English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

10 answers

It might mean that we like to polarize. We feel the need to put everyone and everything into a category of good vs bad. It creates an atmosphere where nobody will compromise.
.

2007-09-04 19:05:42 · answer #1 · answered by Kacky 7 · 3 0

Interesting question. I agree with what has been said by others, but I would add that the US has a divide and conquer mentality. If the powers that be in America can turn people against a group or another nation, it will; it is then easier to conquer that group or nation. That's what the US is all about and its history is evidence of that way of thinking. For instance, the poor are considered losers who have not achieved what is apparently so easy to achieve--this perception makes it easier to justify discrimination against those who are poor, as well as a sense of superiority among the rich. There are lots of other examples, but I'm sure you get the gist of what I'm saying. It's easy to justify hatred and discrimination when you're on the "winning" team.

2007-09-04 19:17:17 · answer #2 · answered by teeleecee 6 · 2 0

I see two answers to this question.

The US sees itself as the policeman of the world -or rather,as the Commissioner of Police of the World Police Force. Guns are lawful to use in the proper or right way by policemen (as long as the Commissioner agrees) and in any way whatsoever by the Commissioner himself, even when the rest of the corps are in disagreement. Moreover,any one outside the corps wanting a gun is prevented, forcibly if necessary,by a non-proliferation treaty drawn up by the corps themselves.
.
Reason given is that no one except those who already have guns can be trusted with them, as these are of a different mentality, and what is different is wrong. Now it may be true that weopons are dangerous in the hands of some, but it is certainly true that it is the corps themselves who have used, not only guns,but any kind of weopon - conventional, chemical and nuclear. Justification?:

Teeleecee has it. You deliberately paint some group or nation evil (for your own political reasons, of course) then it is all right to hate and destroy that group or nation. Not only all right, you actuallly succeed in making people feel they are doing something good by their doing this. Other instances besides those given are how the Red Indians, and the Germans just before the Great War, were made to look.

There is supposedly freedom of speech in the world to-day, but it was an utterance of a great truth when some one wrote: might is right.

2007-09-04 20:36:10 · answer #3 · answered by shades of Bruno 5 · 1 0

This is a liberal socialist whining about the free market economy and life in general.

America's desire to export the paradigm of rewarding success over failure, is being portrayed as the process of creating a bunch of losers (victims) by the hand of the winners (victimizers).

This phrase is part of that tragically dysfunctional Marxist mindset that holds societal wealth should be distributed based on need rather than merit.

2007-09-04 19:49:12 · answer #4 · answered by Phoenix Quill 7 · 0 1

A small amount are made winners and the rest lose out and this is called winning . if the majority win they are called losers and it is said that they can never win they cannot have a better system.reminds a person of supremecist Britain in Imperial days. any supremacist Imperialist type . In the end this seen to be false same attitude though.

2007-09-04 20:07:42 · answer #5 · answered by darren m 7 · 0 1

Well I'm Irish so I can only take an educated guess, so here goes, I'm thinking that it is associated with the fact that America as a nation tells all that they want every american can live the dream and be all that they can be, but without the people that actually never make their dreams come true make up most of the state so they are the real heros that make that country what it is!

2007-09-04 19:09:23 · answer #6 · answered by kissaled 5 · 1 1

individually, I dislike the two. Sore losers do have a reason to be upset approximately yet they are able to come returned up with 1000 motives of ways the triumphing team or participant cheated or shouldnt of gained. yet sore winners in basic terms circulate around bragging.

2016-11-14 05:45:09 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

it's based around americas capitalist ideals and america attempting to spread those ideals throughout the world

Capitalism:
An economic system in which the means of production are privately owned and controlled and which is characterized by competition and the profit motive. -

2007-09-04 19:09:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

That phrase would imply a competitive way of being rather than just being together.

2007-09-04 20:20:25 · answer #9 · answered by the Boss 7 · 0 0

Divide and Conquer.

2007-09-04 20:27:42 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers