what? no mention of the divine right to bear arms?
That translates into settling grievances, real or imagined, in deadly fashion.
It seems the U.S. is more dangerous to its own citizens with its twisted armed-to-the-teeth mentality as well as other cultures around the world that do not share its strange bizarre singleminded obsessions.

I think I just saved myself some much-needed brain-cells, by invoking Pericles Rule #4.

"4. Do not read past the point where the author confesses, coyly, that he has 'coined a neologism'. It will most certainly be neither illuminative, nor particularly clever"

If anyone happens to ignore this highly beneficial rule, and finds anything in the article worth discussing, please don't bother to let me know.

Good, Pericles.
I work on a more East End approach. If I start muttering obscenities then it must be bad for my heart and I stop.
As you can imagine I did not get far this time.

The right to be free means the right to do whatever you want, Until US can formulate a new constitution it is stuck with the rules.
Population armament, national guard.
Thats US structure, just don't go near it.
To be anything else other than free to buy what you want it would be communism.

This is perhaps one of the most intelligent and well thought out though complex critiques I have ever read on the USA as a country. It was perhaps too complex in what it hoped to achieve. Well written and extremely well thought out and accurate.

I'm with Pericles et al, I only got half way through the first page.

David

What pseudo-intellectual twaddle! A self-indulgent essay that copies and pastes some psychoanalytic definitions on narcissism and marries them to a superficial reading of American history and culture.

The most cursory reading of 19th C. European history will reveal that every nation there experienced some form of national 'awakening' and saw itself as, in some way, special or 'chosen'. Nationalism and religion were always fused to fuel the notion of a people's divine mission in the world. The sense of a nation with a divine mission has been nowhere more evident than in Russia - which (whether in Muscovite, Tsarist, Communist or oligarchic form) has always sought to assert itself as a world leader.

What Anderson called the 'imagined community' of the nation state is often embedded in community cults and salvation religions. In America, the numerous denominations do not function so much as community cults as they do religions of individual salvation. Individualism was so revered (above collectivism) that Jefferson and his compatriots saw fit to enshrine the notion in their Declaration of Independence. Theocracy does not apply to the US. Vaknin's notion of a 'theochlocracy' in the US is as misapplied as it is misconstrued. Current theocracies are evident only in Islamic states, the Vatican and would be applied to the Central Tibetan Administration if it were to be recognised as a nation-state.

There are too many gaping holes in Vaknin's drivel. But it all falls into line with the current wave of populist anti-Americanism that sees the US as Satan's representative state on earth. The fact that America champions democracy, free markets and increased human rights is, according to Vaknin, a symptom of their collective 'pathology' as opposed to the numerous healthy states where these ideas and practices are conspicuously absent. Of course there are problems in American liberal democracy but to inflate America's shortcomings as equivalent to the distortions and crimes of Nazi Germany is beyond ludicrous.

P.S.

Vaknin - a self-made millionaire, who exploited the free market system to great personal effect - has developed a deep commitment to the notion of the Narcissistic Personality Disorder that he himself was diagnosed with. The upshot of this is that he not only sees himself as a 'self-aware narcissist', he also believes himself to be uniquely qualified to diagnose narcissism all around him. It's pathetic - not to say, pathological - and his words are not worthy of being reprinted in this forum.

V made a good argument, not that I particularly agreed with it, right until the end. Then he reverted to type, American Type, George W Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld black or white, right or wrong pro or anti. I personally admire Americans they are a good hearted people, innovate and hard working. That doesn't mean that I have to agree with every thing they do because I don't and to be refered to as Anti-American I find deeply insulting. Learn to use your brain God gave it to you to question.

Ulis - "That doesn't mean that I have to agree with every thing they do because I don't and to be refered to as Anti-American I find deeply insulting. Learn to use your brain God gave it to you to question."

I particularly stated that the American system has problems - all human systems do. I did not call you Anti-American. I did not refer to you or direct any comments to you - so I am at a loss to understand how I could possibly have offended you. I referred to Vaknin's article as Anti-American vitriol and I stand by that. Why you should have felt the need to launch an ad hominem attack against me has me puzzled. Perhaps you merely needed to vent your spleen. If so, I hope you feel better for it. As for that last statement about learning to use my brain - perhaps you might benefit from taking a little of your own advice.

I read the entire article.

Pericles has formulated an excellent rule.

Now, I would like to formulate another.

"Beware the writer who has masses and masses of publications"

It spells sweeping prolixity, verbosity, generalisations and a wee

kernel of truth.

"I read the entire article."
-Seneca

I did not. Maybe it was just the author's style, but after a few paragraphs I could feel it going in one eye and straight out the other. But his central thesis - that America is a 'theochlocracy' - can readily be established from more interesting sources than the body of the author's essay.

"Why you should have felt the need to launch an ad hominem attack... has me puzzled. Perhaps you merely needed to vent your spleen. If so, I hope you feel better for it."
-V

"The upshot of this is that he not only sees himself as a 'self-aware narcissist', he also believes himself to be uniquely qualified to diagnose narcissism all around him. It's pathetic - not to say, pathological - and his words are not worthy of being reprinted in this forum."
-V

Sorry, what were you saying about ad hominem attacks? 'Coz from where I'm sitting, it looks an awful lot like the pot is accusing the kettle of being a very poor reflector of visible EM raditation.