What Country (Besides the One You Live In) Do You Respect the Most?

Remove all ads!

Yes, it is a contradiction that both sides draw upon that term to describe their respective utopian ideals. It depends on the application of the word "freedom." For instance, political freedom may mean something different than individual freedom. With political freedom ultimate power derives from "the People;" meaning that the "government" and the "People" are really the same thing, since the government is put in place and governs by the consent of the people. And that they have the right to change that government whenever it no longer suits them. It's pointless from this perspective to speak of the government and the people as if they are two different institutions. It's when an individual decides that he or she does not wish to be governed, or held accountable by policy under the majority of the people that it suddenly becomes "the government."

Individual freedom is freedom from the tyranny of the majority, or from the institutions put in place by the will of the people to craft policy and to govern. For instance gay people may want the same rights as everyone else, yet the majority of the people may not approve of the gay lifestyle and what it means to its institutional "values" (I won't even touch social freedom here, since it is almost a contradiction in terms).

It was the same thing with salvery: When the Declaration of Independence declared individual freedom, many of the slave holders claimed that it was still their "right" as indivdiuals to own slaves, regardless of the "all men are created equal" statement. They claimed that the "government" had no right to tell them if they should have slaves or not (notice that it was the "government" because they disagreed with the direction that the majority of Americans were beginning to move in regarding the issue of solving the political and moral problems presented by slavery).

The great argument is not over "freedom," but who decides upon which side should have the greater weight: the majority of the people or the individual. In either case, you can't please all the people all the time, but at the same time we should have a set of principles upon which we agree and have as a standard to solve the issue regarding certain rights between the majority and the individual, so that both can be protected.

 

@Shoshino: Hmm...so if I understand you correctly, because of the bombings in the UK by Muslim terrorists, it is the default position of all people there to blindly hate Muslims?? Hmm...no wonder its Australia I like!

And as for your point...no. I choose to give the Aussies the benefit of the doubt because I believe they would be responsible enough to blame the terrorists responsible for these attacks, rather than just any and all Muslims. You know, in a way, you've just shown me what I was talking about...

 

That was very eloquent Chandos.

 

@ Faraaz, don't take what Shoshino said too literally. I think it's just the nature of the human race to bracket and pigeon hole.

Like, for example, if I was once attacked by a guy hanging on a street corner somewhere and he took all my money, from that point on I'd be a bit wary of anyone I see hanging out on a street corner. He'd probably be completely innocent and not mean any harm, but I'd still be a bit dodgy.

Another (albeit poor) example would be English football fans. A few cause trouble and be arseholes, and that means that all traveling England supporters are treated with suspicion.

Humans just think that way naturally, to an extent. Some people will be wary of Muslims ever since the bombs we've had go off in our country killing innocent people simply because it was Muslims who committed the act. I'd bet the majority of Muslims are just as appalled as everyone else by terrorist attacks. But you can understand why it could make people a little bit wary.

There are loads and loads of Muslims ans Asians in Britain though and on the whole, they're treated with every respect and courtesy, and just as another member of society. There's all sorts of people of all races and creeds and all walks of life in Britain. It's quite a 'colourful' country in that sense of things. Everyone is treated the same.

Also, don't be fooled into thinking that Australia is non-racist. No country is completely clean of all racism. In cricket games alone, I've seen cases of extreme racism. I also heard cases of mosques being attacked over there after the London bombings.

 

True...but then, I'm not defending Australia to the point of saying they will be completely innocent am I? I was just extending Shoshino's statements logically to show him the weakness of his opinion...which is that the average Australian doesn't feel as though Muslims are dangerous and violent, or in any case if he does...he doesn't show it.

Look, I thought the London bombings were a terrible thing too! But then, branding an entire community to be responsible for it, when the odds are that a significant number of those killed/injured were Muslims themselves seems naive at best.

Finally, @Barmy: I don't think all of UK is like that, but then again, racism (relatively more than some other Western countries at least) is not a problem in the UK which has only risen since the London bombings, has it?

 

There's no more racism in the UK than there is in other countries, I'm sure. Any hint of racism is SERIOUSLY clamped down on in this country (to the point of political correctness gone mad).

Did you know that the Christmas speech (a tradition in the UK) on UK's Channel 4 is to be presented by a Muslim woman in a full veil (not sure what the proper name for it is... hijab? something like that? not sure) so that Asians don't feel alienated by it. A lot of people feel that Britain is losing a lot of it's national identity for the sake of making non-Brits welcome, so to call us the most racist Western country could be quite offensive.

I'd say we were quite the opposite, on the whole.

 

Thanks, DW. Good to see you back.

 

i was putting in a short post because i had to go to work, barmy said it better then me with the quantity of his writing.

a perfect example here would be a friend of mine for this well just call her 'chris'.
when chris was 12 she was hit by a car on a pedestrian crossing, he didnt stop at the red light, she spent sometime in a coma and everyone thought she was going to die, but thankfully she didnt. now, chris will not cross the road at pedestrian crossings, she doesnt trust that cars will stop for her, so she crosses in the middle or the road instead when i asked her why she feels safer doing that she said "because i know the cars wont stop for me there". because of something that has happened in the past, and the unknowing that it may happen again she wont even take the chance.
similar situation, because islams have killed people here, and they werent obvious, there is a thought in the back of the head "i wonder if he's got a bomb under his jacket". and i never said anything about blind hate.

i would like to say that i am not anti islamic, i have friends who are islamic, i just understand the way the human brain works, to quote tommy lee jones from MIB "people are dumb, stupid, panicky individuals and you know it"

 

Time to roll up my sleeves and give my

UK - I'm anglophilic. There isn't much that I could add to what's being said about UK here before.
New Zealand - First country to give voting rights to women. That alone is reason enough.
Canada - Why wouldn't you like Canada? I find it to have a lot in common with Finland. And any country that has given us something like Alanis Morrisette deserves warm feelings from me.
USA - The whole multiculturality thing. I still consider the States to be this melting pot of cultures. And the massiveness of the whole country is something that in itself makes it impossible to ever be a completely homogenic culture.
Japan - Technology, and like said, the culture there is just crazy, in a good way. I also have a huge respect for their traditions and how they manage to assimilate almost anything into their culture.
Sweden - The culture of open discussion. At least they have that more than we have here in Finland.

I could consider living in any of these countries and in a few other countries as well.

I respect many countries because of their traditions and history, but not necessarily the current state that they are in.

A lot of countries get my respect because in spite of their shortcomings they're still able to manage somehow, despite the political and cultural hindrances that are clearly against them. But that being said, it's not necessarily the countries, but the people who get my respect. Cuba could be considered to be one of these countries.

 

Ireland - A country that has always held its own with the mightiest empires the world has even known. On equal terms, no-one can defeat Ireland.

Bolivia and Venezuela are the 2 countries I respect most these days.

 

Poland. For all that the polish people have overcome and thier integrity.

 

I could name a few countries that have more freedom. Besides, while the US is a great place to visit, its far too restrictive and conservative for me to relocate to. My partner also feels the same and she gave up living in Pittsburgh for sunny N.Ireland.

 

Actually, having grown up in PA, I have to say that N. Ireland may be an improvement weather-wise from Pittsburgh. You see, Pittsburgh is located not far from Lake Erie (one of the Great Lakes) and because of this, virtually every front that passes over the lakes picks up precipitation and dumps it on Pittsburgh. So that means you get a lot rain, and in the winter, a whole lot of snow. My brother lived in western PA north of Pittsburgh for a few years, and he said it basically starts snowing shortly after Thanksgiving, and doesn't stop until April. In many places, you just end up driving on snow pack, because you can only pile up the snow on the sides of the roads so high.

 

Well, I really don't know if its gonna hurts other canadians, but I'll take my chance. The answer in my case would be Quebec, its my province but I consider it my country due to many attempts from the federal-government to assimilate us forcefuly to english(which they have failed since we're still speaking french even 400 years after england invaded the former new-france which we used to be) and to eradicate us completly. And I do not consider myself a french-Canadian, but a Québécois, and I'll consider myself a Québécois 'til death I say ! It seem that half the province still consider or prefer to be called themselves french-canadians though, that is mostly because a_ they're ignorant of the many historical reasons and low-hits of the rest of canada agaisnt us or b)they just want to stay colonized I guess, since they prefer to be 'canadians' rather then 'québécois' in their ego-maniac hearts.


Of the many colonized people of older generations, which is about half the province if chk the stats from the last referendum, (but again that was when liberal party of canada cheated its way with illegals votes from other provinces inviting canadians outside of Quebec, or ancient/former/exiles québécois to vote, including the thousands of illegal immigrants who received their canadian citizenship(is that a word btw?) 3 years before the normal date and of course the infamous ads-scandal which allowed 3 times the normal budget of the 'no' camp despite knowing the rules of the refenrum-law) WAY TOO MUCH PEOPLE prefer to remain canadian, especialy for rather their financial interest or their little selfish lives, again many reasons include the fact to stay here and continu to live in english, because its the most spoken language on earth as they claim. Whats even worse, waves and waves of immigrants keep coming here, year after year and they refuse to integrate themselves and to learn french of course, which is slowly but most likely causing its death. In 20 or so years, I predict that Québec will as red as the other provinces, heck its started since the last referendum.

Is there still hope for Québec's independance and/or Sovereingty as the most 'soft' separatist like to call it? I doubt it, but who knows maybe ? if the current PQ chief resign, André Boisclair(which will most likely be the case at the next provincai election) and is replaced by a far more competent leader(Gilles Duceppe or Pauline Marois comes to my mind), we may still have hopes, otherwise I really doubt it.

Yes, yes I'm a very hardcore separatist, and some of you(especialy people from Ontario it seem's ) might even call me a 'redneck' but i don't care, thats how I am, and thats how I'll stay 'til my last days.

Vive le Québec libre comme le disait si bien Charles de Gaule en 1967 lors de sa venu à Montréal.

For those of you who don't understand french that meant : Long live free Quebec, like Charles De Gaule said i 1967 when he came to Montreal.

[ December 24, 2006, 15:50: Message edited by: DarthOne ]

 

wasn't charles de gaule that frenchman who spent most his time hidding in england during world war 2?

and the most spoken language woul be chinese

 

Yes thats him, I dunno why he did that though, but I suppose he had good reasons, so shouldn't judge a national hero too hard on what you heard. Most ost it are purely speculations and rumors though.
Chinese ? Hardly ! I mean perhaps in Japan or in China, but not in north-america or in Europe.

 

over 1/6 of the worlds population speeks chinese as there first language (at some parts of china its more like a second/semi first). secondly it has a lot of nabours, who deals with them in chinese. trust me on this one. english is mainly used as a trade language in europe, and of cause has its native speakers in some countries

But south America uses spanish for trading for instance and so does Russia/asia a lot.

 

Mandarin is the 3rd most spoken language in Ireland.

 

Over 1/6 of the world's population uses Chinese as its written language. There are hundreds of dialects in China, and while they all use the same written language, the spoken language is extremely different. It's not like dialects in most countries where it's the same basic language with a different intonation (like the New England dialect or the Southern drawls in the U.S). In China, most of the dialects are so different that people who speak two different dialects cannot understand each other (although they could communicate in writing).

Moreover, it was never stated that English was the most spoken first language - just that it was the most spoken. English is by far the most common second language spoken. Add this with the great many native English speakers (U.S., most of Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand, and a good chunk of Ireland), and I can easily see that English is the most spoken langauge in the world.

 

no over 1000 million has mandarin listed as first language, thats twice as many as english.

http://www.krysstal.com/spoken.html
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0775272.html

as for second langauge, its clearly a battle between english and spanish (russia learns spanish and i asumme the porteguise parts of south america does too). And as far as i know, spanish is still the trade language in large parts of asia.

in europe you will be surprised about how few actually speak english.