Should the world revolt against US for its dictatorship over the world?
History has shown again and again that every country which does not agree to be literally exploited by US are prosecuted under the lies of democracy/human rights/liberation/terrorism. Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Cuba, now China. India could probably be the next victim in 30 years. COVID just proved further how US manipulates media to direct hate towards its next victim to cover up its own f*-ups (target WHO in order to avoid its debt payment since 2017 to WHO). How could countries, especially democratic ones, not see that US is a literal dictator and the #1 threat to the world? This is especially apparent with Trump rising to power. TC: 37 lac YOE: 4
You obviously have no idea what dictatorship is
I see your point and I have similar thoughts. But agreed that someone is going to be at helm of power. USA has been able to keep its position since they haven't tried to be the bad dictators trying to exploit directly. The day the people start to see an alternative that is better then something might change. US usually controls indirectly via open markets which they haven't been able to do in China, Russia etc. The intention of communism was never bad but it did not develop liveability of its people. In India its more socialist but moving towards capitalism, but given how many people are still poor it's still going to be the socialist state for sometime.
Agreed. The entire covid situation also suggests that both democracy and communism have huge issues and it becomes harder and harder to say which one wins (as comp to before where democracy seems far better). And socialism gaining more voice than capitalism is also observed in a lot of countries
Who is “the world” and who is “the US”? Should China bomb people in Africa to beat the US at the IRL game of Risk? No. People in America should probably revolt against the US government‘s imperialist militarism and support democratic and anti-imperial movements in other countries. Doing so would A) make it harder for a competing empire or terror organization to claim killing US civilians is justified B) the money and labor required for empire and bases all over the world could be used to build more and better schools or healthcare C) when the US gets away with dehumanizing and torturing people in X country... it always comes back home and regular people in the US end up losing rights or civil liberties to a more brutal and more tactically armed US. (Patriot Act with Iraq/Afghanistan, War on Drugs and military-style police following war in Vietnam.)
Lol
I get a feeling that its harder to see this happening with so many hardcore Trump supporters.. what do you think?
What an idiotic question. Where was India when US was fighting in WW2? FOH
They were cooking for Britain in EU at that moment.
Subjugated by Britain, mad at America. K.
There is always a power hierarchy among countries in the world. There will always be a country that is the most powerful and has influence across the globe. If I had to pick the most powerful, I would pick a progressive, democratic, capitalistic, ethnically diverse country like the US anytime. Technological and scientific development in US have shaped modern society. Many of the countries that are being "exploited" by the US have benefited a great deal from that. Whether you like it or not for your own personal reasons, the United States is the best example we have of a powerful, yet not aggressive occupant country. That doesn't preclude it from criticism on specific matters, but to say this country is behaving like a dictator is utterly ridiculous. P.S.: not American here
Everything was sound until the “not aggressive occupant country”. Bruh US has been installing military in every slave country like Japan/Korea/Middle East etc and putting military /economical sanctions on every country refusing to be slaves like Iraq/Cuba/China etc. They are better than 1700s England sure but not a good example of pacifist progressive country. However I do agree I would much prefer US than NK for instance
My point was the US is not a country in pursuit of occupying territory for instance. It has military presence all over the world to establish influence, position for defense, in regions where there is tension and potential future conflict. If NK were to start a war with SK you'll sure want the US military basis there.
Yes, with their d*cks in their hands against our military and 100 million armed citizens. Good fucking luck.
The armed citizens part is of no threat because they will kill each other between race groups, mass shooting and rage kill. Have to give to you that if one country fights US its hard to win but what about a whole world vs 1?
Why would the armed citizens kill each other if we are under attack? 99.9999% of legal gun owners are generally law-abiding citizens. Typically third party enemies bring us together as a nation. Zero chance we will ever be invaded with an armed populace of 100 million.
According to OP north Korea and china are the best democracy.
Its more like according to you, who tf considers NK China democratic? Have you gone insane with wfh in place?
With 200 nations, there is bound to be some power structure or hierarchy. What's your proposed alternative? UN, where 5 oligarchs fight among themselves, and get nothing done? Every country for themselves, which resulted in numerous wars?
If I knew the perfect solution I wouldnt be a petty engineer at msft lol. One country for everyone? More even power between top 5 rather than 1 clearly crashing others? Corporate structure for nations? I only state that US has way too much power which is dangerous to every other single country