>I do not think that international relations are on the minds of too many US
>voters. The truth is, the majority of the US public does not really give a
>shit - they view foreigners as amusing curiosities - some of them more
>amusing than others, but in general something that is somewhere "out there"
>but does not really relate to the US. In short, it is not Amerika ueber
>alles, the US versus the rest of the world, but simply America the
>beautiful, whereas others do not really enter that equation, either as
>friends or as foes. My experience in this country is that very few people
>actually show hostility toward foreigners (although that may vary
>regionally, e.g. there is a lot of resentment against Hispanics in CA), and
>in fact most of them are actually friendly in the "amusing curiosity" kind
>of way.
That is probably true, but it doesn't conflict with what I suggested. Which was that Americans don't need to care about what the world thinks. According to you, they don't care. The citizens of other nations do have to care.
>The fact that trolls like Bush are virtually guaranteed to win elections in
>this country has less to do with the perceived position of the US in the
>world or even perceived economic interests of the voters, but with the
>cultural stereotypes of "red bloodedness" and superman machismo. Arrogant
>macho assholes are virtually guaranteed to gain popularity, whether they are
>local high school football players, college fraternity boys, Donald Trump,
>the "governantor" of California, or the president of the United States.
And of course Americans can afford to elect their leaders on the basis of popularity. If I'm correct, that the electors in other western democracies are aware of the fact that there are dangers in electing loose cannons, simply because it makes them feel good to vote for a certain type of politician, then you can see that the outcome might be different. So they vote according to their perception of what qualities are needed in a leader. Even if the same type of person might be appealing to the electors of other nations.
>That is to say, people voted for Bush
>because he appeared like a Superman who punishes bad characters, not because
>they held resentment toward the rest of the world.
As I say, actual resentment of the rest of the world is not essential, merely disregard for the rest of the world. What I'm trying to explain is *why* Americans might disregard the opinions of the rest of the world and the explanation is obvious.
In other words, Americans aren't any more stupid or macho than anyone else. Simply corrupted by their own military and economic power. I can imagine that Australians might act the same, if they perceived their country had the power to do anything it liked. In fact I'm sure of it, Australians don't take account of the feelings of small weak nations, or even those too far away to pose any real threat.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas