What is your gut reaction to the statement: "Americans first?"

[ecstatic]

Does it sound hateful to you?

Or do you agree with it?

Should our government put the issues and concerns/needs of American citizens first, or is that a selfish point of view?

[Vincardog]

1. People over Corporations yes about time.

[Catch22Dem]

2. gut reaction

It's the responsibility of any nation to put the needs of its own people first. I don't think that's hateful.

[stray cat]

Bush wants to bring democracy to the world

and let those in our inner cities get poorer and destroy democracy here. There alot of people in the world who deserve to be saved but are we going to rescue them all ie everyone in Africa etc

[Minnesota Libra]

3. Americans first? That would make sense! Can't have any of that stuff nt

[babylonsister]

4. Gut? Hahahahahaha! To me, it doesn't seem Americans have

been considered first in quite awhile.

[XemaSab]

5. I'm ambivalent

I don't think we should be in the business of shoving other peoples and countries out of the way, but isn't it the JOB of the US government to look out for Americans?

The Chinese government should put China first, the Swedish government should put Sweden first, so why shouldn't the American government protect Americans, particularly American jobs that we're losing to overseas.

:shrug:

[Blaze Diem]

6. First ones to get screwed out of jobs...

..outsource the high paying jobs and then import illegals to finish them off at the bottom rung..
Ever feel "invisible"?

[ecstatic]

7. I'm an "Americans first" type who has no problem helping other countries

I just believe there are certain things that Americans should have access to, first. I was just curious to see if other Democrats found this view to be selfish.

[brokensymmetry]

8. Sounds like a good idea.

Maybe we could do things like getting people out of shacks and slums into decent housing...setting up decent, affordable health care for all...doing something about education, public transportation, the hopelessness that breeds crime...

After we take care of all that, and many other issues, maybe we'll be ready to deal with problems outside our own country. Until then, I don't think we've proven we know what we're doing.

[spindrifter]

9. Yes, it sounds hateful.

Are they talking about original inhabitants of North America? My dad was an immigrant. I was born here solely by chance. So why should I have an elevated status over another human being?

[SPKrazy]

10. Should Be US Citizens First

The the rest of the world

[nonconformist]

11. I don't think it's hateful to expect

the American government to be first and foremost concerned with the needs of American citizens. That's supposed to be their JOB.

Which they're miserably failing at, I might add.

[sandnsea]

12. shame

We already have so much. Our poor truly are well off compared to most of the world. We are wasteful, we do use too much of everything, from oil to even water. We are the primary polluters of the planet.

And we can't find our way clear to create an economy that will benefit everybody??

Shameful. I hate that attitude, just fucking hate it.

[PsN2Wind]

18. So if we don't allow citizens to be drug down to third world levels

It's "shameful".
The middle class has been fighting a losing battle for 25 years and you just want to put them out of their misery.
Importing labor has greater costs than exporting jobs. Where you for the manufacturing jobs that went to China or the IT jobs going to India?
I seem to remember the outrage here in this forum over the export of those good high-tech jobs to India. Were you here defending the right of those poor souls in India and Bangladesh to better themselves through the loss of American jobs?
How magnanimous of you to be willing to sacrifice someone else's livelihood to a person that came to this country illegally.
How low does the standard of living have to go in this country before you don't "just fucking hate it"?

[uppityperson]

22. It is shameful if we allow anyone to be used up by corporatism.

I don't care if it is a citizen of the USA, or China, or India. The problem is not "America vs the rest of the world" but corporatism. Anyone, in any country, should be able to make liveable wages. I fucking hate how low the standard of living is many places in the USA and yes, the middle class has been struggling, but against corporatism, not "americanism".

[PsN2Wind]

24. More Americanism and less corporatism

and maybe we wouldn't have had NAFTA, WTO and similar agreements thats main export has been millions of manufacturing jobs, jobs that formerly allowed people with only a willingness to work to aspire to the middle-class.
Now that those jobs have been successfully moved to China, the intent seems to be to import cheap labor to work those jobs that can't be moved.
Export jobs or import labor, no difference, our fellow citizens are going to lose. From posts here, it's obvious that many feel that's good they should have to compete with whomever will do the job for the least amount.

[sandnsea]

35. Ass backwards

No, people do not think it's good to compete with whomever will do the job for the least amount. People think you have to force corporations to pay fair wages, wherever those corporations and workers are. Because if you don't, they'll just pick up and go to another country and start the process all over again.

[Cobalt Violet]

27. We are already 34 th in life expectancy.

I guess our poor people live too long. What a shame. :sarcasm:

[sandnsea]

34. *sigh*

I do defend the rights of Indians to have jobs. I don't blame them. I have tried to get people to see it's unrestrained corporatism from the day I got to DU. Just like I tried to get people to pay attention to the garment factory collapse that trapped hundreds of workers in Bangladesh. I'd tell you the number of dead, but our news didn't find it compelling enough to ever follow up and report that number. Maybe one of the dead was a mother of 5 and made the shirt you're wearing right now, who knows. Do you care?

Where do you think the parts for that computer you're typing on came from? Or your morning coffee? Or the bananas in your muffin? Or the shoes you're wearing? I got outsourced way back in 1980 when Keds started making shoes overseas and they down-sized my job into one administrative center in Indiana. Don't need to tell me about it.

The point is, these are the games corporate play. When they closed factories in Michgan where workers were making $15 an hour and moved them to Arkansas to pay people $9 an hour, and then right on down to $4.15 an hour, minimum wage. In the 80s. They didn't just make one swift move overseas. They've been playing us against each other for 30 years and more.

We either stand up together, so we ALL have a decent standard of living and can ALL buy the products made in various countries; or we all sink together.

Frankly, I'm betting on the sinkage because "me firsters" are always ready to throw somebody else overboard, especially people of color.

[OhioBlue]

23. I understand your reaction

but I do believe that our Government is elected to manage the affairs of American's first and to look out for our best interest first - the amount of wealth and waste in our country makes it a despicable thing that situations such as what has happened to U.S. citizens after Katrina can actually happen. This isn't a third world nation that lacks the resources to lift up its own citizens. And that is the truly sad part of the situation - in the country with the greatest resources, OUR poor still live in third world conditions. No American child should go without health care, food, a good education, new shoes, etc. because we HAVE the resources. That is what makes it such a tragedy.

that being said, we could also flip it to the fact that American's should be first in being responsible global citizens. We should have a leader that understands that a wasteful, consumer driven society should lead by example to reduce waste, environmental pollution and greed. We should also be first as the only global super-power at the moment to aid the countries that experience tragedy such as the Tsunami, famine, genocide, etc.

[sandnsea]

33. I agree to some extent

Except most of our poor do not live in third world conditions. Our poor do get health care, food, education, housing, power, clothes. It isn't easy, but it's not a hut in Darfur either. But we do alot for our people, comparatively. It's easy to let our consumer driven mentality distort needs from wants, and it is hard for a little kid to grow up in a world without ice cream and birthday cakes when everybody else has them and they're such a little thing to want. I get that.

But we really have got to take a step back and start acting from gratitude, because for the most part, we've "America firsted" ourselves right into being the first ones the rest of the world hates.

[NanceGreggs]

13. At first glance, gut-reaction ...

... it does hit me the wrong way. I agree with the concept that US elected leaders should be looking after their own first. But the phrase "Americans first" sounds like arrogance, and could be too easily misinterpreted as "no one is as important as we (Americans) are".

But as for the "Should our government put the issues and concerns/needs of American citizens first?" You're damned real the government should. A weakened citizenry makes for a weak country, and a weak country is of no value to our global neighbours.

[flvegan]

14. Depends who is saying it.

If it's an honorable sort, in reference to American resources, then I'd want to know what specifically Americans are coming before. Example, if it's a matter of fighting AIDS in Africa or oppression in the Sudan versus Americans getting a $250 tax rebate, then hell no, I don't agree with it.

However, if it's * or his cronies, I'd laugh in his face anyway. "Americans" don't exist to him. "Rich Americans" only exist to him.

[Balbus]

15. Tell you what isn't my gut feeling...

Olympic basketball

[Dead_Parrot]

16. It would be a good idea.

That is, after all, what governments are for. Unfortunatley, "Corporations first" seems to be the practice.

[panader0]

17. The photos from space show us clearly that we all live in one world

I am not any more special than anyone else because of where I was born. One World.

[jsamuel]

19. It is the responsibility of any government to do what is in the best

interests of it's own citizens.

Unfortunately, many people don't realize that sometimes it is in it's own citizens' interests to help other countries. But that has to be on a case to case basis. For example, outsourcing is not in the citizens' best interests, but foreign aid can be at many times.

[guinivere]

20. Initial reaction --selfish fucks.

Even though I know it isn't true.

[mattclearing]

21. Nationalism.

Americans should be the first priority of the American government, but you don't need a slogan to figure that out.

Actually going out of your way to make a point of it is just nationalistic garbage.

People in other countries are just as alive and matter just as much as we do, regardless of whether or not some people believe it.

[bunkerbuster1]

25. Gott Mit Uns! Juden Raus!

that's pretty much what I hear.

[ecstatic]

29. OK, what is your reaction to "family first?"

Meaning looking out for your own family's *needs* (not necessarily wants) first before donating to charity, etc.

[bunkerbuster1]

36. The truth? I hear "Family first" and I think "SpongeDob Prayerpants."

Sorry, but the RW has highjacked a lot of warm/fuzzy phrasing all too skillfully.

that said, yeah, of course I look after my family first.

[Cobalt Violet]

26. My gut reaction is... Finaly, maybe I will get some health care...

to take care of that pesky major illness that I have been unable to get treatment for before it kills me.


But I'm sure I'll die before that ever happens.

[ComerPerro]

28. Depends what you are talking about

And what kind of Americans.

[Ufomammut]

30. Vague question

If you're talking about the typical semi-retarded Nascar dads and soccer moms driving down the road - poorly, I might add, and usually cutting others off in a big hurry to get somewhere and fuck something up - in some fuel-chugging monstrosity, replete with some stripe of AMERICAN PRIDE sticker ...then I disagree with the sentiment as it appeals to idiots who actually fail to comprehend that the US is and has been for decades, the biggest, most threatening and dangerous empire on the planet. Yet because of the 9/11 psyop, have developed this "don't tread on me" attitude, which is a natural aspect of the "ME FIRST!" mentality. It's like an intellectually crippled, spoiled rotten, moron child who has absolutely no sense of reflection, of conscience, or is capable of critical analysis -- hence, the state of our republic.

Now, in a different world, this term could apply to a social system arranged for more equable civilization. However, keep dreaming...there'll always be those willing to do whatever to "get ahead," just as there'll always be the unwary and indifferent.

[MasonJar]

31. Why should we put Americans first when our lifestyle and our

policies are causing harm to the other citizens of the world and the creatures who share this planet? We use up 25% of the world's resources to support a life of sheer unconcern for the ones we harm here and abroad. Our global warming is going to cause more and more famine and lack of water in the nations with the least facility to take care of themselves a long time before it hits the US, which it certainly will, sooner rather than later.

[harpo]

32. sounds like a RW election slogan

[NaturalHigh]

37. I agree completely.

[ScreamingMeemie]

38. North Americans? South Americans? Perhaps Central...a mixture?

I think we need to stop being the "me" oriented society that we are. I think we need to direct our ire at those who deserve it. The Mexican family crossing the border in the dead of night aren't deserving of it. The hypocrisy that is world government does.

[Redstone]

39. Americans' first what? First date? First kiss? First marriage?

Need specific information before I can form an opinion.

Redstone

[Tom Rinaldo]

40. Human nature

To deny that people tend to initially react with loyalty to units that they identify themselves personally as being part of is foolish. Basic family, extended family, clan, community, nation, etc., that's almost programmed into our DNA. It's a matter of proper framing, going all the way back to the Golden Rule; "Do onto others as you would have others do onto you". Self interest needs to be framed as caring about others also.