Stardate 20021227.1408

(On Screen): Bill Whittle writes a long post about the question of whether the United States has somehow or other become an imperial power. In it he observes:

Much of that world is now going through a state of cognitive dissonance regarding America and her people. In some places, this split-personality disorder is so intense as to cause us real concern.

Talk to the vaunted “Arab Street” about America. Watch as their eyes glaze over with hatred and loathing and a desire to see us wiped off the face of the earth as criminals and murderers. Then something amazing happens. Time and time again, after expressing their view that there is no higher calling for their sons and daughters than to kill as many Americans as possible, watch what happens when asked if they want to visit the US.

On a table, place a $100 dollar bill, keys to a nearby Mercedes, a steak and lobster dinner and a US green card, and see which one disappears first.

These people, common people who spend their entire day sipping coffee and planning our violent demise, want nothing more than to go to Disney World (presumably they will blow themselves to pieces after they get through the lines at Pirates of the Caribbean.) They want to live in nice houses and drive nice cars, just as we do. They want to live in affluence and security – like the Americans. They want everything we have, and admit it cheerfully. And then, when they are here, they’d like to blow up, shoot, poison or infect every last one of us.

Actually, the vast majority of them don't want to kill anyone. They do want to move here, but that's because they want to live here. Even though the United States permits huge numbers of people to move here to live every year, far more want to than are permitted to, and there are people everywhere, in every nation, who apply every year, year after year, hoping to come here to stay.

There are many in the Arab world, and elsewhere, who do seem to suffer from the two minds about America that Bill discusses. There are some who do not.

Leaders around the world are not conflicted at all. The world's leaders hate and fear us. They may be clan elders who have power by descent, with or without titles. They may be "intellectuals", writers and others who are thought to be highly cultured. They may be academics. They may be political leaders. They may be religious leaders, mullahs or bishops. They have power and influence but only because others follow them and do what the leaders say. The position of leader is highly vulnerable, because a leader without followers is nothing and they see their followers being eroded away.

Leaders need followers, and throughout history they have told the common masses that it is their duty to follow, their duty to obey. Disobedience might be considered a sin, or a crime. Sometimes it was actually physically punished, even through torture and painful death. The masses were told that their lot in life was to do what they were told, and not to think for themselves.

The Humanist movement in Europe was the first mass movement to reconsider the hierarchicalization of human society, and it introduced the idea that every person should be free to make their own decisions. America was the first nation to actually base its government on that concept, and although the implementation of it was imperfect it's been improving with time.

We have leaders, but our leaders have followers only because the followers are willing. The leader is followed because he's leading in a direction that the followers want to go. And if he does not do so any longer, the followers will abandon him and find someone else, or perhaps give up on leaders altogether. It's an entirely different way of doing things; it means that leaders must at all times think of themselves as being accountable to those who follow them.

To the leaders in the traditional mold this is profoundly unsettling. It means that leaders are no longer unfettered; they must at all times take into account what their followers believe and desire. This ain't how it's supposed to be! The idea that following is voluntary and that leadership is revocable is the nightmare for leaders from the traditional mold. To them, the American system is a threat, and they have no mixed feelings about it at all. They have power (or think they should) and want to wield it with as few limitations as possible, and to hold it as long as they are able. They want to be free but the only way they can be is by convincing others to be slaves.

The leaders of the world are not confused about their feelings at all. It is the followers of the world who are suffering from internal conflict. They are the ones who seem to be of two minds. On one side they are being commanded by their leaders to hate America and hate what it stands for. On the other side, they find themselves being attracted to the very idea that they don't have to follow, don't have to obey, and can actually think for themselves and make up their own minds and live their own lives; do what they want, spend time with who they wish, and not have to account to anyone else for doing so.

Following is habitual; one gets in the habit of answering questions in certain ways (especially if you live in a place where saying the wrong thing results in harsh punishment). So ask them what they think of America and they'll echo the official line. But if they're given the opportunity to come here, many and perhap