bickering in America. It's underfoot as roaches in the sewer are.
We just finished bickering for months on whether or not we could sign the bill for healthcare that we had all been more or less asking and discussing for.... 16 years.
One side wanted it(D), one wanted to defeat it and hurt Obama in so doing(R), Obama wanted any form of it to pass for ($) reasons, and so Obama offers (R) to edit it and make it likeable - but they refuse to, thinking that they would FORCE the bill to die - and insead it passes, with no (R) influence to hedge their bets, and now (R) uses corrupt media outlets to try to hornswaggle the public into hating it, before they have a chance to know whether they really do.
And that's not even something beyond our own borders - that's within! Can you imagine how convoluted the decisions are when these many minds try to make a choice on what to do in foreign warfare? My friends, it's a wonder we can do any warfaring at all, with such chaos at the top end.
My point is, America is a group of people, not so different from any other. None of us here are carrying the intentions of world domination. Well, 20 or 30 of us do. But the other 99.99999999999999% of us merely wish we had some reliable way to receive information that was not FOX-corrupted (see "Real American Stories" hoax), money-corrupted (see Meg Whitman's attempt to buy the upcoming CA governorship with her $39b fortune), or wag-the-dog corrupted (proof that there WAS a moon landing? that there were any foreignors involved AT ALL in 9-11? That Colin Powell didn't poison Vietnamese citizen drinking water? No - the government says to 'take their word for it').
And this is why we largely support some things, and don't do any supporting of others. We don't act out of malice or elitism, not when it comes to the actual living, breathing citizenry of my country. There is corruption, sure - more corruption in US government than in a 2400bps download - but it's all at the top, at the richest, most diseased part of our populace. It is the immoral, nepotic, deceptive, separatist and religiously radical rare 'creme' of our $ociety that is responsible for these reprehensible Grim Reaper thoughts.
To the rest of us - who were not raised on cabernet sauvignon and black caviar on silver spoons, who did not get rides to school in Jaguars and private limos - when we hear the phrase "world domination," a chill runs up our spine. It sounds like something Goldfinger would have spouted at James Bond, or Moriarty at Sherlock. NONE of us want that.
What we want is to be in a kind of good place monetarily, to have a racket to run to keep us consistently functional, and protection from extremity at the bottom and at the top. This is what most people want, in most places.
What OUR government in US does, and moreso what our MEDIA does (and whether the latter is manipulation freelance or under employ of the former I don't know) is try to CONVINCE us that we don't want what we really DO want. They tell us how terrible other countries and other armies and other regimes are. They want us to either side WITH them and sign on whatever dotted line they should present us, or to side AGAINST them and be dragged out as a traitor and piled with the bodies of the sacrifical enemy. What they CANNOT STAND is people like myself, if I do not speak too boldy - people who will not be forced to care for one extreme, or the other. People who doggedly ask for peace and who never make excuses for shooting their fellow men. This is why Bush blew down the towers - to get us off the fence, onto his side or in front of his sights. It was a round-up, and nothing more.
@ Johanna, about the manipulation of EU public opinion: This sounds totally like us. We're not really soldiers at heart, not anymore, not since the sweeping sociopolitical changes that the last century brought us. Now we're mostly marketers, consulters, salesmen, tie-wearers, and what you're quoting sounds EXACTLY like a tie-wearer hired to fight a war. Instead of grabbing a gun, he grabs a pen and tries to convince the world he's won before he has. This surely doesn't surprise anybody - I contest that Americans are NOT evil and intent on world domination, but I TOTALLY contest that we ARE a group of fast-talkers, slick salesmen, and in some cases liars, and in some cases cheaters. On one level that's a source of pride for some of us, though many others will deny it emphatically. But this I know - we would much rather sell the world a snake-oil tonic than we would to take it over. I daresay Americans would PREFER to be in a war doing the P.R. for it, than to be the victors of it.
America doesn't want to eat the proverbial mouse. It wants to forever play the cat, chasing it. If the mouse died, the cat would cry. But tell that cat a dog is about to eat it, and all rationality goes out the window, and in comes the madness of fear. In other words, we will never behave in a truly bad way, until we are under the impression that we are going to be eliminated. Then, we'll fight tooth-and-nail and without rationality.
In my opinion, the wisest of Dogs is like Russia, willing to bark at the cat to keep it in line. But not so quick to chew it up.
Sorry, Johanna - what country is your country? :oops:
J> .....Particularly not when their content is pushing an agenda that is not even remotely in my country's interest.
She's from Sweden, but lives in UK now.Quote:
Originally Posted by kidkboom
Oh okay, thank you, sorry I should have known that from before anyway.. :oops:
With all due respect Johanna, we do view Europe primarily as pawns (with the exception of Russia, and maybe Germany). Poor work ethic, "multi-culturalism" that is entirely flawed, declining populations, the lack of religion as a unifying force, and the "welfare state" mentality that dominates most of Europe has led to its downfall. This will probably be the "Asian Century." Look to China, India, etc. if you want to see big things. Russia may fare okay; however, it all depends on the price of oil, which is unfortunate for Russia because this means its economy depends on other countries' demand for oil.
Yeah, I know that very well -- I have worked for American companies and heard how the talk goes... I have also watched the USA mess around with my country (Sweden) like a pathetic toy during the cold war in my childhood, during the crazy nineties and in the digital age.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marlow
I also know that, just like you say, Europe has made many serious mistakes and has plenty of issues to deal with; including as you mention, the fallout from the mass immigration. But it's my continent and I support it despite the mistakes!
And we don't need to give up just yet! The battle is not over... Personally I don't want to live in a US dominated world. The US playing far too many complicated games for my taste. I just need to look at how it treats third world countries to form an opinion. Or count the number of wars and invasions that it has started during my lifetime..
In my view, the European countries have only one option if they want to remain an area to be reckoned with; That is "continually closer integration" as Jean Monnet said and Coudenhove predicted. Plus a unified front from Brussels. It's sad that a few countries are to proud or stuck in the past to see that!
I am certainly no big fan of China (human rights, pollution) but they are playing with open cards and not hiding behind any BS talk about "democracy", "liberty" and other demagogy and propaganda, like the US does. They want one thing: Resources for their country and for their "Communist" party to remain in power. Their actions are predictable and they are neither announcing or denying what they are doing.
Modern Russia doesn't worry me at all; It wants good export conditions with Europe for its' resources, stable borders and for ethnic Russians in ex-USSR countries to be treated in an acceptable way. It is not expansionist, not aggressive and it pushes no particular ideology or agenda. The prosperity is slowly increasing which is good for nearby countries like mine. What else they do internally is not my problem although I certainly wish the best for Russia. I see no signs of manipulation towards my country (or Scandinavia), or any game playing from Russia at all.
Class comment. :mosking: Agree. The problem is; I don't want to buy your snake oil, LOL... And don't want to be force-fed it either...Quote:
Originally Posted by kidkboom
Touching and pretty well put! But again, I don't want to be the mouse in that game. I doubt you even KNOW the sort of stuff your gov't gets up to abroad, while claiming to be "the land of the free... etc.... "Quote:
Originally Posted by kidkboom
Да, китайцы без ложных разглагольствований о демократии выглядят честнее. Достаточно вспомнить, какова у Штатов была изначально озвученная причина нападения на Ирак, и как затем она поменялась. А Америка, там в очередной раз арестовали школьницу за надпись на парте. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2010/04 ... e_for.html
С другой стороны, в России сейчас опять вошла в моду американофобия, так что мнения ответивших могут быть несколько пристрастны.
Почему "опять"? Она никуда не пропадала.Quote:
Originally Posted by mishau_
...
....
Once in a while we have this topic debated on this forum. Ramil would be on your side, while I won't. If USD is a promise to pay nothing, then please elaborate what do you want to have in exchange for the USDs. Would you be OK with the golden bricks instead? Are those better? Can you eat them, build your house with them, or drive those golden bricks to work? USDs are no better and no worse than any other modern money which implies a promise you get something in return under the certain conditions. And those conditions vary hourly depending on the other complex (and sometimes unfair) promises, and so do vary the abilities to get something in exchange for that money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seraph
Having said that, I would rather prefer the 'IMF money' over the USD as a common value carrier, but that's another story.
I would agree to take shares in US oil fields, food, raw material deposits, industry, energy facilities, even manpower etc. Something that can be touched and used. I fully agree with the concept that USD = nothing. US exchanges everything I listed above for pieces of green paper. Risks are too high that one day US Treasury decides not to them back. What are the guarantees?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Yes, they ARE better than paper, everything is better than paper.Quote:
Would you be OK with the golden bricks instead? Are those better?
That's the whole problem. I don't believe in money. This is some kind of a bad joke, really. I would use Joulles (energy) as an exchange equivalent, by the way. It's perfect in the present circumstances.Quote:
Can you eat them, build your house with them, or drive those golden bricks to work? USDs are no better and no worse than any other modern money which implies a promise you get something in return under the certain conditions.
...
...
I don't believe in law either. What are you going to do? Sue the US Treasury? The problem with this system lies in the fact that it's too abstract. Any commitee that shares responsibility really can't be held responsible for anything. It is men who run the whole thing and usually these people are above the law. They're like demigods in this world. They have all governments in their grasp and nobody can do anything. Laws are for odinary people not for the ones who write them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seraph
...
...
:good:Quote:
Originally Posted by Seraph
And that is perhaps the best way to describe what the modern money is. Should the conditions change and many of the agreements become void, the money would be worthless. Like, if there's a war, the value of the numbers on a bank account would evaporate by itself rather quickly. That's because when that money was earned, it depended on the agreements at the time, and those very same agreements change or disappear in the wartime. So, as the value of the money. Under the different circumstances (like a wartime) everything changes its value: the gold, the oil, the lumber, the food, all the commodities change their value. If you have lots of gold, you might probably still not get any food in a city under siege. Also, if you happened to purchase a lot of oil, you still can't sell it to anyone as all oil would be nationalized by the government. So, you'd have to give it to the government for free or face legal prosecution. And so on. So, the modern money's value heavily depends on the certain circumstances.
I was talking about some kind of the international money. Something that would be backed up by the worlds GDP. Something which is not the local currency.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seraph
...
Have you noticed how cheap the gold has become over the last decades? (The same thing about the diamonds.) I mean, gold and diamonds used to be the best money (in terms of keeping the value) over thousand of years! Have you ever thought what had happened that it isn't anymore?Quote:
Originally Posted by Seraph
See for yourself :lol: I observe stable growth over the past decade.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/st ... tryCode=us
Another BAD thing about the USA is that it doesn't stick to it's promises, or deliberately tricks other countries. It is incredibly prone to hippocracy. Just off the top off my head, stories that I recall from recent media reports:
1) It promised Russia never to deploy weapons in the former Warsaw pact countries. A decade later it is poking in practically every one of these countries, including ex Soviet republics...! Then it accuses Russia of being too militaristic and aggressive.. Meanwhile they themselves have 200,000 troops and nuclear weapons deployed across Europe. Stones.. glasshouses....
2) 1990s: Signs an agreement with North Korea in the that it will provide oil and fuel as well as an entire electricity plant in return for North Korea dismantling its nuclear power plants. North Korea does exactly that, and follows the agreement to the letter. But hardly no oil is delivered, and certainly no electricity plant. The US did not bother to follow it's part of the agreement. North Korea realises it's been tricked and proceeds with the nuclear power plant because they have no other way to get energy. The US leashes its' full fury, seizes foreign assets and launches an embargo. With this, I am not saying I support the current regime in North Korea.
3) 1980s: Tricks Sweden into believing that the USSR was swarming its coasts with submarines, to spy.. Making everyone nervous. The purpose was to ruin the reasonably good relations between countries, and also to run "realistic" exercises against a real navy. This was no joke, it became a major diplomatic incident and there was plenty of drama on the sea. A few years ago, tests and witnesses confirmed the US was behind the incidents, not the USSR. Beggars belief to treat a peaceful European country in this way. And that's not all they did in our country.
4) Accuses countries like Russia of having no respect for human rights (I am not saying that Russia is an innocent lamb though...), but kidnaps people from other countries, detain them for almost decade without trial at Guantanamo. Regularly executes its' own citizens, incidentally the weakest poorest disadvantaged citizens whom the state has let down.
5) Touts itself as the torch bearer of freedom and democracy; yet its own democracy is VERY questionable: Florida vote count; state representation; lobbying by business in Washington and support of business to election campaigns. Has put in place and supported countless very un-democratic right-wing dictators. Actions speak louder than words.
6) Falsifies evidence to support claims of WMDs in Iraq.
7) Things that it did in the name of fighting Communism are just beyond belief. How can anyone trust a country that kills millions of civilians in countries that they've got nothing to do with.. Then refuse to admit they were wrong, or apologise. Americans ought to be shown some things I saw in Vietnam and Korea, just like the Germans are shown concentration camps. Maybe then they'd be less willing to participate in these endless wars and invasions that the US start.
8 ) "We like Saddam because he opposes Khomeini; let's give him money and weapons. But wait, now he's evil, a threat to the Europe (yeah, right) and must be destroyed" --- followed by 20 years of hardship for the people there, and millions dead during this period who would otherwise be alive today.
Disclaimer: I really like a lot of things about the USA and its' people. I like some US TV series and films. I have several American friends. I am NOT anti American per se and I certainly do not wish anything bad on the US or its people. All I am saying is that its foreign polices are terrible and I wish the US would stop its aggressive and scheming foreign policy.
Oh dear, there will be a terrible flame when Dogboy or DDT see this....
Consider what would likely happen if we weren't proactive, and turned isolationist. I would be willing to bet that..Quote:
Johanna: All I am saying is that its foreign polices are terrible and I wish the US would stop its aggressive and scheming foreign policy.
1. China would become increasingly aggressive against Taiwan, Vietnam, and India.
2. Israel in all likelihood would come under attack from either non-state actors (Hezbollah), states (Iran, Turkey, Syria, Egypt), or both would.
3. Again, like before, 2001, nobody would really care much about the Middle East and it still wouldn't be peaceful.
4. Western Europe becomes increasingly isolated.
Which country would you rather have possessing greater influence around the world? Sure, we (US) have our faults, but remember international relations pretty much is a zero-sum game; if we step down, China will step up, because if they don't, someone else necessarily must fill the void. Do you want China becoming increasingly aggressive and its influence extending across Africa, Middle East, and Europe?
You Europeans think we are terribly repressive here in the US and we are so aggressive. At least we care somewhat about our PR image, China doesn't give a shit. Look at Tibet, it's almost entirely Han Chinese at the moment. Look at all of your liberal journalists who are getting their GMAIL accounts hacked.
So consider who is going to fill the void if we stop being aggressive. Some country will do it.
Nice chart. :hlop: I actually meant over the last decades. The chart you refer to is the relative price of gold in the USDs. But the USDs have also became cheaper over time. :mosking: So, if both the gold and the USD are losing their value, they might do so in different rates, so the fluctuating ratio might still change in favour of gold. That doesn't change the big picture. :flazhok:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
What I meant by "cheap" is how much gold an average person could typically purchase using his income. Nowdays, gold is much more accessible than a hundred years ago. Meaning, the value of gold is going down comparing to the GDP. You don't need a graph to realize that. *)
Well, I don't mind China very much. And I don't think it will be that overly oppressive as USA is. Certain accents in the world politics will be shifted of course but nothing all that drastic will happen. US has not been behaving very delicately as well so the question is: who's going to bomb third world countries USA or China? Well I don't really care as long as somebody will anyway. From the Russian point of view I think it'll be easier to come to terms with China rather thatn with USA. During the past several decades US's become a sanctuary of many political enemies of Russia (including those having much influence). China's attitude towards Russia is neutral.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marlow
This place can theoretically be occupied by Russia as well :)Quote:
So consider who is going to fill the void if we stop being aggressive. Some country will do it.
I think we need to come back to the Persian Gulf War and reflect on the outcome. The allies have got tactically a very successful campaign (and an epic strategic fail), so I think since then they're trying to make that model work everywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marlow
So, here's my question: should there be a police in the neighbourhood, or we'd rather let the gangs settle things with each other? And who will guard the [s:26fk5w8c]guardians[/s:26fk5w8c] police if it becomes corrupted?
I see double standards here. If US butchers a bunch of civilians in some third-world country this is called 'collateral damage' and the US is called 'world's policeman'. But when the same thing is done by some other country you refer to them as 'gangs', 'rogue states', 'dictatorships', etc.
I would never believe in good intentions of the US. I won't believe in striving to bring justice and peace to some part of the world which is currently in turmoil. Leave these fairy tales for American children (if they are still capable of eating this bull$hit).
That's exactly what I mean. Look out at the streets. What's going on out there? If Vasek is preparing to shoot Seriy over who will control the west-side of Cherkizovskiy market we call them gangs, and if uncle Stepa is shooting both of them in order to control the WHOLE market, we call him the police. :evil:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
Do you believe in good intentions of uncle Stepa? :evil:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
Uncle Stepa is striving to bring justice and peace to Cherkizovskiy market which is currently in turmoil by CONTROLLING THE ALL OF IT. :evil:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
http://lukoshko.net/mihal/mihal13.shtml :crazy:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
So, after addressing your emotional speech, let me repeat my question: should there be a police in the neighbourhood, or we'd rather let the gangs settle things with each other? And who will guard the [s:tnd4be1u]guardians[/s:tnd4be1u] police if it becomes corrupted?
This time please answer more carefully. :friends: :beer:
Class comments by both of you as usual. I am just not as knowledgeable, or good at debating. So I'll just answer Croc's question:
I think: Let these countries mind their own business!
If they want to live fundamentalist religious societies; let them! If they want to try communism - go ahead.. If they want tribal law and a feudal society -- it's their call!
Somebody will then say: Oh but what about the women in Afghanistan...? What about the people who are sent to 'gulags' in North Korea....? And Saddam committed mass murder against the kurds... it was the Wests duty to stop him... ETC!!
Yeah - some of this is very bad, but our countries did not always have great respect for human rights.. our countries have been "dictatorships" if you look far enough back... etc!
But nobody from a foreign continent invaded our countries with superior weapons when we had all these faults! And told us that we must use their great system called "democracy", have more respect for human rights (and of course, sell our natural resources to them at a price that they think is reasonable...)
Instead we gradually evolved into slightly more fair and safe countries to live in. We did it at in our own way, on our own terms. We should allow these countries to do the same! It's evolution. They might not even WANT Western style democracy in the end -- even though their countries are prosperous. Saudi Arabia has made that choice, for example.
Then, a lot of the "policing" is really about oil!
And I don't care for the oil driven economy anyway!
I don't want wars for cheap oil!
-Yes, I realise that cheap oil is part of the foundation of my lifestyle, but I would be willing to pay more for goods, consume slightly less overall, and travel less by car and plane. Seriously.
Also, I really don't think China or Russia have any interest at all in being "world police", at least right now. Both countries have enough to worry about within their own borders.. And they are not half as self-righteous as the US...
EU is only participating because it's following in the US footsteps. It would not bother otherwise. All major European countries are done with obvious imperialism/colonialism, and with serious wars too. But unfortunately we're "in bed" with a country that's not....
Last argument is about "the great game" i.e super power domination in certain areas.
What happens if no-one polices these areas?
For Europe (mostly) and the USA (certainly), what happens in that part of the world doesn't affect us! Even if the whole area is in total chaos and everyone wants to leave, they cannot (in theory) enter Europe easily. Obviously they certainly cannot get to the USA.
The problem would remain LOCAL, and their neighbouring countries would have to step up and take some responsibility and resolve the problem!
Or, the populations could make a revolution and try to improve things themselves in that way. Either way; let them sort their own problems!
I suppose right now the problem for Russia with chaos in that area would be 1) spreading of religious fanaticism into Russia... 2) possible refugee crisis; 3)problems with smuggling and criminality spilling over into Russia....
But the area is not directly neighbouring Russia, so I am not sure how serious the problem would really be.
I would grudgingly agree with a police acting on the basis of the UN mandate after due 'paperwork' (official resolution approved by everyone). And if the peace-keeping forces were truly international (well, at least its command staff should not be subordinate to NATO HQ) I wouldn't mind very much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Since nobody really cares about human life (and I would never believe some American politician does) this would probably be the wisest course.Quote:
or we'd rather let the gangs settle things with each other?
This can only be achieved if a peace-keeping force consisted of the troops from the countries whose political interests in the region are opposite. This way they will watch each other.Quote:
And who will guard the [s:2hq43lpm]guardians[/s:2hq43lpm] police if it becomes corrupted?
I recommend everybody to watch some of the documentaries by/about Noam Chomsky (particularly) or Michael Moore (for a more populistic, entertaining version). Americans who have no illusions about their country.
Available on OneBigTorrent. Just get a few onto your hard drive and watch when you feel inspired.
For example "Manufacturing Consent" - about Chomsky and his views on media and information in democracies in general and the USA in particular.
...