Tancredo: Bomb Muslim Holy Sites

[Tom Odom]

Hi redbullets,



That's certainly an explanation that has been used by a lot of people in sociology, political economy and political science. Of course, most of them were Americans .

Honestly, I don't know why the difference exists, but I do know that the "standard" reasons just don't face up to the comparative case.

Marc

Hmmmm

that would be because Canadians are just jealous and semi-frozen people looking to migrate south to the Nirvana of the Paris Hilton Fan Club. That means you guys are focused on us, hey, and we are, too.

Tom

[redbullets]

Hi redbullets,



That's certainly an explanation that has been used by a lot of people in sociology, political economy and political science. Of course, most of them were Americans .

Canada shares the same geographic isolation as the US does and the same movement patterns (actually, slightly less mobile than the US), so you would expect to find the same attitudes, but you don't. Maybe Canadians are "more aware" of international events because the US is foreign but Canada doesn't hold the same dominating position in the US worldview.

Maybe it stems from the differences that came about as a result of your revolution with the US focusing inwards and on the frontier while the Canadian colonies (and later Canada) maintained strong ties with Britain. It may also have to do with historical differences as to how each of us has dealt with immigrant populations or with our differing conceptions of citizenship and identity.

Honestly, I don't know why the difference exists, but I do know that the "standard" reasons just don't face up to the comparative case.

Marc

I think Canada's past as a member of the Commonwealth, and the centuries of colonial involvement that entailed probably has some lasting impact on the internationalist views up north. We said "to hell with it" a couple of hundred years ago, and y'all chose a different, though equally workable approach. But, what do I know, I'm just a knuckledragger.

Cheers,

[Steve Blair]

I think Canada's past as a member of the Commonwealth, and the centuries of colonial involvement that entailed probably has some lasting impact on the internationalist views up north. We said "to hell with it" a couple of hundred years ago, and y'all chose a different, though equally workable approach. But, what do I know, I'm just a knuckledragger.

Cheers,

That and the existence of a stubborn foreign language minority....

I would tend to suspect that population size and space play an important role. Historically, the US has been focused internally (the frontier, the Civil War, reconstruction, civil rights, etc.) and the numbers (space and population) have allowed that focus to remain fairly fixed just because there's so much there for media outlets to focus on (and they were like that before Paris raised and lowered her head....but now we have the saturation factor). Political factors have also caused this, I think, since it's easier to get reelected by focusing on internal, local matters than it is something outside the US that you might not be able to control or influence. That same focus bleeds down into our education system.

With some extension, I also think this could explain (or help explain) some of the centric nature of cities like New York as Nat mentioned.

[SSG Rock]

Hi redbullets,



That's certainly an explanation that has been used by a lot of people in sociology, political economy and political science. Of course, most of them were Americans .

Canada shares the same geographic isolation as the US does and the same movement patterns (actually, slightly less mobile than the US), so you would expect to find the same attitudes, but you don't. Maybe Canadians are "more aware" of international events because the US is foreign but Canada doesn't hold the same dominating position in the US worldview.

Maybe it stems from the differences that came about as a result of your revolution with the US focusing inwards and on the frontier while the Canadian colonies (and later Canada) maintained strong ties with Britain. It may also have to do with historical differences as to how each of us has dealt with immigrant populations or with our differing conceptions of citizenship and identity.

Honestly, I don't know why the difference exists, but I do know that the "standard" reasons just don't face up to the comparative case.

Marc

I think this is an accurate assessment to the failure of many Americans to understand the nuances of international diplomacy. Indeed, the American culture was built upon rugged individualism. Pioneers, moving westward, hacking out a living space and making his own way. Canadians evidently don't think that way, nor do say, the Japanese, who being an island nation, densly populated seem to be more loyal to the central authority or the boss. Americans don't think that way because they didn't evolve that way. I think that putting yourself in the shoes of the other guy and seeing things from his perspective is a valuable critical thinking skill.