Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Soft power is a thing

This is the usual claptrap Euros and Eurosimps come up with when Americans gripe about subsidizing Europe's defense.

"Soft power" isn't putting money back in Americans' pockets, and the primary beneficiaries of NATO clearly didn't like us very much even before Trump's return, when Biden was still president and the aid flowed freely to Kyiv: https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/06/11/views-of-the-u...

> Sweden: 47% had a favorable opinion of the US.; Germany: 49%; France: 46%; The Netherlands: 48%

This is the "soft power" that Americans should rue having lost under Trump? A continent of entitled ingrates, who constantly crow about their generous welfare states ("six months paid vacation!") they enjoy partially through neglect of defense, and condescendingly lecture us ("As a European...") about how everything we do is wrong, who apparently don't like us very much even when we do come to their defense?



Apart from it just being morally and ethically righteous for rich countries to share their wealth globally, American "soft power" serves as a gesture of good will to the world so they will tolerate a strong dollar (so we get to play global economics on easy mode) and American hegemony generally. When we stop exercising "soft power" everyone will just resent our relative comfort and suddenly decide they aren't okay with us being on the throne anymore. And we'll find ourselves playing on hard mode because we'll be iced out from global trade.


Is it morally and ethically righteous toward the people of the rich countries? A country owes everything to its citizens and nothing to anyone else, and pretending otherwise led to resentment toward foreign aid including some realpolitik justified programs like USAID. When programs are sold to the people as being selfless while people are less fortunate than the social media influencers they watch every day, it’s only natural that they resent the government for seemingly giving resources away.


Are the constantly crowing, entitled ingrates with their condescending lectures in the room right now?


Yeah, they're the ones trying to gaslight Americans into believing that NATO hasn't been a completely lopsided relationship since the end of the Cold War, and that it makes complete sense that Americans be treaty-bound to defend nations like Sweden (which lifted not one finger when Finland was invaded by the Soviet Union and its territory annexed, and also later when Norway was invaded and occupied by Nazi Germany), a country where less than half of the population had a favorable view of us as a nation, before Trump.

Obviously I don't agree with his threats over Greenland, but acting like the end of NATO would be a huge loss for the US is ridiculous. Look at how obsequious European heads of government are towards Trump, even in the face of these threats; that tells you all you need to know about whom NATO truly benefits. They know if the US withdraws from Europe completely, they'll have to up their military spending considerably to plug the gaps, which will strain the welfare state.


>Yeah, they're the ones trying to gaslight Americans into believing that NATO hasn't been a completely lopsided relationship since the end of the Cold War, and that it makes complete sense that Americans be treaty-bound to defend nations like Sweden

Sweden just joined NATO in 2024, so what does the cold war have to do with it?

> a country where less than half of the population had a favorable view of us as a nation, before Trump.

Ok? Yes, it was looking like Sweden thought Russia was the bigger threat, so they joined NATO in 2024, but I guess Trump is making them regret this.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: