Socialist nightmare - "Thousands of suicidal children turned away by over-stretched NHS clinics"

[Ceke2002]

It's easy to read this and immediately understand why Donald Trump is so popular or why certain themes in American life are so prominent (violence, being an outsider, redemption and second chances, etc.) These themes are peculiarly American. Nobody runs on the "outsider" message abroad. Not really, at least. No ethnic minority would ever be selected as prime minister in the UK or Australia. No other country shows people being gruesomely murdered on prime-time television but throws a national fit over Janet Jackson's right nipple (except Saudi Arabia, etc.). It's not good or bad, but just the dominant American meta-narrative.

Had a read of what I could access of that paper, very interesting, I can definitely see a lot of correlations with how Australian notions of identity have often centred around the idea of the ANZAC legend and the 'Aussie Battler', and how, unfortunately, those images do sometimes get translated into areas of the subculture in a more jingoistic kind of way, like if you dare to challenge some of the myths and ideals surrounding these archetypes then, "Rah! Eff you, that's un-Australian, if you don't like it then leave". I remember having a discussion with someone at a coffee shop one time, where we were both debating and looking at the myth aspect of the so called 'ANZAC legend' (and there are mythological aspects to it, that doesn't remove all truths, or make it a bad thing, but it is still in a part a mythological construct that I think Australians nurtured, and needed, at the time and that's grown from there). Anyway, we're having a reasoned conservation, when this guy comes barreling out of nowhere and suddenly we're getting an in your face lecture on how we're disrespecting the fallen, and 'those diggers fought and died over there, how dare you challenge anything surrounding their legend' (except this is all obviously delivered with a lot more flag waving, nationalism than that). I started to politely point out that I did have relatives who had fought at Gallipoli, two of which died on the Western Front, and that in no way was the discussion he'd just barged in on meant to be disrespectful to their legacy or memory, when one of the counter staff came over and asked if everything was okay (which did thankfully have the desired effect of encouraging this guy to just get on his way). All the time though, that this dude was going off on his 'they fought and died for you' rant, I couldn't help but think, "Yeah, and I'm pretty sure none of them fought and died for the ideal of dictating what another person should think through intimidation and outrage".

I can see, or at least imagine a similar dynamic at work in America, where the US is obviously not a hive mind, and some people are going to look deeper at, and perhaps challenge these identity tropes the US has grown up with, and others in response are going to go into frothing at the mouth, uber flag waving patriotism mode. The difference of course being the population in the US is a lot larger than Australia, so the mouth foamers appear to then become the magnified majority to those of on the outside looking in.

Love the perspective from the Aussies. As an American who spent many years oversees, I see some of the same cultural traits as do you. I always find it humorous when people here say we should be more like these "enlightened" European countries. First off, they are neglecting fariy recent history of global imperialism and destruction. Second, it discounts the strengths that are inherent in our culture. Third, if we want to emulate anyone, we should pick Australia cause we have a lot more in common with them than we do with Sweden or Belgium or France.

Show me a perfect country and I'll show you a doorway to Narnia. It's one thing for one country to look at another and think, "Hmm, you know they've actually got some good ideas, maybe we should consider adopting some of them', and one country pointing fingers at another and telling them to, "be like us."

One thing I do find really curious/interesting about the US is what seems to be the mile wide difference between the attitudes and ideas of the American working class and/or lower socio economic groups including those of a lower educational background, and the attitudes and ideas of the working class populace in other countries.

Say if you compared working class attitudes etc in Australia, to working class attitudes in America (or working class attitudes in America as they're seen/portrayed by people in other countries). I'll use myself as an example, just because it's way easier, but I grew up in a working class family (both parents not highly educated by a long shot), and my Dad's paranoid bigoted and racist rantings aside, the main ideas I was exposed to growing up were worker's rights, worker's solidarity, get behind the unions because they protect the workers, champion the underdog, don't tread on the little guy, and so on, and so forth. I can remember many an election where Dad would be watching the more corporate orientated political party ads and speeches, and calling back at the TV, "Yeah, and what have you done for the workers lately, you mongrel bastards"; or his other favourite speech aimed at anyone he saw as part of the 'corporate rich', "Why don't you take a pay cut and give that money back to the workers." My Dad's overall political stance could probably be summed up by another slogan I became well familiarised with, "I stand with the man, who stands up for the workers!", and that attitude pretty much translated across to the rest of my family, and most of our friends and neighbours. In contrast when I think of the working class in America, the view I'm getting is one of way less support for ideas of worker's solidarity and worker's rights, and a higher penchant to reject ideas that may be more in line with championing the working class, and supporting those that seem to line up more with the corporate elite (as long as they're saying the right things, and giving the people the soundbytes they want to hear). Okay, that was a little harsh, but there does seem to be this, I suppose not really a division but more of an inverse between how workers in America think and respond, and how those in a country like Australia do under similar circumstances.

Now obviously I'm talking in pretty broad generalisations here, but as an American who has spent time overseas I'd be interested in hearing what some of your observations of this phenomenon (if indeed it does exist the way I'm seeing it) have been (both within the US itself and comparatively between the US and other countries).

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Had a read of what I could access of that paper, very interesting, I can definitely see a lot of correlations with how Australian notions of identity have often centred around the idea of the ANZAC legend and the 'Aussie Battler', and how, unfortunately, those images do sometimes get translated into areas of the subculture in a more jingoistic kind of way, like if you dare to challenge some of the myths and ideals surrounding these archetypes then, "Rah! Eff you, that's un-Australian, if you don't like it then leave". I remember having a discussion with someone at a coffee shop one time, where we were both debating and looking at the myth aspect of the so called 'ANZAC legend' (and there are mythological aspects to it, that doesn't remove all truths, or make it a bad thing, but it is still in a part a mythological construct that I think Australians nurtured, and needed, at the time and that's grown from there). Anyway, we're having a reasoned conservation, when this guy comes barreling out of nowhere and suddenly we're getting an in your face lecture on how we're disrespecting the fallen, and 'those diggers fought and died over there, how dare you challenge anything surrounding their legend' (except this is all obviously delivered with a lot more flag waving, nationalism than that). I started to politely point out that I did have relatives who had fought at Gallipoli, two of which died on the Western Front, and that in no way was the discussion he'd just barged in on meant to be disrespectful to their legacy or memory, when one of the counter staff came over and asked if everything was okay (which did thankfully have the desired effect of encouraging this guy to just get on his way). All the time though, that this dude was going off on his 'they fought and died for you' rant, I couldn't help but think, "Yeah, and I'm pretty sure none of them fought and died for the ideal of dictating what another person should think through intimidation and outrage".

I can see, or at least imagine a similar dynamic at work in America, where the US is obviously not a hive mind, and some people are going to look deeper at, and perhaps challenge these identity tropes the US has grown up with, and others in response are going to go into frothing at the mouth, uber flag waving patriotism mode. The difference of course being the population in the US is a lot larger than Australia, so the mouth foamers appear to then become the magnified majority to those of on the outside looking in.



Show me a perfect country and I'll show you a doorway to Narnia. It's one thing for one country to look at another and think, "Hmm, you know they've actually got some good ideas, maybe we should consider adopting some of them', and one country pointing fingers at another and telling them to, "be like us."

One thing I do find really curious/interesting about the US is what seems to be the mile wide difference between the attitudes and ideas of the American working class and/or lower socio economic groups including those of a lower educational background, and the attitudes and ideas of the working class populace in other countries.

Say if you compared working class attitudes etc in Australia, to working class attitudes in America (or working class attitudes in America as they're seen/portrayed by people in other countries). I'll use myself as an example, just because it's way easier, but I grew up in a working class family (both parents not highly educated by a long shot), and my Dad's paranoid bigoted and racist rantings aside, the main ideas I was exposed to growing up were worker's rights, worker's solidarity, get behind the unions because they protect the workers, champion the underdog, don't tread on the little guy, and so on, and so forth. I can remember many an election where Dad would be watching the more corporate orientated political party ads and speeches, and calling back at the TV, "Yeah, and what have you done for the workers lately, you mongrel bastards"; or his other favourite speech aimed at anyone he saw as part of the 'corporate rich', "Why don't you take a pay cut and give that money back to the workers." My Dad's overall political stance could probably be summed up by another slogan I became well familiarised with, "I stand with the man, who stands up for the workers!", and that attitude pretty much translated across to the rest of my family, and most of our friends and neighbours. In contrast when I think of the working class in America, the view I'm getting is one of way less support for ideas of worker's solidarity and worker's rights, and a higher penchant to reject ideas that may be more in line with championing the working class, and supporting those that seem to line up more with the corporate elite (as long as they're saying the right things, and giving the people the soundbytes they want to hear). Okay, that was a little harsh, but there does seem to be this, I suppose not really a division but more of an inverse between how workers in America think and respond, and how those in a country like Australia do under similar circumstances.

Now obviously I'm talking in pretty broad generalisations here, but as an American who has spent time overseas I'd be interested in hearing what some of your observations of this phenomenon (if indeed it does exist the way I'm seeing it) have been (both within the US itself and comparatively between the US and other countries).

Yeah the American worker's attitude probably comes from several sources. The alliance between the unions and the political left whereas many workers are more right leaning. Also, the American Dream dynamic where many see themselves as potential corporate tycoons. Another could be the demise of the big manufacturing unions due to the decrease in that industry.

 

[Ceke2002]

Yeah the American worker's attitude probably comes from several sources. The alliance between the unions and the political left whereas many workers are more right leaning. Also, the American Dream dynamic where many see themselves as potential corporate tycoons. Another could be the demise of the big manufacturing unions due to the decrease in that industry.

Yeah, the American Dream idea isn't one we really have an equivalent of here, which is obviously a pretty major difference. Being working class is almost like a badge of honour if you're Australian, like the working class here are probably less likely look at a corporate tycoon and think 'Hey, that could me one day', and way more likely to thumb their noses at those same corporate tycoons, and then proudly declare themselves to be 'working class' (good on ya, up the workers!). That attitude is gradually changing though, or at least I've noticed a water down of things since the 70s and 80s especially, but even so there's no huge surprise in Australia that our (slightly tongue in cheek) alternative national anthem is sometimes considered to be Working Class Man by Jimmy Barnes (or more seriously, Waltzing Matilda, which is actually pretty dark if you take a proper look at the lyrics).

And here we go, the Australian left wing attitude against the jingoistic ideals of the Liberal party right, perfectly summed up by a poetry reading performed by one of the members of TISM (TISM were an Australian band that always dressed in weird costumes, and wrote a lot of satirical, double edged songs that took pot shots at pop culture, and cultural ideals in general).

*Btw, John Howard is the former prime minister and leader of the Liberal National Party at the time.

 

[lymphocyte]

In the past, more than 40% would rabidly disagree. Slavery, genocide of Native Americans, Jim Crow, Mexican American war. Our country has always been diverse and part of that diversity includes the negative. Also, is Canada really that diverse and tolerant or are they just letting peaceful immigrants from other peaceful commonwealths in? And how do they really treat their indigenous peoples?

You ain't seen racism till you've seen European racism (or even Australian racism). Whole other level. They openly and unselfconsciously sold Sambo cakes at the bakery across the street from when I lived in Geneva. This was 1km from the UN! Also see any European football match ever...

 

[birchswing]

Even when I lived in Sweden in 1991, it was quite diverse. It's only become more diverse over time. I don't think the ethnicity is quite as homogenous as people imagine it to be. I'm not saying it's easy to be an immigrant in Sweden, but there are a lot of immigrants. To say that it's easier in Sweden because your neighbor looks like you doesn't ring true to me. In the US we have managed to pit white, middle-class, Christian Americans against each other into conservative vs liberal camps on wedge issues. Sweden also probably builds more consensus due to the parliamentary process where fringe beliefs that end up as wedge issues in the US get lumped into issue-based fringe parties that never gain much power.

I think the harder part in comparing Sweden to the US is the size difference. Sweden has the same population (approximately) as the state I live in. States in the US, mine in particular (Virginia), tend to be run fairly well. I'm not saying I like the policies, but the process works fairly well (except for gerrymandering, but that affects the federal government as well). There's generally more consensus than at the federal level and seems less corrupt in general (in spite of the fact that our current governor is under investigation and our last one was convicted of taking bribes—at least they're investigated; it seems at the federal level the behavior these governors are under scrutiny for are condoned). I also think it's just inherently easier to run a smaller region and be responsive and held responsible.

 

[lymphocyte]

Even when I lived in Sweden in 1991, it was quite diverse. It's only become more diverse over time. I don't think the ethnicity is quite as homogenous as people imagine it to be. I'm not saying it's easy to be an immigrant in Sweden, but there are a lot of immigrants. To say that it's easier in Sweden because your neighbor looks like you doesn't ring true to me. In the US we have managed to pit white, middle-class, Christian Americans against each other into conservative vs liberal camps on wedge issues. Sweden also probably builds more consensus due to the parliamentary process where fringe beliefs that end up as wedge issues in the US get lumped into issue-based fringe parties that never gain much power.

I think the harder part in comparing Sweden to the US is the size difference. Sweden has the same population (approximately) as the state I live in. States in the US, mine in particular (Virginia), tend to be run fairly well. I'm not saying I like the policies, but the process works fairly well (except for gerrymandering, but that affects the federal government as well). There's generally more consensus than at the federal level and seems less corrupt in general (in spite of the fact that our current governor is under investigation and our last one was convicted of taking bribes—at least they're investigated; it seems at the federal level the behavior these governors are under scrutiny for are condoned). I also think it's just inherently easier to run a smaller region and be responsive and held responsible.

I agree about the small size, but Sweden surely isn't that diverse, is it? Look at this map and the corresponding dataset. I read something similar when the Economist ran its special on "the Scandinavian Model."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-most-and-least-ethnically-diverse-countries/

"And while there are still some exceptions – Belgium has ethnic Walloons and Dutch, for example – in most of Europe, ethnicity and nationality are pretty close to the same thing."

 

[birchswing]

I agree about the small size, but Sweden surely isn't that diverse, is it? Look at this map and the corresponding dataset. I read something similar when the Economist ran its special on "the Scandinavian Model."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-most-and-least-ethnically-diverse-countries/

"And while there are still some exceptions – Belgium has ethnic Walloons and Dutch, for example – in most of Europe, ethnicity and nationality are pretty close to the same thing."

I thought I had read somewhere recently that approximately 17% of those who live in Sweden weren't born there. Not sure where I read it. Wikipedia says 19.1% were either born abroad or are first generation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Sweden#Migration
I know immigration has picked up speed quickly. They have the highest asylum intake rate in all of Europe per capita.

When I lived there, it was in a mid-sized city. The neighborhood I lived in (a poorer neighborhood) was very mixed ethnically. A lot of people from the Middle East. I'm not sure which countries, but they had darker skin. My parents were tricky and got me into a different school than the one I should have gone to (by using my aunt's residency as my address) because my mom wanted me to go to the school she had gone to when she was young (it was also a nicer school)—don't be mad at me, I was the beneficiary not the trickster. There weren't as many immigrants there as the neighborhood I lived in (or at the school I should have gone to). There was one boy from Iran and one girl from Poland in my class (and me—I was an immigrant, as well).

My experiences in the US are not so instructive in that I've lived in areas that are pretty much all white. In fact one of the towns I grew up in Virginia specifically incorporated as a city in order to avoid busing that would have brought black students into the school system. The town before that was in Oregon and was 100% white, as well. Oregon didn't even allow black people to enter the state until 1900 something. I now lived in a town that has diversity, but it's segregated so that I almost never see a black person.

I guess my experience in Sweden was more cosmopolitan than any I've had in the US. I guess for one thing it was the biggest city I've ever lived in, even though it was only 150,000. And for another we lived below our income that year because my dad took the year off to work on his dissertation and my mom only worked part-time. It was sort of a "gap" year for my parents, so we lived very frugally and in a duplex, whereas we had left a 4,000 square foot house behind in Oregon. That was the only year of my life I shared a room with my sister.

Perhaps if I lived in a bigger city in the US and/or were poorer (well I am poor, but I live with my parents), I could more accurately compare the two countries.