ErikViking
Gold Member
I have been reading a thread about the āPopular Voteā. At first I couldnāt understand why the candidate with most votes wouldnāt win. That was until I a saw an explanation, and it made sense. I think there are a few things in the USA that seems strange, or even stupid, at a first glance. Like the Filibuster procedure. Or some peoples obsessive worrying over legislation regarding guns.
Testing this:
USA is a vast country with a certain degree of diversity between states, culturally and economically. Americans feel that this diversity needs to be protected and everyone has agreed to do so, even if that means that one state, in the eyes of another, makes some really bad decisions. This is so important that the government is less trusted to look out for a personās wellbeing. The effect is that the president needs to be elected taking this in account. In general, the ālittle manā or a minority needs to be able to stand up against the majority, hence the Filibuster. Even the gun issue can be read in to this as it enables people to defend themselves, not only from criminals, but on a deeper level against the government. (I donāt mean that there is an urge for civil war, quite the opposite, whom ever in power would know that this power only extends so far).
Also Americans in general has a low degree of solidarity. Not as flawed character or lack of compassion, just that this ācontractā between citizens is on a more personal scale, not between the citizen and the government like: āAs I donāt trust the government to look out for my own wellbeing I donāt trust it to look out for yours either. I like to direct my money where I think it matters mostā.
I know this is a generalization, not very in-depth either. But for someone who is not a scholar and only has the interest of some sort of light understanding, is it a fair description?
Testing this:
USA is a vast country with a certain degree of diversity between states, culturally and economically. Americans feel that this diversity needs to be protected and everyone has agreed to do so, even if that means that one state, in the eyes of another, makes some really bad decisions. This is so important that the government is less trusted to look out for a personās wellbeing. The effect is that the president needs to be elected taking this in account. In general, the ālittle manā or a minority needs to be able to stand up against the majority, hence the Filibuster. Even the gun issue can be read in to this as it enables people to defend themselves, not only from criminals, but on a deeper level against the government. (I donāt mean that there is an urge for civil war, quite the opposite, whom ever in power would know that this power only extends so far).
Also Americans in general has a low degree of solidarity. Not as flawed character or lack of compassion, just that this ācontractā between citizens is on a more personal scale, not between the citizen and the government like: āAs I donāt trust the government to look out for my own wellbeing I donāt trust it to look out for yours either. I like to direct my money where I think it matters mostā.
I know this is a generalization, not very in-depth either. But for someone who is not a scholar and only has the interest of some sort of light understanding, is it a fair description?
