Is America any different then Saudi Arabia?

[Ted Striker]

I think he's doing some kind of student program there.

[Heresson]

Originally posted by Geronimo


What's bringing you to the ME? business or pleasure?

I'm going to learn Arabic there.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Ming
That would be their choice... And at least it would be that... a choice! We do have a choice in this country, so the comparisons are silly at best.

Yep, that's the big difference. It breaks down to three related questions:

1) Is there a prevailing orthodoxy regarding one's way of life? In the KSA, yes, absolutely; in the US, not really.

2) Is the prevailing orthodoxy enforced at the point of a gun? In the KSA, yes; in the US, no.

3) If you differ from the prevailing orthodoxy, can you escape it without hiding who you are? In the KSA, no; in the US, sure -- just move to a place (San Francisco, the Bible Belt, an ex-urb, etc) where your way is accepted.

[GePap]

Why does anyone take the question seriously?

Last time I saw a guy in a Camel, was, well, NEVER. That alone shows how different the two places are.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by GePap
Why does anyone take the question seriously?

Last time I saw a guy in a Camel, was, well, NEVER. That alone shows how different the two places are.

maybe because they are taking a different question seriously than the one you are objecting to? The OP has already been clarified to refer to differences between the ability of ordinary citizens to change what their governments do rather than the exceedingly broad and silly question that the thread title suggests.

[Odin]

The (ideal) puropse of the state is to promote stabillity and protect the powerless from the powerful.

[Dauphin]

The irony then is that the state is the most powerful.

Stability and fairness.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
The purpose of the state apparatus is to protect the interests of the ruling class. In the US it is the capitalists. In SA it is the royals (AFAIK). As a result, there are superficial differences, but fundamentally, they are the same.

Of course, the US is much more sophisticated in its approach to control and/or manipulate the masses. The US appears to be much more open and the citizens have more freedoms, because the government does not need to rely on a draconian law based on religion to effect control.

It seems though the US law has been becoming more draconian and the society becoming more religious based in the recent years.

Religiously adhearing to outdated Marxist dogma:

[Odin]

Originally posted by Dauphin
The irony then is that the state is the most powerful.

In a democracy, the citizenry IS the state.

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by Odin


In a democracy, the citizenry IS the state.

Sad thing that you won´t find a real democracy anywhere on this planet

[Odin]

Originally posted by Proteus_MST


Sad thing that you won´t find a real democracy anywhere on this planet

Well, I'm not a supporter of complete democracy, anyway, but a mix of democracy and meritocracy. Most modern "democracies" are a mixture of democracy and plutocracy. The ideal state would be a pure meritocracy, but that is unachivable because the less abled or educated would resent the highly able, educated elite.

[The Viceroy]

Actually, I think you've hit upon a interesting point Proteus, I have noticed that for some, democracy appears to mean getting your own way all the time, and that somehow when this is not acheived, democratic credentials are brought into question.

The fact is, No country that I am aware of has a system of government which entitles its people to take a vote on every policy (including going to War) .. You simply get the chance to vote on a government every so often, and you have the opportunity to take into account all the actions of that government when you make your choice at the next election.

I wonder if a government that only took decisions based on referendum would ever be truelly representative of the people ?

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by Odin


Well, I'm not a supporter of complete democracy, anyway, but a mix of democracy and meritocracy. Most modern "democracies" are a mixture of democracy and plutocracy. The ideal state would be a pure meritocracy, but that is unachivable because the less abled or educated would resent the highly able, educated elite.

Another problem in a meritocracy would probably be that you would have to pay your ministers very high wages so that it is profitable enough for those who are the best in their fields, to take over a ministry in your government (after all those who are the best often are also those who are the best paid )

But I agree in theory some form of meritocracy would probably be the best form of government for a state (it often annoys me that people who take over a ministry in germany don´t have to have any qualifications which makes them suited for the job [well, no other qualification than having influence in their party that is ])

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Az
I don't think that anyone can deny that there is a huge difference between life in the US and Saudia.

Yeah, about 15000 km

Sheesh. Some people just don't know their geography.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ming
You tell em KP... Some wish to give up and not even try... You are a classic example that people can make a difference. Some are just too lazy, and all they can do is whine like stuck pigs.

This is a simple troll... if it was a real discussion, it would have compared SA to many other countries that have similar problems... not the US. Just some more US bashing... just a troll.

The person who posted it is from the US. Maybe he's more acutely aware of the situation in the US than in the rest of the world?

Not that the basis of this thread isn't pure stupidity, but don't try to label it US bashing.

More like US-centrism...