Our Status As the Best

Current Events
1

Earlier today I had an argument with a friend about the United States’ status as “the best” country in the world. I prefaced my side with, “I don’t know much about recent history or the current state of affairs, but…”, with my argument being that America is still the most free, economically and politically (hello, Microsoft and France). I’m in the process of developing a working knowledge of history and the current state of world affairs, but I currently only have broad impressions to go on, which I base off of places like this forum, Objectivist blogs, and publications like The Objective Standard. I also currently place high esteem in Rand’s cultural commentary.

I also factored where I thought America is likely to be headed in the near future. Meaning, even if there is another place on Earth which has more freedom than America, this country is more likely to pull itself out with a greater potential for success in the near future.

His argument was that there are other countries in the world which are more free than the US, specifically Singapore, and he hinted to include Europe and even Russia. His proof was his travel experience, since he doesn’t trust the media or American history books (I don’t necessarily blame him).

Is there any truth to this, and would anyone care to comment? Would you mind including examples to support why you do or do not believe America to be “better” than anywhere else?

2

Travel anecdotes are worthless as evidence. One measure is the Reporters Without Borders index which ranks countries in terms of freedom of the press (which as you will recall Rand considered to be a fundamental measure of the distinction between “free nation” versus “not free nation”). By that metric, Norway, Iceland, Denmark, Finland, Netherlands, Ireland and Switzerland are the freest nations – Singapore is 140th (the US, BTW, is 44th), and dictatorships like North Korea, Eritrea, Burma, Turkmenistan and Iran are in last place. Freedom House has a somewhat different ranking, which basically preserves that evaluation of freest country except puts Ireland in 15th place, puts the US in 24th place, Singapore in 139th place (i.e. the same place), and the dictatorships are in last place. They also have a coarser-grained ranking of religious freedom, which puts those freer nations in first place (the US in in the first tier), Singapore in 4th (or 7), and our friends Turkmenistan, Iran, Burma and North Korea in last place. The operative principle in Singapore is “social harmony” – disharmonious actions are prohibited by law. However, on economic freedom, Singapore ranks 2nd in the Heritage Foundation economic ranking, Ireland is 3rd, Denmark is 8th, the US is 9th, Norway is 30th, and Turkmenistan, North Korea, Burma and Iran are in last place.

Homosexuality is a crime in Singapore, possession of pornography is a crime, and numerous drug offences carry the death penalty. Littering may be punished by flogging. So as long as you chose to operate within the bounds of the law, Singapore is a free country.

Freedom House has an average ranking, which considers all of these dimensions (and also groups countries into 13 piles, which doesn’t impute injustified precision to some computed difference between Iceland and Norway). But of course, none of these rankings are particularly useful if you happen to do something that’s outlawed in some country. For example: Sweden has a broad law against “hate speech” that would prevent me from condemning Muslims. I believe that the Norwegian law is narrower, only prohibiting me from advocating the murder of Muslims (which, as it happens, I would not do anyway).

I don’t personally find the question of what country is generically the “best” to be particularly useful. If I were faced with competing job offers in the US and Norway, I’d look at more specific questions like salary and tax rates, cost of living, and how each employers would advance my career. A law against advocating the butchery of Muslims would not have any bearing on my evaluation.

3

I think it’s important to distinguish between america the idea, and america the country.

America the country has its significant faults, and it’s debatable whether or not it is the best. But america the idea is the best, hands down.

4

America the country has its significant faults, and it’s debatable whether or not it is the best. But america the idea is the best, hands down.

OTOH, you have to live in America the actual country, not America the idea. The question is whether it would turn out that America the idea is best manifested, physically, in Ireland or Iceland.

5

Honestly, by all of the metrics that I have seen, Ireland seems like one of the freeest countries in the world.

It is one of the most globalized, with almost free trade, very low taxes, and see above it has a very free press. And just one fact that I have seen (but have no record of) is that twice of the amount of investment capitial is moving to Ireland from the US, than is moving to China from the US. Plus there is almost no language barrier. I am honestly surprised that is it not on more people’s radar screen.

http://www.enterprisesurveys.org/ExploreEc…px?economyid=93

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_Tiger

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbo…os/ei.html#Econ

I still bleed Red, White, and Blue though, I wish that our country could be so enlightened.

6

I thought I’d add NationMaster to the list of references for what it’s worth. Ironically, I’m about to start a post on one of it’s more misleading statistics.

7

One measure is the Reporters Without Borders index

Freedom House has a somewhat different ranking.

They also have a coarser-grained ranking of religious freedom,

However, on economic freedom, Singapore ranks 2nd in the Heritage Foundation economic ranking,

Where does income expropriation to fund the welfare state get factored in? <_<

It would seem that with today’s philosophical bent, this would get overlooked.

8

I don’t think the USA rocks. New Hampshire and Nevada rock, but not the whole shabang.

Furthermore, as a (semi-)country, I think Guernsey and Jersey rock. Of these Channel Islands, Sark is renowned to be the most free.

9

Thanks for the responses everyone, especially Dave, RationalBiker, Dikaiosyne and lombas for the references. I appreciate it.

10

I agree with Dave’s assessment that a broad “best” title is not worth much.

I personally would add military ability or power high on my list of judgement factors, in conjunction with other factors such as tax and speech laws, language compatibility, and economic strength and potential.

11

Where does income expropriation to fund the welfare state get factored in? :slight_smile:

Dunno. Heritage Foundation and Freedom House aren’t pro-welfare, so I have a lightly justified hope that this is a factor in the computations (I filtered out leftist indices). Actually, I do know that the Heritage Foundation method does look at tax burden, but in a complex way that only an economist can love (or tolerate).

12

Travel anecdotes are worthless as evidence. One measure is the Reporters Without Borders index which ranks countries in terms of freedom of the press (which as you will recall Rand considered to be a fundamental measure of the distinction between “free nation” versus “not free nation”)…

I don’t think that “Reporters Without Borders” is trustworthy. Part of the problem is that they count Iraq as part of the US and they believe that reporters should have access to military secrets and classified documents.

I don’t think it’s really possible to say on a concrete leve, “This country is the best.” Clearly, some countries are far better than others (US vs. North Korea) but once one starts trying to choose the “best of the best” (US vs. Hong Kong) or the “worst of the worst” (Iran vs. North Korea) it becomes perhaps impossible.

13

I don’t think that “Reporters Without Borders” is trustworthy. Part of the problem is that they count Iraq as part of the US and they believe that reporters should have access to military secrets and classified documents.

I don’t know what they did that makes you believe that they consider Iraq to be part of the US or that reporters should have access to military secrets and classified documents. I have seen no concrete reason to distrust their evaluations, but if you have specific information, I’d be willing to consider it objectively.

14

“Some Western democracies slipped down the Index. The United States (44th) fell more than 20 places, mainly because of the imprisonment of New York Times reporter Judith Miller and legal moves undermining the privacy of journalistic sources.”

and

“137 United States of America (in Iraq) 48,50”

http://www.rsf.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=554

15

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_Tiger

I like how under “Challenges Ahead” (for Ireland), Wikipedia lists “Spreading the Wealth” and includes the following passage:

Spreading the wealth

Like any country that undergoes rapid growth, Ireland’s new wealth is not evenly distributed - it is concentrated principally on the east coast surrounding Dublin. The challenge is to spread the new wealth nationwide to remote areas such as Connemara and Donegal.

With regards to America the idea being the best, I worry that the idea is slowly fading away. In OPAR, Dr. Peikoff laments the kind of abomination that would be established if the current legislators of the time (this applies even more so today) were to draft a new Constitution to replace the old. I think this would have alarming results.

16

Switzerland seems to be up with the best. From a quick Wiki journey, it seems to be the strongest example of direct democracy (which is good in some ways.)

Switzerland apparently also has mandatory military service, but come on… it’s not like that would mean seeing any action :lol:

17

The United States (44th) fell more than 20 places, mainly because of the imprisonment of New York Times reporter Judith Miller and legal moves undermining the privacy of journalistic sources."

How does that discredit their credibility? The fact is, the attempt to force information from her was improper use of force. This is exactly the kind of stunt that dictatorships like Turkmenistan and Burma use to suppress any kind of negative publicity about their facist regimes, and for the US to more in that direction is absolutely appalling.

“137 United States of America (in Iraq) 48,50”

Dunno how I didn’t see that. Anyhow, how exactly does this bear on their credibility? Presumably you aren’t denying that the US is in Iraq, or that the US has had and continues to have significant control over the operation of the Iraqi government. You have to apply all of your knowledge in understanding these rankings, not just part of it. If you’re objecting that this rating and the association of the US government to Iraq thinking that it somehow lays blame on the US, I don’t see that at all. As they said, the rating is because of the actions of terrorists.

18

Miller was held in contempt of court in an issue of great importance to national security. She was released in under three months. That does not strike me as essentially similar to Turmenistan or Burma.

19

Miller was held in contempt of court in an issue of great importance to national security. She was released in under three months. That does not strike me as essentially similar to Turmenistan or Burma.

Miller had no information vital to national security: there was no matter of national security involved in that affair. The meaning of a less than perfect ranking is not “There is no difference between you and Burma”. The meaning is that the press does not fully enjoy the right to speak freely. This is an undeniable fact in the US, that we do not enjoy the same freedom of the press or more generally the right to privacy that we used to enjoy. Their ranking means that there are governmental restraints on the press in the US, which are more severe than in western Europe and certain other nations, that the restraints on the press in the US are comparable to those in Israel or Poland, and are ten times less severe than in North Korea. These are accurate judgments.

20

Miller was held in contempt of court in an issue of great importance to national security. She was released in under three months. That does not strike me as essentially similar to Turmenistan or Burma.

Miller was jailed because she would not divulge information the prosecution already had. How could national security at stake if she had nothing to add.