Fine, you're arrogant because you can't stop talking about how much better you are than US citizens
.
You don't know shit about what has happened to our populace and our land. Corporations and wealthy individuals own everything.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_StatesBTW, I don't buy the whole capitalist-socialist dichotomy. Everything is shades of gray, and it is the extremes you have to watch out for.
You seem to want to restrict the term arrogance to what is probably better termed "US exceptionalism". Yes, this is a form of arrogance, but arrogance can take many forms.
i don't have much of an opinion of u.s. citizens really. but the consensus about them is well established. i also don't buy the capitalist-socialist dichotomy...
as it's commonly illustrated.
i think the perceived arrogance of people from the US is much due to US exceptionalism, yes -- i was making that point because that is what non-US folks are exposed to. but i am talking about the dictionary definition of "arrogance".
sure, there is great wealth inequality in the u.s. that doesn't mean there isn't far greater wealth inequality elsewhere, such as in South America.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Gini_Coefficient_World_CIA_Report_2009.svgit also doesn't speak to the effect of historic exploitation of the southern hemisphere by the north. over 53% of world net worth (based on PPP) is concentrated in North America and Europe, which has less then 15% of world population. when we talk about wealth inequality, surely comparing that of the u.s. with that of that of bolivia is sort of ridiculous, right? are we talking about being entitled to basic human necessities, perhaps education? or are we talking about being entitled to a basic minimum income? or big screen tvs?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealthin the u.s., when people complain about entitlements, i hear complaints about people buying big screen tvs with welfare checks. (i take that with grain of salt) surely, you don't think that these are the sort of entitlements that Brazilians seek? that they are arrogant for fighting for? especially given the nature of wealth inequality?
am i arrogant for fighting for a better education system for my children? i must feel so self-important?
it's one thing if the state does not exists. it's another thing if the state will exists for the forseeable future, and exploits, and allows exploitation. in the latter case, i think it is only reasonable for people to try to reform the state, to legally prescribe what had once been unwritten -- their ownership, their rights, their dignity. even if i do not support reformism. i still do not see this as arrogance. someone who is arrogant by definition does not see themselves as equal to others.
As I already tried to explain, we have the same master and we should work on an escape plan.
The fact is, state boundaries only exist for the general populace. Corporations are transnational. The state has become a tool for them to divide and conquer.
