雖然這文章略帶偏激‥, 一篇評論現今美國人的文章

因為南華早報聲明不得轉載，對文章感興趣的板友請自己到南華早報的網頁閱讀。
http://www.nanzao.com/tc/international/14e...en-di-tong-bing

文章題目：《無知：半數美國人的通病》
作者：Jonathan Power(專欄作家)

文章作者的一些評論好像在說氣話，例如：「美國已將近失去理性。奧巴馬試圖對抗，但未能全然取勝。傷感的是，我不認為繼任者能夠做得更好。」(節錄)
另一方面，作者對現今美國人的某些描述相當有趣：「半數美國人真心相信，美國發明了自由的觀念，並將之完美呈現；他們又相信，美國的生活品質是全世界最高的。」(節錄)
(要下班了，只能匆匆發了主題，稍後再說兩句感想)

目前仍是世上最強大的國家，不是叫假的

當然，其實一直都是。相信絕大多數人都知道，美國仍然領先世界很遠。我看這篇文章時，想到的不是國家強弱的問題。

似乎不只是美國, 而是大多人類社會的通病

我想說華府不容易安撫美國人的不滿，儘管今日的美國仍然比世界大部分地方先進、文明。我會說是昔日的美國太輝煌，從杜魯門到雷根時代，那段叱吒風雲的歲月，確有帝國之風。在美國人心目中，自然對國家期望甚高，持續滿足別人的崇高期望將會是一件很吃力的事。當現實與理想出現差落，有點情緒也是正常的。

至少在美國，逆向民族主義者和精神外國人不是普遍現象。

話說爺爺奶奶是戰前孩子。他們那個年代，中國是個百年積弱、內憂外患的國家。我看出他們心裡的民族自悲，是那戰亂不堪的歲月的烙印。我會說爺爺奶奶是生不逢時且身不由己。他們是對自己的民族有點自悲，或許還有一點崇洋媚外的情意結，但至少對自己的同胞沒有白眼。反觀我身邊80%以上的青少年，生活在一個不愁溫飽的年代，而且有良好的機會接受高等教育，但‥ 唉‥ 我不想說了。

I think this is the original article?
http://www.jordantimes.com/opinion/jonathan-power/oh-america

Seriously? This article is poorly written at best. It bugs the cxxp out of me that a non-American like Jonathan Power tries to generalize people from the 'culture of ignorance' a.k.a the Conservative party with such little backup and statistics. I can't read any backing except from personal, liberal opinions. (Disclaimer: I side with individual policy instead of political party) There were tons of loopholes created by the policies from both parties, and he apparently failed to see that.

It obviously an biased article. It is not realistic to expect many statistics from such a short article, when it is not an academic dissertation. By the way, I wondering how many reviews about China around nowadays, were actually written by Chinese.

It obviously an biased article. It is not realistic to expect many statistics from such a short article, when it is not an academic dissertation. By the way, I wondering how many reviews about China around nowadays, were actually written by Chinese.

I'm not expecting a research report nor a detail coverage. To make a statement he needs some backing and supports. I'm open to opinions from either sides as long as they can quantitatively or qualitatively justify them. (e.g. The U.S. is way behind on building family friend workplaces in comparison to other developed countries as it is the only one that has no paid maternity leave law). I don't even know what he meant when he said 'Good Life' in Canada in comparison to the US. Is it less racist, more scientifically oriented, or more healthcare for the poor? These statements are dogmatic and there are no figures to support his point.

So refusing to study the Keynesian uplift economics was a way to sabotage the US economy? I find that pretty laughable. This is one of the reasons why the article is poorly written.

本篇文章已被 Pearltea 於 Jul 22 2015, 18:57 編輯過

Some criticisms on journalists nowadays with the "quantity or quality" principle... Therefore, you are suggested to try something like the "60 Minutes" instead of popular news. Trust me, you will not pleased with them.

本篇文章已被 試驗帳號2 於 Jul 23 2015, 07:37 編輯過