Things I'm tired of

[Guest American Woman]

These are some of the things I'm tired of as an American:

1) I'm tired of Americans being thrown all in one lump as Bush supporters, war wongers, bullies, etc.

2) I'm tired of apolgizing for my government, as if it's my fault that the Bush administration is doing what it's doing.

3) I'm tired of the Bush Administration, and have been ever since Iraq.

4) I'm tired of Americans being viewed as stupid. We are no less knowledgable than any other nation.

5) I'm tired of the comparison's between Canada and the United States, as if we're in some kind of competition to prove which is better; and I'm tired of the ugliness on both sides as a result of this kind of thinking.

6) I'm tired of the U.S. being thought of as a nation of gun-toting crazies, making it unsafe to walk the streets.

7) I'm tired of the U.S. being thought of a bunch of religious fanatics.

8) I'm tired of hearing how ammoral and materialistic Americans are. I'd say Americans, as individuals, are some of the most giving people in the world.

Any comments? Any other Americans agree with me? What about the Canadians?-- What are you tired of?

[jdobbin]

These are some of the things I'm tired of as an American:

1) I'm tired of Americans being thrown all in one lump as Bush supporters, war wongers, bullies, etc.

2) I'm tired of apolgizing for my government, as if it's my fault that the Bush administration is doing what it's doing.

3) I'm tired of the Bush Administration, and have been ever since Iraq.

4) I'm tired of Americans being viewed as stupid. We are no less knowledgable than any other nation.

5) I'm tired of the comparison's between Canada and the United States, as if we're in some kind of competition to prove which is better; and I'm tired of the ugliness on both sides as a result of this kind of thinking.

6) I'm tired of the U.S. being thought of as a nation of gun-toting crazies, making it unsafe to walk the streets.

7) I'm tired of the U.S. being thought of a bunch of religious fanatics.

8) I'm tired of hearing how ammoral and materialistic Americans are. I'd say Americans, as individuals, are some of the most giving people in the world.

Any comments? Any other Americans agree with me? What about the Canadians?-- What are you tired of?

I certainly have no truck with some of the anti-American posts made in the forums. Like a lot of Canadians, I was wary of Bush at first because I thought his lack of knowledge about Canada was going to hurt us. I didn't have problems with American citizens, however, because I have always found them to be generally open, receptive and friendly whenever travelled. My business partner is an American in Los Angeles and I've done a lot of business south of the border.

There are certainly differences between Canada and the United States which we take note of more in Canada because of our exposure to all things American.

I don't think you have to apologize for your government nor have to defend yourself against people who don't know you or the average citizen in the U.S. from Adam.

In short, ignore the nasty commentary and engage those that actually want to have a discussion instead.

[Guest American Woman]

I agree with your "ignore the nasty commentary" advice. I guess there are a lot of people who actually get into the flaming, insults, etc.

As for the differences between our country: there are differences between states and provinces too, but don't think think on the whole, Americans and Canadians are very similar? I'm hard pressed to find two other neighboring countries that share as many similarities as we do.

[bush_cheney2004]

As for the differences between our country: there are differences between states and provinces too, but don't think think on the whole, Americans and Canadians are very similar? I'm hard pressed to find two other neighboring countries that share as many similarities as we do.

This is true, but it is very important for some Canadians to draw such distinctions even when none exist. America is the foil that helps define such people and their collective national identity, starting with the leader of such thinking, the late PM PET. It was all he could do without suffocating from the American influences, frantically striving to prevent an internal indentity crisis that exists to this day between Quebec and the so called "ROC" (Rest of Canada).

Canada strives to be the the UnCola in word if not in deed. Pointing these things out here at MLW earns disdain from some of the faithful, even as they are more than happy to bash America.

[jdobbin]

I agree with your "ignore the nasty commentary" advice. I guess there are a lot of people who actually get into the flaming, insults, etc.

As for the differences between our country: there are differences between states and provinces too, but don't think think on the whole, Americans and Canadians are very similar? I'm hard pressed to find two other neighboring countries that share as many similarities as we do.

There are a great deal of similarities. Still, I think you see a difference when you cross borders. Moreso, than if you cross provincial and state boundaries. Culturally, with the exception of Quebec, much of Canada shares the same language, backgrounds and religions as the U.S.

A lot of the differences can be seen in the constitutions where Canada has peace, order and good government as objectives and the U.S. has life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as theirs.

Canadians accept the role of government in their lives far more than the U.S. does. Some may say this is a bad thing but many prefer it.

An older, closer and more peaceful relationship is unlikely to be found anywhere else in the world.

[ft.niagara]

A lot of the differences can be seen in the constitutions where Canada has peace, order and good government as objectives and the U.S. has life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as theirs.

Canadians accept the role of government in their lives far more than the U.S. does. Some may say this is a bad thing but many prefer it.

An older, closer and more peaceful relationship is unlikely to be found anywhere else in the world.

This is an interesting comparison of constitutional objectives. One sounds like a liberation of the human sprit as an objective, the other sounds more legal, more formal. I am surprised that peace and good government should be an objective of a constitution, like who would expect that war making and bad government would be a stated objective.

[Guest American Woman]

I find the difference in objectives in our constitutions interesting too. I wasn't aware of the differences before, so I learned something; always nice when that happens and it's one of the things I was hoping for when I started this thread.

Now about the differences: I'd have to say I like the inclusion of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. How American of me, eh? But seriously, don't you think it would be good to include that in Canada's constitution too? And I'm curious: Does Canada's constiution elaborate on what "good government" consists of? One has to assume any government thinks it's "good," so that's why I'm wondering if "good" is defined.

[jdobbin]

I find the difference in objectives in our constitutions interesting too. I wasn't aware of the differences before, so I learned something; always nice when that happens and it's one of the things I was hoping for when I started this thread.

Now about the differences: I'd have to say I like the inclusion of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. How American of me, eh? But seriously, don't you think it would be good to include that in Canada's constitution too? And I'm curious: Does Canada's constiution elaborate on what "good government" consists of? One has to assume any government thinks it's "good," so that's why I'm wondering if "good" is defined.

There is one fine example.

In the U.S., the west was settled by basically creating a land rush where people went off to pursue their lives. Unfortunately, that led to a period of lawlessness because the government was at the back of the pack and not in front of it. Some romanticize about it in the Western but if you had to live it, it could be very unpleasant having to deal with it.

In Canada, the Northwest Mounted Police (RCMP) preceded the settlers and were in place and carrying out their duties (in equally romanticized ways). Likewise, treaties and settlements were made with natives in terms of governance and trade in Canada and avoided many of the Indian wars seen south of the border.

I think that is probably as plain an example of good government and pursuit of happiness as can be made.

Both have their merits and both have become legendary.

[ft.niagara]

There is one fine example.

In Canada, the Northwest Mounted Police (RCMP) preceded the settlers and were in place and carrying out their duties (in equally romanticized ways). Likewise, treaties and settlements were made with natives in terms of governance and trade in Canada and avoided many of the Indian wars seen south of the border.

There is another marked difference between the two examples: one followed the other by a great deal of TIME. Most likely, one went to school on the other's shortcomings and had little to do with constitutional objectives.

[jdobbin]

There is another marked difference between the two examples: one followed the other by a great deal of TIME. Most likely, one went to school on the other's shortcomings and had little to do with constitutional objectives.

The Old West of the United States is considered to be a period that ran from 1850 to 1909. The Northwest Mounted Police began in 1874 during the height of that period. However, you are correct that some of the response was to what was happening in the U.S. and how it was affecting Canada. The NWMP headed west to Fort Whoop-Up in Alberta to stop American traders from spreading the lawlessness of whiskey trading.

Edited July 29, 2007 by jdobbin

[ft.niagara]

... to stop American traders from spreading the lawlessness of whiskey trading.

And then Canada returned the favor by providing wiskey to the lawless US during prohibition.

Also, 1874-1850 is twenty four years. A college education is only four, so there was plenty of time for the Canadian model to go to school on the American.

Edited July 29, 2007 by ft.niagara

[jdobbin]

And then Canada returned the favor by providing wiskey to the lawless US during prohibition.

Also, 1874-1850 is twenty four years. A college education is only four, so there was plenty of time for the Canadian model to go to school on the American.

Yup. Whiskey is a scourge.

Certainly, the 1867 BNA Act was in response to Canada's deference to the law and observations about what was happening in the U.S.

Settlement of the west was a fluid thing. Canada and the U.S. chose two different paths and the constitutions show what those differences were.

[bush_cheney2004]

Settlement of the west was a fluid thing. Canada and the U.S. chose two different paths and the constitutions show what those differences were.

"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" pre-dates the US Constitution by many years in the Declaration of Independence, and has its basis in the liberal writings of John Locke. To say that is differs from Canada's approach is collosal understatement, having nothing to do with constitutions or settling the west, and everything to do with casting off the oppressive burden of monarchy.

Edited July 29, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[B. Max]

Does Canada's constiution elaborate on what "good government" consists of? One has to assume any government thinks it's "good," so that's why I'm wondering if "good" is defined.

The entire Canadian constitution is about giving more power to government. The good government thing, as they interpret it. Is just in case there's some power they didn't give themselves to put their boot on your neck.

[Guest American Woman]

There's definitely some "food for thought" in this thread. I'm going to have to look into some of it more. Did Canada learn from our mistakes? Was the west actually part of the U.S. when it was "lawless?" Did the First Nation People willingly agree to the treaties in Canada? Or were they more or less forced into it? Anyone have the answers to these questions?

[sharkman]

Good topic AW, I agree with many of the comments. I don't know if Canada has learned from American mistakes or not. It seems to me like a new couple wanting to avoid the mistakes of their parents in raising a family and then finding a whole set of their own mistakes to make instead. Canada, in spite of what you've heard around here, is no better than the U.S.

[FascistLibertarian]

Canada is better than the US in my view for a whole host of reasons (mostly cultural, economic, and social). If Americans want to think the USA is better than Canada so be it. There are too many Canadians who define themselves on not being American, thats kinda sad.....

[B. Max]

Did Canada learn from our mistakes?

What mistakes? I would agee there are mistakes but doubt we would agree what the mistakes are.

[bush_cheney2004]

Did Canada learn from our mistakes?

What mistakes? I would agee there are mistakes but doubt we would agree what the mistakes are.

The US made no mistakes....it made choices and had reasons in historical context....good or bad.

That's how we roll. (Forgiveness is easier to get than permission.)

[ft.niagara]

Canada is better than the US in my view for a whole host of reasons (mostly cultural, economic, and social). If Americans want to think the USA is better than Canada so be it. There are too many Canadians who define themselves on not being American, thats kinda sad.....

Yes, it is sad that so many Canadians would DEFINE themselves as NOT being something. It is kind of like the absence of an identity, or the identity is so weak no one recognizes it.

And BTW, what is a 'FascistLibertarian'? Aren't the terms contradictary. One denotes strong, and the other weak government control. It makes one wonder if you know what you are talking about.

Edited August 3, 2007 by ft.niagara

[FascistLibertarian]

who here knows what they are talking about?

I speak from personal experince (my own) only.

[ft.niagara]

who here knows what they are talking about?

I speak from personal experince (my own) only.

That leaves alot of room to wonder what kind of experiences, aka treatments you were exposed to.

[jdobbin]

There's definitely some "food for thought" in this thread. I'm going to have to look into some of it more. Did Canada learn from our mistakes? Was the west actually part of the U.S. when it was "lawless?" Did the First Nation People willingly agree to the treaties in Canada? Or were they more or less forced into it? Anyone have the answers to these questions?

California became a state in 1850. The United States laid claim to western territory but many states didn't come into existence until after the era of the Old West ended. Some writers called it a "western civil war of incorporation."

Canada entered into treaties with First Nations between 1871 and 1921 to gain title to land for settlement. It was not free from conflict and two major battles were fought over it. However, in the end, it meant that the Canadian government was on the ground in advance of most permanent settlers. The first treaty's agenda was set by the Ojibway not by Canada.

[FascistLibertarian]

I know and am friends many americans and canadians, I have travelled a lot in both countries. I have talked to my friends about their experinces there and here.

What is this, some kind of questioning to see if my point of view is valid when I saw that in my view Canada is better than America? Thats not even the point.

If you want I suppose I could go into detail about WHY Canada is better than the US. But that serves no purpose.

[sharkman]

What is this, some kind of questioning to see if my point of view is valid when I saw that in my view Canada is better than America? Thats not even the point.

You question other posters' point of view with your comment, "who here knows what they are talking about?"

Then you get in a snit when yours are questioned?