Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'm not American, but ~1850 is quite a long way back to go to make this point (especially when the US was quite a young country at the time). And it's small if you've comparing to the atrocities of other countries being discussed here (not that that excuses it!). Do any country histories remain pure with such a long timeline?

US is one of the very few countries that has been tested in a position of power over the world — speaking post-1945— and they've largely opened world trade and allowed most countries of the world to prosper, including allowing economic competitors to overtake their own (eg, Japanese car manufacturers, among many others). They have also not shown interest in taking territory, nor doing mass extermination. There are undeniable flaws and warts in the history, but they're quite marginal when compared to any other world power we've seen.

(*beware when replying to this that many people in the US only know their own country's flaws, not the abundant flaws of other countries — the US tends to be more reflective of its own issues and that creates the perspective of it being much worse than it actually is.).



> Do any country histories remain pure with such a long timeline?

You know the old joke, "Europeans think 100 miles is a long distance; Americans think 100 years is a long time", I presume?

OK, so I'm a European, but still: 170 years is NOT, in a historical context, "a long timeline".


But it is in a political context.


The question was:

> > > Do any country histories remain pure with such a long timeline?

(Emphasis added.)

And not, you will notice, “Does any country’s politics remain pure with such a long timeline?”.

Yo


I mean, the US is supporting a genocide right now...


It's not, thanks.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: