For the sake of argument, let us accept the proposition all the great evils in the world are the fault of the United States. If that is what you truly believe, please explain exactly how one country managed to accomplish such a remarkable feat? Was it really a deliberate effort by a determined populace to ruin the rest of the planet for the sake of its own gain? If so, how was it so successfully implemented when at least ninety percent of that nation didn't even participate? Unlike Alexander the Great, the Empire of Rome, or Communism, conquering the important parts of the known world was never an American goal, and no armies were ever raised, let alone implemented, strictly for the sake of global domination.

If you are still willing to overlook that fact and continue to operate under the assumption the US used capitalism to exploit the rest of the world, shouldn't you really start thinking about which Americans were more directly responsible? Was it the so-called Robber Barons manipulating the poor? The farmers taking land from the Indians? The millions upon millions of immigrants taking land from the Indians? The army filled with former farmers and immigrants protecting the land taken from the Indians? Perhaps it was everybody's favorite invisible enemy, the evil and greedy rich. Or was it all simply the fault of old, white men?

Here we have every possible source of American wickedness ever proclaimed, and yet we still have no clear idea who the true villains were/are. How is it the most powerful country in the world can be blamed for every problem on this planet, and still nobody has ever broken the blame down enough to find the one particular group most responsible? Isn't it time we started thinking about that?

This is a good exercise for those of you who don't blame America first for every world problem as well. Along with every other country or civilization ever to exist, crimes and wrongs have been committed here by people who had enough power to get away with it. These wrongdoings must be acknowledged, and even condemned, but simplistic generalizations about their causes are childish. They are also misleading, especially when a little logical thought can lead you to the true culprits.

Go ahead, think of a great injustice from our past. Hell, think of a dozen, if it makes you feel better. Now, other than building up some righteous indignation, what good have you really accomplished? None whatsoever. Stoking up your anger only keeps you miserable. Worse, you probably still don't know who you should blame. What good is anger if you don't even know where to focus it?

You see, there's nothing really wrong with getting upset, as long as you don't get crazy or violent about it, but if getting worked up is all you ever do you won't ever solve anything. If you are bound and determined to devote a large chunk of your life to being angry, wouldn't you want to do even a little bit of research first, just to make sure you were making yourself miserable for a good cause? (Not to digress too far, but psychiatrists exist to help people put their anger behind them and find other ways to be happy. Why is it nobody ever thinks radical activists should seek psychiatric help to become happy?)

Ask yourself this: is there no part of an angry rational activist's mind interested not only in crying about the injustices of the past, but also interested in preventing future abuses from occurring again? This is an extremely serious question. Do any of the outraged spokespeople you see parading around care enough to determine the true foundation of these abuses enough to expose, honestly, the real source of every injustice?

Just going by the actions of the people getting the most news coverage, the assumption would have to be no. Had any of these folks truly cared more about this country than they did about themselves, the issue they care most deeply about would have been resolved fifty or more years ago.

So, okay, let's deal with the two biggest crimes people love to throw around when they can't control their hatred for the United States: Slavery and the treatment of Indians. (No, I am not going to indulge in any politically correct terms for Indians. I have known quite a few of them, and most can't be bothered to worry about what term they go by. Besides, the word "native" also carries with it a negative connotation of a backward non-civilized people, and for that reason it is highly insulting. If you truly wanted to honor them, you would call them by their correct tribe: Cherokee, Apache, Navaho, Huron, Blackfoot, etc. Unfortunately, those who feel righteously indignant also tend to be too lazy to bother finding out which tribal name to apply to each Indian). Which of these crimes only existed in the United States and/or has only ever been committed by one race, country or religion? The answer is neither.

Slavery and abuses of indigenous people existed long before there even was a United States, and it existed in every culture. By the way, these things continue to exist in some parts of the world, and the United States isn't responsible for any of that now. Why aren't any activists going to these other places to protest against the same things they hate about our country? The question almost answers itself. Just having to ask it tells you they hate America more than they hate the crimes they scream about.

Putting all those questions aside, have you decided which group earlier mentioned is the guiltiest for all our country's past crimes/abuses? I'm going to make it easy for you. Those who love this country, no matter what, will say none of these groups apply, and those who truly believe America is an evil country will say the two worst offenders were the greedy rich, and the old, white men. More precisely, they will combine the two and declare all evil in the world is the result of the actions of old, rich, white, AMERICAN men.

Both choices are incorrect. As was stated earlier, simplistic generalizations are childish. Even so, for the sake of fairness, let's examine the old, white men theory. There is absolutely no reason to completely discard it. In fact, I am willing to even acknowledge it as a factor, at least partially. Somewhere between 90 and 95 percent of the guilty parties of the past were, unquestionably, old white men. How could that not be so in a country where the power resided almost entirely in the hands of old, white men? The real question is why stop there?

Come on! The same loud-mouths who tell us stereotypes are some enormous transgression against humanity also never make an effort to avoid it themselves when they are in full-blown whiney mode? Seriously? Old, white men is the only answer, stop, end of discussion, no more thought required beyond this point? Pu-lease! Are we supposed to be so simple minded we can't even ask, specifically, which old white men were the most responsible? How on earth could every old white man in America, past or present, rich or poor, religious or atheist, happy or sad, married or single, intelligent or stupid, Whig, Democrat or Republican manage to come together for any single cause, good or bad? It just isn't friggin' possible!

It's worse than just being impossible. It's outrageous. Picking one large specific group to blame, without even trying to include any other contributing factors, is the classic description of prejudice. Why should a hateful prejudicial attitude be good against one race when it was previously considered bad against another? The answer is it is never good, and if you can't put that hatred aside you will never be able to discover the truth, let alone figure out how to solve the problem.

It's time for rational people, atheist or religious, intelligent or uneducated, rich or poor, and black, white, brown, red or yellow to figure out who the real scumbags, past and present, were/are.

First and foremost we must acknowledge the overwhelming majority of people who ever lived in this country do deserve to share a piece of the blame. Whether it concerns the treatment of Indians, the problems of slavery, or the methods used to handle immigrants, it all comes down to the same thing. No wrong from the past could have occurred without the tacit approval of the majority. The bulk of the population may have done nothing to advance any particular wrong, but neither did they do anything to stop it. The real scumbags are worse than they are, but, had the majority been interested enough, they could have stopped the real scumbags.

This is still true today. Wrongs are being committed with impunity because most people don't care enough to even pay attention. Worse, the folks directly responsible for the abuses aren't even the ones getting the blame. The true villains know how to get away with it, so by throwing some BS to the folks not really paying attention they are allowed to continue screwing things up, totally unimpeded.

Allowing for the fact most the abusers of the past were white men, what else distinguished them from the rest of the country? Think about it. White men made treaties with Indian tribes, and white men later broke those treaties, but was it the same men? No, it wasn't. The ones who stood before the Indians and made the treaties were acting in good faith. These were the people who took all the risks, and by that I mean they actually put their lives on the line. The ones who later broke the treaties were the ones I call the loud-mouth wussies (You know the type. The ones who routinely scream in outrage against opponents they consider safe, but rarely stand against people who are truly dangerous). The loud-mouthed wussies never had to put their lives on the line. They simply had others do the hard work, and then they indulged in abuses once the risks were removed.

Same thing with slavery. True, some white men wanted to keep slavery, but other white men also wanted to end it. That struggle started even before the Revolution began, but nobody ever talks about the people who were against slavery. They only focus their attention on what atrocities were done, and they practically ignore the loud-mouthed wussies who used other people to keep the institution intact. Here again the majority of the people share some blame. They didn't approve of slavery, but, since it didn't directly affect them, they just let the loud-mouths have their way. Simply put, that particular abuse continued for such a long time only because the loud-mouths had the tacit approval of the majority.

Need some more clues to figure out who the real criminals of the past were? How about this? America signed a peace treaty and pulled all her military forces from Vietnam in 1973. Two years later North Vietnam broke the peace treaty and attacked South Vietnam. Not only did Vietnam fall entirely to communist control, but so did Laos and Cambodia. Even though we had the power to stop it, our country refused to get involved. As a result of our inaction, millions of people were later slaughtered by the conquering communists. Almost as bad, people we promised to help were left behind. No doubt many of them were included in the slaughter.

These are serious crimes committed in the name of our country, but who is really responsible? That's right; the loud-mouthed wussies. The loud-mouthed wussies had the power to prevent this, but they refused. Not only that, but they also successfully managed to shift the blame from themselves and placed it on our entire country instead. That is the most despicable part. Millions of people today loathe America because of what happened in Vietnam when they really should be focusing their anger on these few gutless cowards.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, let me make it clear. The worst crimes committed in this country, by this country, and in the name of this country have all been the work of one particular group of people. Sure, they are loud-mouthed wussies, but they are much worse than that. These folks are a special breed. They are loud-mouthed wussies with power. In short, they are politicians.

That's correct. Everything you may want to blame our country for all comes down to the destructive work of a few selfish politicians. Had it not been for the cowardly, greedy, and/or just outright despicable behavior of politicians, none of the worst maltreatments could have lasted very long. After all, who but the politicians had the power to stop these things? Unfortunately, as soon as any politician had a special interest in any particular wrong, he also had the motivation and the power to keep it going.

Think I might be trying to make only one political party appear corrupt? If you do, you need to do more research. It doesn't matter what party you support, the sad fact is as soon as you look into it you will find plenty of politicians who sold your side out for some personal gain. However, if it makes you feel better, you can just put on your blinders, stick your fingers in your ears, and start telling yourself you don't need to pay attention to things that upset your current belief system. That attitude is precisely what allowed most loud-mouthed wussies to get away with the terrible things they did.

As proof, consider this. Had the majority of people in the past removed their blinders, and actually put values ahead of political party, things such as the Jim Crow laws never could have been created. Oh, and check this out. Notice that word "laws"? It means Jim Crow only came into being through the work of politicians. Think about that. No shabby law was ever created without a shabby politician first getting, or sneaking, it past the voters, and that's the awful truth. Instead of blaming the entire country for the wrongs of the past, you should instead be figuring out which politicians were/are responsible, and then you should be doing everything you can to keep such morons from office.

Basically, you need to start voting responsibly. History clearly shows shabby politicians were capable of fooling the people in the past, but we need to remember they can still do it in the present. The trick is in comparing the new politicians to the old ones to figure out which ones are doing shabby things. It's actually not that hard. The shabby ones tend to keep making the same promises about things they never really try to get fixed. They always have somebody else to blame for their failure.

At this point it should be considered how to respond anytime we hear somebody say, "Americans are responsible for _______!" The proper response should be along the lines of, "Not quite. It's only American politicians who are to blame, and chances are the ones you've been voting for are major contributors." If that person has enough intellect to avoid calling you names, or stomping off in a huff, and actually chooses to engage you in an honest discussion instead, you might like to mention corrupt or incompetent politicians are hardly unique to America. Every political system ever created has been plagued by faulty leadership. What is unique to America is our system gives us a better chance to remove, or at least get around, our biggest political numbskulls. Unfortunately, what most haters fail to realize is replacing the so-called evils of Capitalism with any other system would only allow different politicians to come in with new ways to abuse the populace. There is zero chance at all for any society under any system to ever reach total utopia as long as politicians have any control. The one advantage our system has is we can always make things better if we just hold our politician's feet more often to the fire -something many other systems deliberately fail to allow.

With a little work we may evenentually be able to get some former America haters to join with us in saluting our flag. Hey, maybe we could even get a few to give us fist bumps and chant, "LIFE to America! La-la-la-la-la!" (Oh well, we all have our little dreams).

A little military style advice works well here: The ballot is your friend. Take care of it, and it will take care of you. Make sure you only use it responsibly, and always treat every ballot as if it was loaded. Remember, the country you save just might be your own.

Geez Louise! Just read about the issues and study a politician's record before you vote. The villains are still out there, and they are counting on you not to notice.