What ElQueso said is 100% accurate. I suggest you read some in-depth US history. Regarding ElQueso's statement of "an idiotic desire to try and solve all the world's problems in their own image," you can begin by reading about American president Woodrow Wilson and his Missionary Diplomacy, the basis of which very soon became, unfortunately, the US's overall foreign policy doctrine of a Protestant Christian-based moral and ethical superiority. I believe good old Wikipedia is full of this information, so start reading.
Thank you Joe, you probably put it more succinctly than I could have. In fact, I was trying to keep my previous post that Matias quoted quite short, hoping that people wouldn't roll their eyes at what would have been a wordy explanation, but then I realized that although I know how to write and explain, I tend to wordiness rather than brevity to ensure that my complete thoughts are rolled out correctly 9not that I'm always successful at that, anyway!).
But truthfully, I hadn't expected anyone, not even Matias, to think what I was saying could be taken in any other fashion than how you explained it.
Yes, I admitt it, Im an idiot. Totally 100% idiot.
So idiot, that do not understand what you say or said. Please, explain me, if you wish, with details, enlighten me, teach me, what the hell you meant by: "an idiotic desire to try to solve all the world's problems in their own image"
Matias, my first urge was to completely agree with you on your level of intelligence. In fact, had I not read the rest of the thread and seen Joe's explanation, I might have done so simply out of ire. I ain't no saint and it incenses me when someone intentionally misquotes what I've said (leaving out the most relevant part), while also misinterpreting what I've said from what
was quoted, which anyone should have been able to understand, with his or her eyes half open and a brain that wasn't so full of preconceived notions that have apparently become so calcified that you should be compared to an ossified senior who is stereotypically unable to learn anything new.
You go on and on about the greatness of Argentina (or UBA if you want to be more specific in what I'm about to say), but you are talking about its heyday at best and putting that onto today. 5 Nobel Prizes? Considering that the Nobel prize is fairly political to begin with, I don't take much stock in such things. But even if I were to give it as much due as you seem to, the last one for UBA was in 1984 (in case you are truly as mathematically-challenged as some have stated here, that's some 31 years ago). What have they done since then? In fact, one could say (using your usual type of deductive reasoning) that roughly around the time the military dictatorship was lifted, the democratic institution of the country hasn't done much here since then to advance knowledge that is rewardable (in your terms, remember, I don't think much of the Nobel prize anyway - and just so you understand directly, I'm not saying that's the cause of Argentina's failure to produce more Nobel prizes, it was a somewhat tongue-in-cheek statement). And indeed, you only have one university in this great country of 40 million or so folk that can bring in a Nobel prize?
So what if your country has brought in the most in Latin America? You keep setting the bar so low that such accomplishments that you usually point out don't really carry much weight, particularly when put into the context of time.
Not one time in my life have I ever thought "gee, Argentina is in such bad economic and social condition that I can't believe those 5 Nobel prizes and that one great university haven't been able to pull it out of the mire in which it finds itself stuck." In case you don't understand what I mean, UBA could have pulled in 100 Nobel prizes and it still wouldn't make one serious impact in my (or probably anyone else's) feelings about how great Argentina is when one looks around seriously at the state of things here and compares to how they
could be.
And the graph that everyone's giving you such a hard time about? Do you realize that the real decline (and it was a doozy that lasted at least 15 years before it edged up again slightly for a few years and began falling again)
began around 1970, according to that graph, 30 years
before whatever crap you are trying to spew happened in 2000 that somehow shows how bad is "capitalism" (I have yet to see capitalism do anything bad to the world - again, it's the people and how the tool is used, not the tool itself).
In fact, as I remember, a few months ago you were looking at a graph of Argentina's GDP over the last few decades, pointing to a similar point as the 2000 data point in the current graph in question, and saying that just because it leveled off doesn't mean it will fall, and indeed the president is saying we're doing good, so obviously it will go up from there, not down. Now, with this current graph in question above, you seem to be saying that because it didn't just go straight down the whole way since 1970, that 2000 is the year to look at because it never leveled off afterward? Talk about cherry-picking!
You come on all big and strong for Argentina and you love to take potshots at whoever you feel most strongly about being evil (and it seems your subject matter has an awful lot to do with what Cristina says, even though you claim to not be exactly a fan), yet with all the problems an honest observer sees all about oneself, you target everything except where the problems really are.
So you somehow read a simple sentence and completely fail to understand that I was saying nothing good about the US. Indeed, my assumption is that you are incapable of seeing things in any other light than your own. I was only softening things a little bit in the last half of that sentence, the part you actually quoted (and whether it's really softening things, even I'm not sure) by saying that some people in power in the US actually are doing things based on ideals (or at least using such ideals as a pretense) to export what they think is going to cure the world, that indeed there is some altruism involved (although, in my opinion very little in reality), while using horribly invasive pressure both politically and militarily (idiotic things) from the US around the world to accomplish their ends. I abhor what the US does globally. You should know that by now if you've read anything I've said in the past.
The ends do not justify the means. I'm a firm believer in that. But you, apparently, are not, as you have suggested over time that the overwhelming attempt that this government makes to dictate both economic and social dogma are means that justify some coming utopia where everyone is "equal", and therefore happy, I suppose. I don't like the government of the US, nor that of Argentina. Nor that of probably a majority of governments on this planet.
But at least I'm as honest as I can be about it, no matter which one I'm talking about. My judgements are clouded with memes I've learned since I was a baby, but I try desperately to overcome that. You should try something similar.
If you have a problem with the English language and understanding some things that may not be so obvious to a non-English speaker in the way it's written or idiom that is used, I can understand and sympathize. I often mistake some concepts within complex subjects in Spanish when I read them. I realize I need to read more Spanish - just speaking the language isn't good enough for serious understanding in such a medium.
But when it's something
I can't believe that I've read (in any language), I always go back and study it to make sure of my understanding before popping off in public and making an ass of myself. If people then think that I am innocent (actually, I think the better word might be "naive", though I don't really agree with that either of those labels applied to myself for various reasons) because they simply don't agree with me, that's OK. I'll hopefully learn something from why they think so, but even if what was said was not tangential to my understanding of the world and I feel they're wrong, at least I've tried without simply accepting what I've been taught all my life.
