!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
Anybody who thinks about that question enough always realizes they don't want that kind of power and control. Sometimes people think about it partly, get excited by the promises of power, but only misrepresented by their own misunderstandings, and mistakenly think they do.
Nobody actually does, just not everybody realizes it fully.
Because people in power only want one thing - more power. They only fear one thing - loosing power.
Every empire has those aspirations.
There are many ways to achieve it through the complex relationships between countries and societies (e.g. soft power, cultural influence, militar control, etc) but an empire willing to try it at any cost with any means will always succeed for longer as an empire...
Because it’s an empire. Everything else is clever marketing.
Pretty much when the US was the only super power to survive WWII unscathed.
Also, having developed atomic hellfire, and the will to use it (twice), kinda makes you the big kid on the playground.
This right here. The US was isolationist prior to WWII but then got attacked and drawn in to active war.
Since the mainland of US was untouched by war directly, and industry boomed post depression and during the war they came out of it better off than Europe, which had a lot of rebuilding to do.
As a result of the war and the need for defense they established bases all across the globe and for the last 80-90 years as the political system grew more corrupt the increase of American hegemony followed.
They love to take credit for WWII while completely ignoring the part Canada played
Canada’s role is adequately acknowledged, our Nederland brothers send flowers every year
The US taking credit at all in Europe is silly but they did help with the Japanese theatre
Many countries played an important role, not just Canada. And no, not all of us take credit for it.
The citizens, in general, don’t. We want to do the same thing every other country’s people want - live our lives and hopefully give our kids a good or better one.
I have no fucking clue what the government is doing to make these decisions.
I want Finland to rule the world.
I also want that, but only for the future generations to know that "we were Finnished"
After WW2 the US became addicted to being the world police and many other countries were happy to have the US cover the cost of their defense or income from hosting US bases. Selling arms is also big business and the DOD justifies it by saying that it keeps personnel and manufacturing lines for weapons running.
After world war two, Europe was busy putting itself back together. It left an opening that the US stepped into. And who wouldn't like to be the big dog in the yard.
Pretty much this. Up to that point, it was Britain and a few other European nations that were doing all the management* in various places in the world. After WWII, they realised: "You know what, we're tired and worn out and everyone wants us out anyway. We're going low energy to rebuild at home. Someone else can step in if they want."
* a.k.a. "Colonialism". Management is an odd choice of synonym I grant you, but once you've got a colony, it's in your interests to run things in good order. Until the locals rightfully kick you out, that is.
After WWII, they realised: “You know what, we’re tired and worn out and everyone wants us out anyway
This is a very naive understanding of the history of decolonisation. Decolonisation wasn't a western initiative, it was done because the colonies were literally rebelling against their European oppressors, great part of that through Soviet funding and arming.
Someone else can step in if they want.
...unless they oppose western control of the region like Patrice Lumumba, Fidel Castro or Mosaddeq.
This is also an oversimplification.
Colonies were always rebelling. The main issue that led to decolonisation was that there was no longer the resources required to maintain these big empires.
Coal was more expensive, troops were more expensive, everything now cost too much to maintain.
It's the end phase of every empire.
I'm gonna answer from the perspective of someone who believes the world is a better place when it is led by America without reverting to a thin jingoist ideology. These aren't my views, but a steel man of someone I would disagree with.
Why does America feel the need to control the world?
In the wake of the world wars, we realized that the world is best off with one power to lead the world. No powers and multiple powers will result in another world war. We were the best position to take that role after WW2 and resist the Soviet union's attempt to gaining that position.
Do what they say?
Many of these countries don't do what America says because America says it. Heck, many go against what we say. But they believe in a better world and when they remember that, they undtand that America is putting themselves in the most danger by clearing that path for the rest of the free world.
Instead of taking care of their own problems at home?
The problems we have at home are pretty limited. Most of these problems are born out of laziness. But we keep the criminals in check both at home and abroad.
When did the US become police officer of the world and enforcer?
If we didn't step up after ww2, the world would have slipped into another world war or deem communism run rampant.
I guess my question is who gave the Americans the right?
The civilized world at the end of WW2. And under our leadership, the world is safer and healthier for it.
I say this as an American. But would not the world be a better place if we just minded our own business and quit nation building and stoking non existant fires?
From communism to extreme religious views, we are the only ones who are capable and willing to step up and protect the world against that. It's a difficult and thankless job.
This is a very America centric veiw and even if it is a steel man it deserves a counterpoint.
After WWII most of the nations who were old empire builders were decimated. The general feeling was even those on the winning side didn't feel like they'd won. The rebuilding was slow and economic austerity lasted for decades.
The American prosperity of the 1950's and 60's wasn't "normal". America didn't have international competition it otherwise would have and that power gave them bargaining rights which made them both culturally dominant as they projected a sense of prosperity and politically powerful due to the resources at their disposal. Opposition to America was potentially disastrous and America threw their weight around like crazy. They expanded their military with these resources and established bases in countries too weak to oppose them.
America came out of the war with something of a Big Damn Hero complex. Communism, for all it's perceived threat was also a handy excuse to pursue expansion and in keeping American supremacy in place. Whether countries wantes to be "protected" or not really has a lot of across the board nuance. A lot of American political will was coercive and a lot of the things done in the fight for "democracy" were disproportionate and horrific.
Really a lot of the American supremacy at bottom was might makes right. With the world finally recovering economically and now able to speak as equals the US is using measures that demand a return to that economic supremacy and stranglehold. The larger sore points are growing. The world doesn't need one big power in charge. They don't need a king with a standing army. They want to make their own choices and have freedoms to not conform to whatever America wants and the attitudes Americans show to disregard that will is garnering response.
I also believed the world was a better place when the US led, but when anyone other than Trump was in power. At least with the US, we had a clear ideal of justice being normalized, and you could feel the progressive momentum with every passing year. We don't get that among the other contesting world superpowers. But I don't think the US stands for that anymore, thanks to meddling countries like Russia, but that doesn't mean I want China or, especially, Russia to succeed them. They lobotomized the US and they showed their real face in return.
The USA was securing international trade lines. After WW2, they started doing it to counter communism and build friendships. (Cannot attack your trading partners.)
This was not entirely popular with Americans, see "Team America: World Police".
Another country or coalition could step up. Just build a navy that rivals the USA one to secure shipping lanes.