Friday, November 30, 2012

The Greatest Nation on Earth?

The US is a fine place, and I feel blessed to have the chance to spend time here. But one of strangest things about the US is the frequency its people describe the place as The Greatest Country on Earth. Let’s call it the GCE




It is everywhere. Patriotism is fine. People show flags and are proud of their nation. Adverts extol the nation. You expect that sort of thing from politicians and generals. But then this GCE expression sneaks in, in the least likely places. Half way through an NFL match, the commentator is moved to describe the USA as the GCE. Actually, on one recent occasion, he said the USA was still the GCE.



Don’t you love that “still”? There is some self-doubt creeping in, some fear of being in the process of being overtaken. Were the expression GCE to be any less ridiculous, the still would be a little sad. As it is, I love it.



For how would we possibly decide the GCE?



History and legacy? Well, how about Italy, Greece, Iraq or even Kenya? Longevity as a nation? I’ve no idea who the winners of that one are (Greece again maybe?) but for sure it isn’t the USA. Natural beauty? Many contenders there. Queens and Brooklyn are not among them.



Intelligence? That would nowadays be Finland, south Korea or Hong Kong. I am not sure who wins the most Nobel prizes per capita. Human development? Well, they live the longest in Japan, infant mortality is lowest in Scandinavia I think, and the healthcare system in the US is almost an extension of a bank, hardly a role model.



Who tries to lead the world to development? The millennial goals and the best UN initiatives often stem from Scandinavia, and Britain can be relatively proud too. Climate change? Norway, and indeed almost anyone but the USA.



Culture? Judging by how much the Americans defer to British culture, on that one not even they would claim a lead. There is Hollywood I suppose. Sport? Per head Australia is a leader, Brazil has the best record in the most popular sport, and many countries score more Olympic gold medals per head than the USA. At least they are the best in US Football (and the Superbowl winners are labelled world champions without irony)!



Everywhere you look in the USA you see grinding poverty and misery. Where is poverty lowest? Norway perhaps. And happiness? Bhutan claims that one, but several South-East Asian nations seem to have faces that only smile. Studies of child well-being I always find interesting, even though they tend to cover only developed nations. In those the Netherlands and Scandinavia win, while the USA and UK rank dead last.



Then there is wealth. Total GDP in the US is highest, but what does that actually mean? GDP per person is higher in Luxembourg and other small states. And increasingly the US is mired in debt, piles and piles of it, with so sign of any reduction. Many great companies come from the US, and the economy is known as innovative, but, per head, Finland would certainly beat it.



What about politics and freedom? Probably liberty and freedom are the words the GCE advocates would back up their claims with. Well, the politics is horrible, if the recent election is anything to go by, with money controlling everything and little attempt at a debate. As for liberty, maybe US passport holders do OK, but the rest of us have to stand in line quite a lot! Religious tolerance seems pretty limited, while social tolerance appears weak. How can a state with so many signs and instructions and caveats and lawsuits claim a lead in liberty? The medical adverts here are hilarious. And the US locks up more people per head than almost any nation on earth, and kills some, including children. Liberty?



There is one definition left. Military power. On that one there is no contest. Since the Bay of pigs it hasn’t actually led to many glorious victories, but for sure the US military might leaves the rest in its wake and enables a decisive voice in many conflicts, for good or ill.



So, when the commentator says GCE, he should really talk about the biggest power to bully others around. Judging by league tables, the true greatest nations might be Nordic ones, though part of their nature would mean they would never claim it – indeed the Swedes would hate the idea.



This is fun, and I should repeat I do love the place and its people. But what interests me is the effect of the continuous GCE claims. Does it do good or does it do harm?



Before that, some slightly related stories. First, in the US the festival of Christ the King is known as Christ the King of the Universe. Listening to that made me think of Superman or Flash Gordon. We wouldn’t try that in Europe. In the same service, we sang a patriotic American hymn to the tune of, wait for it, God Save the Queen. That made me feel slightly odd, though then I realised I’d been singing alternative words to the German national anthem since I was a child (but not patriotic ones).



Anyway, many Americans believe they are the GCE (still, ha ha), and there seems to be some informal campaign to perpetuate the belief. Annoying and amusing to foreigners for sure, but does the perception help the US? Or help the world?



On the plus side, it makes people walk taller, complain less (even in New York), and work better as a team. There is a feel good factor about the place. Strangely, this even seems to extend to immigrants, especially second and later generation ones. And it may even create a market for further immigrants, which allows the US to be selective and still let in productive ones. It creates some unifying values, even if in practice these are not always followed. All these things have some benefit. The nation seems more likely to hold together while it believes in itself.



But, even for the US, there are downsides too. The same factors diminish healthy challenge. Try raising gun laws here and hear the denial. The election campaign did not for an instant consider that there might be something to learn from other nations, only ugly false portrayal of China.



Arguably, hubris is what destroys all empires. They get lazy, they stop learning, they think they can do things that they can’t. The saddest tragic failure of the last twenty years might be the unshakeable belief in the USA that their troops would be welcomed with open arms into Baghdad. That has a real fin de siècle feel about it, as does the denial over economic reality, and the descent into complacent obesity. The Romans and even the British came to see themselves as infallible, and thus sowed the seeds of their own downfall.



To the world, the scorecard is even more weighted on the downside. Having a hegemon can have advantages, for example in leading efforts on something like climate change. But that hegemon has to be able to see beyond its borders occasionally. Arguably, US military might has prevented as many wars as it has caused, but the ones that have happened have become more intractable and damaging.



In that same Church service, we were asked to pray (twice) that the nations of the world should come to see Jesus as their saviour. That seems to cut across general modern beliefs about the separation of Church from State. But, more, the lazy statement seemed to me to epitomise a certainty of rightness, an unwillingness to consider that alternatives might be as good or at least can exist in harmony. True, this was Catholic Christianity talking not US politics, but I sensed that Catholic Christianity would not have been so lazy in a country without a GCE complex. Of course this is the sort of sentiment that ultimately can lead to crusades, intolerance, and war (and then decline of the one expressing the sentiment).



Sometimes I become ridiculously naïve. I argue that nations themselves are the things that hold back the world the most, and the time has come to challenge the whole concept. Fat chance. Now I am asking the USA to go easy on the GCE stuff. Dream on, Graham.

No comments: