There are many who voice their opinion that they are tired of everyone "blaming America for the world's ills".

Yet the United States is, unquestionably, the foremost political entity in the world today, and perhaps in the whole of human history. Thus, it has tremendous influence over world affairs, arguably more than any other nation.

Thus:


• If you have tremendous influence, do you also bear tremendous responsibility?

• If fulfilling American needs (A) creates challenges around the world, and (B) hinders the resolution of pre-existing conflicts, what responsibility do Americans bear for the effects of how we exercise our influence?

These are the underlying questions that simplifications like "stop blaming America for the world's ills" appear to ignore.


• Who among us would argue that Americans bear no blame for the effects of our influence?

And, getting past that question, as not everything wrong in the human endeavor is necessarily the fault of Americans, what degree of responsibility do we actually bear?

T,
While I by no means think the US is blameless, I do think that they are getting waaaaay too much blame for everything.
People are too quick to criticize the US for our SNAFUs and very, very reluctant to give the US praise for all the good things we have done.


If you have tremendous influence, do you also bear tremendous responsibility?
That is just 'With great power comes great responsibility' said a different way.
So the answer to that would be a resounding YES.

I do not by any means think that Bush acted responsibly on a number of matters. Now the current admin has to double time to fix all this crap that he and Congress made over the past several years.

There are many who voice their opinion that they are tired of everyone "blaming America for the world's ills".

Yet the United States is, unquestionably, the foremost political entity in the world today, and perhaps in the whole of human history. Thus, it has tremendous influence over world affairs, arguably more than any other nation.

Thus:


• If you have tremendous influence, do you also bear tremendous responsibility?

• If fulfilling American needs (A) creates challenges around the world, and (B) hinders the resolution of pre-existing conflicts, what responsibility do Americans bear for the effects of how we exercise our influence?

These are the underlying questions that simplifications like "stop blaming America for the world's ills" appear to ignore.


• Who among us would argue that Americans bear no blame for the effects of our influence?

And, getting past that question, as not everything wrong in the human endeavor is necessarily the fault of Americans, what degree of responsibility do we actually bear?

The US has done good things. But whoever has the most power, also has the most power to screw it up. But the only truly good thing it's done would be the marshall plan, and even that had ulterior motives.

Today, the security situation was caused by the United States alliance with Saudi Arabia, and its previous intervention with the middle east.
Today, the Global financial crisis was triggered by the subprime mortgage, as a result of U.S. lending practices. Or as the pundits put it, "corporate greed", which was started by Reagan and deregulation.

That's the two major problems today. The continued support of Israel by Bush and the preceding presidents (possible Obama too), continues to deteriorate the security situation.

The continued presence of nukes, also contributes to that.
Perhaps you should add "most" option. I picked All, but that's because the two major problems of today originated in the U.S. Some implys a small amount.

You had nothing to do with the solomon Islands situation here, The civil war in East Timor, or the unrest in Fiji. So not all of the problems are yours to bear.

Thus:


• If you have tremendous influence, do you also bear tremendous responsibility?

Yes. In principle. But not responsibility in the self entitled sense.


[indent]• If fulfilling American needs (A) creates challenges around the world, and (B) hinders the resolution of pre-existing conflicts, what responsibility do Americans bear for the effects of how we exercise our influence?

Americans, if you mean, citizens, do not seem to be even aware that there are continents beyond America. If you mean the American government, a good dose of HONESTY is in order.



• Who among us would argue that Americans bear no blame for the effects of our influence?

There is a lot to answer for, but I seriously doubt it will ever be forthcoming.


And, getting past that question, as not everything wrong in the human endeavor is necessarily the fault of Americans, what degree of responsibility do we actually bear?

No. By far not. America has given the world much, not least technology, great art and literature.

The degree of responsibility is relative to the degree of culpability accepted. It would take a very special leader to play the honesty and humility card, and pull it off. I personally do not see that leader at present.

I voted "other" because I feel that voting "some" would be accurate but misleading. many nations bear "some" moral responsibility for the current state of the world including rarely criticized ones like Belgium.


• If you have tremendous influence, do you also bear tremendous responsibility?

While I hate to disagree with Uncle Ben and the wisdom of Spiderman, I think the answer is a qualified "no." I believe that if you have great influence and power that you bear moral responsibility for how you wield that influence and power, but I do not believe that it requires one:

(A) to use one's influence or power in matters not directly impacting one's own nation (so a non-use of one's influence is not immoral, even if its use would have been effective)

(B) to wield that power in a manner that is altruistic and not in one's own national interest or contrary to the will of one's own citizenry;

(C) be correct in every assumption made in selecting how to wield that power. (Sometimes intelligence fails, and bad things happen as a result. One is responsible only for one's intentions and the reasonably foreseeable consequences of actions selected based on information at the time a plan was implemented.)

I also think that the judges of the world need to carefully consider the harms that intervention may have prevented before judging an action. Take, as an example, the Iraq War. Undeniably controversial and in hindsight few argue that was a good idea or went well. That said, for all its horrors, it has to be acknowledged that present day Iraq has a chance at a brighter future today than it would have had if Saddam were still in charge. Similarly it has to be acknowledged that Saddam would have killed and tortured a lot of people had he been left in control, so each death, while tragic and wrong, should not be considered entirely "avoidable" had the U.S. not invaded. Invasion or no, people still would have been killed in droves.


• If fulfilling American needs (A) creates challenges around the world, and (B) hinders the resolution of pre-existing conflicts, what responsibility do Americans bear for the effects of how we exercise our influence?

There I agree. If American actions cause an effect, others in the world have the right to note that effect. The mature response from there is to discuss the issue with U.S. leadership, though, not denounce us and shout us down. They are free to do that, but they should then not be surprised when they get ignored and we reform nothing.

That said, often enough shouting down America because we "hinder resolution of conflicts" is a pretext anyway. In many cases, like in Israel and the middle east generally, America is not substantially hindering resolution so much as obstructing resolutions we think would be bad for us. Again, having power does not require that the U.S. use it altruistically to its own detriment. That America opposes a particular solution to a given problem which a given group may prefer is not always America "misusing" its power, but it is often characterized as if it were. In most international conflicts, there are opposing moral viewpoints that lead to different proposed (or preferred) resolutions, and the U.S. should not be denigrated for its preferences when they differ from one's own.


• Who among us would argue that Americans bear no blame for the effects of our influence?

Subject to the foregoing, not me.


And, getting past that question, as not everything wrong in the human endeavor is necessarily the fault of Americans, what degree of responsibility do we actually bear?

That is a moot issue. Whatever level of responsibility I believe we bear in the world, others will select a greater or lesser burden. Take the lingering effects of the slave trade as a thought experiment. The U.S. government is often thought to bear moral responsibility for the slave trade and its lingering effects. I personally agree that it does, but that it does not bear sole responsibility, or even a large part of the responsibility for it. The British and Spanish and even the Africans who operated the markets on the supply side strike me as bearing greater moral culpability that the U.S. The primary fault that can be ascribed to the U.S. government is that it did not ban the practice outright from the start. It was the States, however, that affirmatively legalized it and had mechanisms in place to operate the system, nit the federal government, and that limits the view to the American slave trade alone, which I am not sure is appropriate since moral culpability need not track legal borders.

That is one view, but I'd be stunned if people did not disagree with me and ascribe different amounts of blame to the federal government. At the level of fine detail, I'd be surprised if any two people ever agreed on exactly the same level.

Responsibility for the state of the world is a million egg omelette, and the U.S. added a few tens of thousands of eggs. There is no way to unscramble it now, and even if there were people are all too ready to overlook the most culpable of the contributors in favor of punishing the one who happens to be the most notable and yet least popular.

Yes. In principle. But not responsibility in the self entitled sense.



Americans, if you mean, citizens, do not seem to be even aware that there are continents beyond America. If you mean the American government, a good dose of HONESTY is in order.



There is a lot to answer for, but I seriously doubt it will ever be forthcoming.



No. By far not. America has given the world much, not least technology, great art and literature.

The degree of responsibility is relative to the degree of culpability accepted. It would take a very special leader to play the honesty and humility card, and pull it off. I personally do not see that leader at present.

I agree, but technology is neutral, it's how you use it that matters.