Is the United States destined to become one of the most unsafe countries?

[Silais]

If the title could be longer, it would read: Is the United States destined (or doomed) to become one of the most unsafe, restricted, and right-withholding countries in the world?

I ask this as a United States citizen becoming more and more aware of the government's treatment of the people and the injustices that plague regular men and women who live within the country. All Americans should be worried about the state of their country and how the people in power continue to leech off of the American public while punishing them for acting out of line with their own personal agendas.

Talking points:
-police violence/brutality and the erosion of the extremely necessary Miranda rights - how law enforcement has become something to fear, and not something to rely on when danger strikes
-banks and big corporations stealing and misusing taxpayer money for their own personal bank accounts
-the NSA spying on American citizens and recording their daily activities without having any warrant to do so
-Prosecuting and persecuting whistleblowers and naming them "spies" and "traitors" to the country when they attempt to reveal to the people the cruelty and inhumanity that the government and the military enact against innocent civilians in other countries
-politicians pursing their own agendas while disregarding the thoughts and opinions of the public - even going against their own initial promises to do so
-Higher cost of living and lower and lower wages - how people can no longer survive on minimum wage and how great the divide between the poor and the rich has become
-the war on women, minorities and homosexuals in our country and the withholding of rights to these groups

These are just a few of the injustices that the American public face. If you have any more to add to the list, please do so.

 

[Kanzler]

It'll continue to be a first world country, unless there's a <0.001% scenario. I'm going to say not even close. America is pretty safe. You can easily name a worse country for every point listed. I get that it's hard to do the whole "freedom" gig anymore, but "one of the most unsafe" is a bit of an overstatement by any measure.

 

[New Eden]

It'll continue to be a first world country, unless there's a <0.001% scenario. I'm going to say not even close. America is pretty safe. You can easily name a worse country for every point listed. I get that it's hard to do the whole "freedom" gig anymore, but "one of the most unsafe" is a bit of an overstatement by any measure.

Yeah, this is basically how I think of it. Plus I think it's pretty hard to ensure freedom all over the place for a population of 300 million and growing (to be honest a large amount like that makes it seem like conflict is completely inevitable.) At least in the current state of things though, America becoming one of the most unsafe nations seems flat out silly.

 

[BraveNewWorld]

War on women? What? Look at gender ratios at public schools across the United States and tell me which gender is getting shafted. Let's take a look at some of the more prestigious.

University of Virginia
55% Female
45% Male

University of North Carolina
58% Female
41% Male

University of California, Berkley
53% Female
47% Male

UCLA
55% Female
45% Male

University of Michigan
49% Female
51% Male

College of William & Mary
55% Female
45% Male

So in 5 of the top 6 most highly respected public institutions of higher learning in the United States there's a solid gender gap in favor of women.

Let's look at Title IX. This is a law the requires the equal treatment of men and women is sports at all school levels. What's the problem? More men play sports. And men's sports, like football, have in excess of 80 players depending on the level of play. It's way more complicated than what I'm about to say but the gist is there have to be an equal amount of male and female athletes. Well, if one sport is taking up 80 players, then you have to finance many different women's sports to make up for it. This causes schools to stop sponsoring football and/or cutting other men's sports.

Women also don't make less than men when you compare education, experience, and work hours. This video will explain it.

 

[Entermaid]

-police violence/brutality and the erosion of the extremely necessary Miranda rights - how law enforcement has become something to fear, and not something to rely on when danger strikes.

I have never had a fear or dislike of law enforcement with the exception of highway patrol :/ I have a great deal of reverence toward my local police officers. I don't involve myself in any situation in which might change my perception of cops as being negative. I'd like to see some information regarding Police Brutality and Miranda Warnings in the US, if anyone is claiming that they are a major concern. The Supreme Court has an extensive array of laws regarding the Miranda Warnings including exemptions of the rights, such as, the immediate endangerment of an individual for example. Other than that, I don't understand why it would be believed that Miranda Rights are diminishing, most police agencies require a written version of the Miranda Warning to affirm the individual verify that the rights have been read with a signature. If anything this issue has become more of a non-issue over time.

-the NSA spying on American citizens and recording their daily activities without having any warrant to do so. Prosecuting and persecuting whistleblowers and naming them "spies" and "traitors" to the country when they attempt to reveal to the people the cruelty and inhumanity that the government and the military enact against innocent civilians in other countries

First off, the government has every right to survey the public activity so long as that information is kept confidential and only used for purpose of criminal activity and defense security. There is this perception that the NSA is reading your personal emails and investigating the personal lives of many individuals. They simply don't have the time or desire to read through conversations that are not pertinent to security. I would gladly allow the government the ability to read through my personal information if that is a requisite for discovering terrorist activity. Any advocates against this either engage in illegal activity, or are defending arbitrary rights for the sake of defending arbitrary rights with little regard for the good that these programs do. "But I don't want the government spying on me." They probably haven't read a single piece of private information granted you haven't engaged in suspicious activity. Thus, whistle-blowing does create chaos and interrupts the government from working proficiently when the media is used as the vehicle for whistle-blowing rather than a congressional committee, which may a time will gladly contest with the President's Administrative Agencies. It's a matter of pandering to arbitrary rights rather than valuing the function of the programs. Further, fleeing to China and Russia and disclosing information and documentation that is classified to these nations is dangerous. These are the two other superpowers of the world, by creating conflict with these nations, it puts at risk the entire global stability, so I would consider such actions to be conducive with his "traitor" status, though I would like to qualify that status a traitor to international stability, thus a traitor to all . Legitimate concerns should be taken care of quietly, among diplomats, rather than stirring the public hysteria foreign or abroad, and since the US is interconnected with many countries, such forms of whistle-blowing places the entirety of global stability at risk and is a unilateral decision of which a person usually has no authority, as was the case of Snowden.

-politicians pursing their own agendas while disregarding the thoughts and opinions of the public - even going against their own initial promises to do so

Actually, this is the opposite. The opinions of the public and their engagement in the political process is stronger than ever, and for all of the wrong reasons. If anything, the nation is at risk of the tyranny of the majority. If tax dollars are allocated or withheld from certain persons, the votes follow, and this is where the politicians have a lack of regard for effective public policy. The public doesn't take into account the many factors of making a policy and have effectively hijacked the process, in which, now our representatives are making decisions that please the individual's desires rather than the public's welfare on a broad scale.

-Higher cost of living and lower and lower wages - how people can no longer survive on minimum wage and how great the divide between the poor and the rich has become

We live in a society in which even the poor have luxuries such as televisions and cellphones. It's all a matter of relativity. I agree the divide of the rich and poor has increase and is a concern though. As mentioned in the question before, many of these issues are arising with the political process as it relates to the sway regarding uninformed public and their appetitive and reckless desires.

-the war on women, minorities and homosexuals in our country and the withholding of rights to these groups

These are largely exaggerated if existent in some cases. These minor injustices are nothing compared to the United States 20, 50, or 100+ years ago. The trend is upward, so I don't understand the argument since injustices have been steadily declining, thus more violence would also decline. However, most crime is unrelated, and mainly concerns poverty.

 

[Livewire]

War on women? What? Look at gender ratios at public schools across the United States and tell me which gender is getting shafted. Let's take a look at some of the more prestigious.

University of Virginia
55% Female
45% Male

University of North Carolina
58% Female
41% Male

University of California, Berkley
53% Female
47% Male

UCLA
55% Female
45% Male

University of Michigan
49% Female
51% Male

College of William & Mary
55% Female
45% Male

Try the faculty gender demographics instead. Then look at which ones have tenure, which ones have advanced degrees, which ones sit on the various councils and boards at the school. There's more truthful and revealing data, much more so than enrollment. And especially since some of those colleges are quite small.

 

[Kanzler]

While the tenure holders and emeriti are old men today, when these geezers die off, the future belong to women (I shouldn't be talking like that tho, gotta get along with the old profs XD)! But yeah, there are more women undergrads and I don't see that number going down in the future.

 

[Kura]

You forgot lack of a proper healthcare system, too.. and the fact that the government craps on their veterans by forcing them to stay at low-quality veteran hospitals unless you want to pay astronomical fees out of pocket. Fun!

We live in a society in which even the poor have luxuries such as televisions and cellphones. It's all a matter of relativity. I agree the divide of the rich and poor has increase and is a concern though. As mentioned in the question before, many of these issues are arising with the political process as it relates to the sway regarding uninformed public and their appetitive and reckless desires.

Most put it on their visa, where they can't really afford it.. and either use it until they declare bankrupcy.. or they skimp on other things in order to have it. Haven't you ever known anyone to borrow money from you and if you ask them about it they say "sorry bro, have no cash on me right now" while on their way out to a night of expensive heavy drinking? People even skimp on their children. Or they live without a penny or saving to their name. Then again, sometimes they can get their TV through donation or cheap through second hand.. so it's not possible to generalize.

 

[Ivysaur]

As Fenneking said, the current situation of the US is a billion times better than 100 years ago. Sure, they didn't read your emails, but, in turn, neither women nor blacks were allowed to vote, discrimination not only did exist and was more common than it is today, but it was also legal and approved by most people.

Not only that, but the Miranda rights were created in 1966!, which leaves us with around 200 years in which they could not be toyed with and infringed upon... because they just did not exist!

In other words, there is an upward trend. Sure, there are always uncertainties. Sure, there are always leaders who prefer stepping back than forward. And yes, the inequalities are increasing tenfold during the current crisis and need to be fixed to avoid a bigger divide in society. But the US are one of the most developed countries in the world, and as bad as they might be today, people living there are much better off nowadays than they could be 100 years ago. So no, I don't think the country is falling into hell.

Bonus track: Obamacare is the best healthcare system the US have had in ever. Can it be improved and built on? Of course! Is it a sign of the end of the world? Certainly not.

 

[.:batto:.]

Does the bear poop in the woods?
Nobody can answer the question your asking. & to be completely honest. No country sits back and lets whistleblowers leak information and let them off without any punishment. IMO. Leaking information about your homeland is betrayal. Sure. Killing harmless people is VERY bad. And can give the united states a bad reputation in other countries that it has happened in. But in one way or another. You sleep safe at night there is no doubt about that. Don't mess with the higher power. And you will be fine.

 

[Amore]

I seriously doubt America'll become one of the worst places to live in the world. Remove points 1 & 7 from the OP and the rest of the world has similar issues. Particularly those of us outside of North Korea whose internet habits are being monitored by either the NSA or GCHQ (British cyber people).

 

[twocows]

I like how you mentioned the war on every single construct except men. I hope it's merely out of ignorance; men face many problems, some of them extremely severe (specifically, child custody post-divorce).

Look at the whole laundry list of problems men face. It would be hard enough to deal with these problems if we as a society acknowledged them, but many people outright deny these problems exist (or worse, are actively hostile toward those who work to remedy them).

Try the faculty gender demographics instead. Then look at which ones have tenure, which ones have advanced degrees, which ones sit on the various councils and boards at the school. There's more truthful and revealing data, much more so than enrollment. And especially since some of those colleges are quite small.

Since we don't know the number of women trying to get those positions in the first place, pretty much all of that information is meaningless. If the ratio of women employed in those positions closely matches the application ratio, there's no problem, except that maybe women don't pursue higher education teaching jobs as much as men (or perhaps are less willing to pursue graduate school in general, as that is often a prerequisite to being a professor in any university worth working at).


As for the original original topic, no. That's silly hyperbole. Every generation thinks it's the end of the world because that would make them special and people love to feel special.

EDIT:
Post comment by Anonymous
With regards to the link - " The men's rights movement's claims and activities have been critiqued by scholars and others, and sectors of the movement have been described as misogynist.[4][5][6][7][8]"

Anything with any sort of impact is going to be critiqued by someone, and claims of misogyny against the movement and its supporters, true or not (and I'd argue many are clearly not), do nothing to change the existence of very real problems for men. The end goal should be egalitarianism, fixing EVERYONE's problems, not female supremacy, which is what some (not all, probably not even a majority) feminists believe in.

 

[Keiran]

America seems fairly middle-of-the-pack if you consider just violence and freedoms. Violence will probably only get out of hand if our economy falls, and peoples freedoms are constantly under threat with our horrible, influenced-by-money government that doesn't care for their constituents. But we're nothing like North Korea or Russia, for example.

What America really fails at is enviromental safety. The effects of our massive pollution are gross. I don't even live near a polluted water source and my water is toxic. People who live near property where fracking happens have tap water that is flammable. We have tons of animal populations in rapid decline. We have businesses dumping waste into water sources and the surrounding neighborhoods breathe in the fumes and have ridiculous cancer rates- these areas are literally becoming devoid of life, and the people are silenced.

Every year, the east coast is ravaged by hurricanes and destructive tornadoes seem to keep popping up around the midwest. Who knows how the climate change will affect either of those things? If they get worse or more frequent, we're really not in a safe country are we? Can our economy afford more disaster relief?

 

[Livewire]

Let's not forget unsafe in terms of safety, with regards to our infrastructure. Which is literally crumbling away with every passing year, and congress can't or won't shell out the funds for repairs and new bridges, roads, tunnels, subways, highways, etc. Except to see many more deadly collapses or structural failures in the news in the coming years. Unless we start fixing them, that is.

 

[Psycho Yuffie]

So some random college attendence statistics are supposed to convince us there isn't a war on women? Take a look at the states that want to ban abortion. Texas wants to ban all reproductive rights for women--not men. They're not trying to ban condoms, but any form of birth control for women? Yes. Not to mention products for menstruation because they don't even know what they're really for. We have men making laws about women's bodies, when it's been proven they don't know how reproduction even works. On top of all of this, they cut services that help low-income mothers. So don't tell me there isn't a war on women because there is.

 

[lukasz050]

"I seriously doubt America'll become one of the worst places to live in the world. Remove points 1 & 7 from the OP and the rest of the world has similar issues. Particularly those of us outside of North Korea whose internet habits are being monitored by either the NSA or GCHQ (British cyber people)."



right :D

 

[donavannj]

There is certainly a war on women, but it's more because the majority of conservatives in positions of power are afraid of the opinion shift of the majority that is happening right now, which is resulting in more people being in favor of more access to birth control and other women's rights. Its attempts at stifling this trend are passing in states where the majority of the legislature is socially conservative, and at the Congressional level since Republicans in Congress toe the party line with minimal exception lest they be supplanted by an upstart, but it's boiling under the surface in states that are liberal-leaning yet are still on the whole socially moderate.

On another note, I'm quite concerned by the blatant lack of investment in repairing our existing infrastructure and in providing alternate means to our existing infrastructure to reduce wear and tear and congestion on that existing infrastructure.

 

[twocows]

So some random college attendence statistics are supposed to convince us there isn't a war on women? Take a look at the states that want to ban abortion. Texas wants to ban all reproductive rights for women--not men. They're not trying to ban condoms, but any form of birth control for women? Yes. Not to mention products for menstruation because they don't even know what they're really for. We have men making laws about women's bodies, when it's been proven they don't know how reproduction even works. On top of all of this, they cut services that help low-income mothers. So don't tell me there isn't a war on women because there is.

There are certainly some problems with the law and the people making it. I wouldn't exactly call it a "war on women" any more than I would call many of the equally awful laws being levied against men a "war on men." I don't really like that term, wars require active participation by one side and are usually outright violent and this is neither (don't be so quick to ascribe to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity). The term "war" in this case just seems disingenuous, and implying things that are pretty obviously not true (like the people involved are evil warmongers instead of idiots parroting what their handlers tell them to) is unlikely to persuade people of anything good. That's just nitpicking, though.

Anyway, there are unfair laws being made against women, that much I think anyone can admit. There are also unfair laws being made against men, and what's more, while there's a general consensus that the unfair practices against women need to change, there is no such thing with those against men. In fact, many people would go so far as to deny such problems even exist or to persecute those advocating for mens' issues. The courts (including, but not limited to, the criminal justice system) especially seem content to keep their anti-male bias