I for once am speechless that this has been posted on this CP.

Suddenly I feel more at home.lol.

Posted by: Get Real at June 28, 2004 08:51 PM

Don’t get too teary eyed. Remember that Franklin the Democrat Donkey is still and ass. But, I do recall an old proverb:

Be kind to your ass for it bears thee.

Posted by: hungry valley at June 28, 2004 09:09 PM

I wonder if one of the reasons they support Kerry is their disapproval of “Bush’s war” in Afghanistan and Iraq, the hypocrites.

This spineless bunch of leftists can organize to their hearts content; Kerry will still lose by a landslide.

Posted by: Helen at June 28, 2004 09:11 PM

I’ll be right up front GR, I‘m a registered Republican. I posted it anyway. It’s interesting and I figured y’all might not run into an expat story, especially this one, in your regular rounds. I’m also nutty for Central Asia (the focus of my regular blog), so that factored in.

I think Alan said it well earlier. There’s no real bias going on here. Kerry’s campaigning hasn’t been too, um, stellar, newsworthy, or noticeable lately. If I read it correctly, that’s his strategy. But, if there’s noteworthy stuff about him out there, I’ll post it. I’ll save the comments for my partisan bickering.

I should also note that I left out the part of the story that I really wanted to quote—the part that perfectly illustrates why I consider so many expats in the aid community world-class jerks. I didn’t like most of them when I lived in Uzbekistan and I have had little reason to change my mind since I came home.

I also have to mention that Afghan donkeys are scruffy, sad, cruel little beasts. I’d rather have a cartoon Mexican pinata donkey as my mascot.

Posted by: Nathan Hamm at June 28, 2004 09:19 PM

Helen, I wouldn’t actually read all that much into it. The expat aid community tends to consist of certain kinds of people, and it’s a tight community that rewards sameness.

There are other large bodies of expats that tend not to mix with the aid people (usually military and business, though the latter does fraternize sometimes). It can be easy for the aid community to remember they are around, especially in the third world where there aren’t as many of them. But in Afghanistan, remember there are 20,000 US soldiers. Something tells me Bush will win the expat vote there.

Posted by: Nathan Hamm at June 28, 2004 09:45 PM

Helen,

The last thing i would like to do is to ruin your day but your comment about Kerry seems to me, if I may say so, like an overdose of wishful thinking.

Mind you there is nothing wrong with wishes as long as one remembers that they do not always become reality. One would not like one to be too disappointed.

As for the Afghan party itself why is the people we refer as “the right” always so amazed at discovering that not all expats vote for them.

Don’t tell anyone on this site Helen - sorry for whispering - but yes even in the military, some of them will vote for Kerry. Incredible yes yes I know it is difficult to believe and I imagine how awful that news might be for you but sad as it is it is nevertheless painfully true.

If you allow me I would also add that one can be in favor of fighting the Talibans and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and be against the foolish invasion of Iraq. Can you imagine that far or am I asking too much of you.

Also the expression “spineless left” seems to me gratuitiously insulting. To be on the left in Afghanistan or in Iraq right now you must need quite the opposite quality of spineless. Yes, courageous comes to mind, fearless is another, maybe temerarious if the word is not too long for you but spineless certainly not.

And to finish as I sense that you need to rest now even if they were against both invasions I will be blant, it is quite rude of you to call them hypocrits without hearing their reasons who might be, after all we don’t know do we, perfectly reasonable.

Posted by: Get Real at June 28, 2004 09:58 PM

GR, I agree with much of what you have to say. Personally, I think Bush’ll win the most votes from citizens in Afghanistan because of the soldiers. I know Kerry’ll get plenty of votes from soldiers, but Bush should still win that one.

And, the following is blatantly not true,

To be on the left in Afghanistan or in Iraq right now you must need quite the opposite quality of spineless. Yes, courageous comes to mind, fearless is another, maybe temerarious if the word is not too long for you but spineless certainly not.

I don’t know if you’d have much reason to think that unless it’s just a hunch, but, it’s wrong. In fact, if anything, the opposite is true. The aid community is largely liberal and extremely cruel to conservatives. Like I mentioned, it’s a small community, and conformity certainly helps your social life. Believe me, nobody’s getting courage awards for being a Democrat overseas.

Posted by: Nathan Hamm at June 28, 2004 10:17 PM

Nathan,

Would that apply also to the military overseas?

Is the military which is overwhelmingly on the right cruel to the liberals and are they on the right in their vast majority because their conformity helps their social life?

Posted by: Get Real at June 28, 2004 10:33 PM

Once PETA gets ahold of this you lib`s are toast…

Posted by: Rob..NC at June 28, 2004 10:43 PM

GR,
Maybe. It’s certainly possible. I never hung out with the military crowd, so I’m only talking about what I know.

However, there is a different dynamic in the military that I’m not 100% qualified to characterize. I would imagine though, that when deployed, men and women in uniform already have a bond as soldiers and their politics don’t cut that bond. There was something of that in the Peace Corps. Most of us acknowledged that you watched out for and took care of other PCVs regardless of what you felt about them. There were cliques, but we all got along and liked each other largely because of the bond forged by shared experiences.

Expats are a different bunch altogether. They usually come alone or with a spouse. They will often be one of the only expats at their place of work. I’m not saying anybody’s changing their minds to make friends, but expats can behave very oddly to please each other. Not to overgeneralize, but aid worker & any ideology is a dangerous combination. Someone whose job it is to know better than everyone else tends to take that attitude home with them. I’m sure that business expats tend to be more conservative, but conservatives seem to be drawn to the kind of work there is in the third world much less often than liberals.

Posted by: Nathan Hamm at June 28, 2004 11:01 PM

I’ll bite, I know the military vote is about 10% more favorable to Republicans, but I would like to see any data on your assertion that business expats are conservative or Republican.

If it is your anecdotal observation, then let me add mine — and I lived and worked oversees as a business “expat” half my life — they are if anything more likely to be Democrats. I lived in Rome, Berlin, Tokyo, London, Johannesburg, Mexico City, Costa Rica and Santiago among other places, inlcuding . Because networking is the heart of my business I must have joined every local expat organization, including BOTH Republican and Democratic clubs (lol). Honestly the Democratic clubs are larger and tend to have higher demographics. At heart and in the booth I am a moderate Republican, but there is no denying that. Indeed the most active anti-Bush overseas movement is spearheaded by overseas businesspeople…not tie dye aid workders.

Business expats do not tend to be more conservative at all. That is just not a valid assertion. In my experience both American independent entrepeneurs and posted Fortune 500 exacs oversears are MORE likely to be Democrats

And lets face it since you worked in international aid you know that aidworkers, business people and the deployed military is a drop in the bucket of US expats, the actual voters of which are predominatley … retirees.

here is a good article
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/may2004/nf20040511_3275_db010.htm

also:
http://www.iht.com/search/ihtsearch.php?id=523232&owner=(IHT)&date=20040610031541

There is a good case that the absentee overseas vote, including the effect of the 5 to 10% of Americans overseas who are deployed military, is going to acrue to Kerry and way more will vote than ever before. (It doesn’t make me happy but let’s not kid ourselves.)

Posted by: JStod at June 29, 2004 01:06 AM

I’ll concede to you JS. It was a total guess on my part (I can see how the “I’m sure that..” could be interpreted otherwise. There were few of them from the US in Uzbekistan (except with NewMont, and I never met them).

Business and aid volunteers are totally different breeds though. I much prefer the former, Democrat or Republican. I found them much friendlier and more grounded.

Where are the retirees, though? Are there really 3.5-4+ million of them overseas? As expats?

I don’t doubt at all that Kerry will win the expat vote. I don’t think he’ll win the “Afghanistan vote” because of the slight military bias towards Republicans.

Posted by: Nathan Hamm at June 29, 2004 01:24 AM

The estimated total number of American citizens overseas is 7 to 7.4 million. a million or so would be ineligible in most states as they have not lived in the US. for example the child of US service person and a Korean woman who remained in Korea would be a US citizen but in many states inellble to vote as they had not lived there despite being a citizen with an residence address. Some students who went abroad at 17 also would not be elible in some states.

But the great majorityare eligble. Yes and most are retirees. For example there are many naturalized people who have gone back to the country of their birth after spending their working life in the U.S. There are tens of millions of legal and illegal mexican immigrants in the US, but there are over a million Mexicans who gained US citizenship who returned to Mexico to retire. (economically this is good for everyone). mahy of them don’t know they are eligble to vote and this is going to be a growing target of both parties.

There are also places just jam packed with regular US born retirees. Costa Rica would be a case in point, I believe there are tens of thousands there alone. (many of those peopel are like florida reitrees, having two reisdentces, but many just stay in Costa Rica.)

I am just making this point because your observations about expats are interesting, and valid as a sample of what you saw, but there are bigger pictures you may not be aware of. there are probably more old guys sitting in a few town square cafes in Sicely or playing parchesi in Egypt who are qualified to vote in US elections than the expat community of all the “stans.”

All in all remember it is retirees who vote as well. I don’t have my hand on the statistics right now, but last I heard they were three times as likly to vote as your average 30 year old…peace corps or marines. Which is why a politician would rather spend an hour in a small retirement home than on MTV reaching millions.

Overall the world is changing anyway. the class of global dual citizens for example grows all the time. Many peopel will chant a mantra of “the US doesn’t allow dual citizenship.” this of course is bogus, of course we do, but people don’t realize they can vote, and in both their countries and their isnothing in US law that says otherwise. And that will be an area of great growth

When some of my grandparents came here a trip to the old country would have taken amonth’s travel and probably three or four months gross wages. access to media in their language was almost non existant. It is very different now and there is a growth in elligble dual citizen voters that is phenominal (and it isn’t just the case for the US, you have politicians from dozend of counties visiting prospective voters in Astoria on any given month).

Posted by: JStod at June 29, 2004 02:08 AM

The irony is that the party would not have been possable had BUsh not overthrown the Taliban.

Posted by: Brian at June 29, 2004 08:58 AM

“The consensus hear that Kerry is unimpressive.”

-*

Posted by: "|" at June 29, 2004 10:22 AM

“The consensus hear that Kerry is unimpressive.”

Who said that L? Can’t find it anywhere. Must be another dose of wishful thinking coming from some unsavory quarters.

Anyway all of that does not matter at all because elections are mainly lost by the incumbent and not won by the aspirer.

And lets face it Bush is doing a great job at losing it with a civil war on his hands.

Posted by: Get Real at June 29, 2004 11:03 AM

Brian,

Thank you for enlightening me. I did not know that Bush had gone to Afghanistan to fight the Taliban enemy.

I thought he had stayed at his ranch to watch the games, play golf and fall off his bicycle.

Must be that Michael Moore’s movie again playing tricks.

But now I can imagine the picture. Bush leading the battle on the ground perched on his tank like Napoleon on his horse raising the Star and Stripes.

OUR HERO

Posted by: Get Real at June 29, 2004 11:12 AM

“The irony is that the party would not have been possable had BUsh not overthrown the Taliban.”

I am voting Bush, but I don’t think anyone is going far with independents suggesting Kerry would not have done the same in Afghanistan. That is going to fly in the political center just as badly as attacking Kerry’s and McCains military records

Posted by: JStod at June 29, 2004 12:02 PM

I remember arguing the Afghan War with a friend who worked for the USAID. This is not surprising.

I just find it amusing that they found a donkey - I just wonder what the Afghan hosts were saying when they found out the Democrat mascot is an ass.

Posted by: KH at June 29, 2004 12:14 PM

Out of interest, would anyone say that US expats living in Europe, for example, become more liberal living in a more liberal environment? Anyone with experience of that? Business, aid or military?

I’s guess it would only refer to the business community since I’d guess the aid workers are already to a degree liberal and the military may not have so much exposure to a European community.

Posted by: symptomless at June 29, 2004 12:16 PM

symptomless - “…and the military may not have so much exposure to a European community.” Posted by symptomless at June 29, 2004 12:16 PM

Once again, a bad guess on your part.

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at June 29, 2004 12:37 PM

Oh yeah, Moore is certainly offering an unbiased view of the president GR. While your at it, I’ve got some bridge for sale cheap.

I’ve yet to see construction start on the pipeline Moore claimed was the true reason we went to war. Nor have gas prices declined to the point where I can run my SUV 24/7. Oh, and I’m still not rich yet, wasn’t that another reason we went to war?

Posted by: Brian at June 29, 2004 12:41 PM

Cap, have you any interest in contributing to debate or just sniping?

For some reason you’ve taken a bitter dislike to my posts.

I’ll explain what I meant. Since the military community would generally live on camp as opposed to expat business people who would live like the natives. I lived near an RAF camp which was also used by US military, they hardly ever came off the camp. I’m not saying that is what all military folk do. I wouldn’t know.

Hence the question.

Would anyone else like to discuss my query which is not meant to offend anyone?

Posted by: symptomless at June 29, 2004 12:46 PM

symptomless (1)Don’t accuse me of sniping, as I just call them as I see them. (2)There were and are many military personnel serving in Europe who are there for service tours ranging from one to two years or longer. If you think those folks are hermits, you have been misled. MOF, English is a second language that is not butchered in that theater.

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at June 29, 2004 02:29 PM

Cap, You seem to think I’m casting aspersions on the social lives of the US military. Did you actually read my post?

“MOF, English is a second language that is not butchered in that theater.”
- What the hell are you talking about?

With regard to the topic of the thread, have any posters experience a shift in attitudes, left or right on visits abroad?

Posted by: symptomless at June 29, 2004 07:47 PM

I became more conservative in Uzbekistan, but not for reasons of anyone around me. It was more of a reaction to wishy-washy relativism of my college education and a realization that capitalism is absolutely central to supporting freedom and democracy.

Posted by: Nathan Hamm at June 29, 2004 07:55 PM

NH, “I became more conservative in Uzbekistan, but not for reasons of anyone around me. “

Was it as a consequence of living in a foreign land at all? Or do you think that you would have reached the same conclusion if you had lived in the US?

Posted by: symptomless at June 29, 2004 08:15 PM

Yes, it’s specifically related to living in the third world and Uzbekistan specifically. A good chunk of American conservatives wouldn’t like my domestic policy ideas (the thought if single-payer medicine doesn’t make me go stark raving mad, for example).

I might have reached these same conclusions in the US, it’s hard to tell. I can, at the very least, say that this shift is informed by my experiences in an illiberal society where the fabulously baroque theories of the academy were out of sync with what Uzbeks need.

Posted by: Nathan Hamm at June 29, 2004 09:54 PM

Well, apart from the seperate debate on the specific views, I find it interesting that your views were formed after travelling.

There’s a widely held belief in Europe, right or wrong, that Americans don’t travel, see other countries, beliefs, cultures and form very insular viewspoints, beliefs. I know many do but the political policies under this administration seem to follow the negative stereotype.

I originally came to this site to see for myself. I’m a bit dissapointed by the lack of debate and outright hostility to opposing views. Unfortunately its reinforced many of my negative beliefs. Maybe its just this site thats extreme and is not a reflection on all Americans.

Thanks, NH for your time and any other thoughts would be appreciated.

Posted by: symptomless at June 30, 2004 02:40 AM

JStod

What makes you think Kerry would have done the same in Afghanistan? Clinton and Co. knew where the problem was before 2000 and did nothing about it. Gen. Zinni said exactly that. In response to questions on the USS. Cole bomboin hsi resopnwe was,”What should we do, Invade Afghanistan?” which tells me that action was pretty well off the t able. It took Rummy realigning the Generals to even be able to get something done. I would say going into Afghanistan was a pretty monumental feat given the alignment from the previous administration.

Chads

Posted by: chads at June 30, 2004 08:43 AM

Symptomless,
I think a website probably isn’t the best place to get a good glimps of how most Americans react to opposing views. TCP and many other blogs attract the more tenacious of us. That being said, there’s been a good deal of erosion in tolerance for dissent, and I’ve noticed it’s gotten much worse on the left than the right. I’ll leave that for another day though.

As for the European view of us, I think it’s rather unfair. Compared to us, you live in rather small countries and have numerous opportunities to run into other languages, cultures, and so forth. For the vast majority of us, that’s not within reach whether or not we want it. One could travel from the Arctic Ocean to Southern Chile and only need two languages. Also, I was thinking about this today in another way. I grew up in the Pacific Northwest but now live in the Mid-Atlantic. Culturally it’s extremely different, and my old neighborhood here was full of Russian and Hindi speakers. So, we do run into these things without leaving our shores.

And personally, I was extremely disappointed with how Europeans acted in Uzbekistan. The Uzbeks agreed with me. The only Europeans both they and I liked were the British. The French were at the bottom for them. European aid workers lived luxurious lifestyles in the capital, took no pains to hide their wealth, never bothered to learn the language, and looked down their noses at all of us in the Peace Corps. Red Cross workers that visited my city refused to speak to us when we ran into them at a cafe (except for two nice young men who were told to quit talking to us by the rest of the group as they were leaving. I found young European tourists to be extremely pretentious (and I’ll admit, American “backpackers” are too). I think a lot of this has to do with Kipling’s Two-Sided Man affliction that I fell to, but it’s lasted.

And, I must reiterate that what I was doing in Uzbekistan was not travel the way I understand the word. I lived there. I had to learn the two languages. I worked and got paid next to nothing.

Posted by: Nathan Hamm at June 30, 2004 10:20 PM