I think we should try to be respectful not only to each others countries, but to each others life-styles, opinions and
worldviews. However, being respectful does not mean being uncritical. I noted in the Bush and Europe-thread that one poster was highly critical to Europe and EU, and called EU "The people's republic of Europa". Of course some posters found this description of Europe not only incorrect, but also insulting.
However, also note the implicit critisism of China, that makes people automatically take a comparison to China as an insult.
I would actually say that the most insulting and disrespectful comments in that thread, were made towards China. As Westerners, I think we often forget that China is not only the Culture Revolution and violations of human rights. Before the culture revolution, China had 5000 years of civilation, at long times the
far most advanced in the world both technologically and structurally. How hurting wouldn't it be for Chinese people (who haven't even elected their political leaders) to read that we take for granted that a comparison to China is an insult?
Now, I don't want to make a fuzz out of this, I just use to point out that we must both be respectful, and able to critisise different phenomenen. Hell, regardless of China's history, their current political leaders are violating human rights, which I find unacceptable. Regardless of 2000 years of discrimination and ethic cleansing of Jewish people, the state of Israel are violating human rights, and I think Sharon is a horrible person, not only for his current politics, but also for his role in slaughtering innocent civilians in Libya. Regardless of Sweden's nice human rights record, I still think the Osmo Vallo case (a man who were "mysteriously killed" when on drugs and arrested by the police) is a legal injustice, and I still think the Swedish immigration policy in inhumane.
Being critical is not the same as being disrespectful. But critical views can easily become disrespectful when people don't present factual arguments for their opinions, and generalise too broadly. That's why I think all critisism, towards a person, a country, a system or anything, should be followed by a motivation. We don't have to express ourselves like the tabloid press.
Originally posted by Kayless
As a psychology student I’ve been wondering about this myself, and I’ve found that the souces of hatred are many and varied. Often it’s learned behavior, taught by a parent and passed on. Most times the origin of this hatred is spurious, though in some cases there are somewhat understandable origins. People who lost family members in the 9/11 attacks, or the family of Daniel Pearl have very legitimate reasons to feel nothing but loathing for those responsible for killing their loved ones. It takes a great deal of willpower not to embrace hatred and clump people of a certain religion or nationality into one big group to vent hatred at (especially since such blind hatred is what inspired the 9/11 attacks in the first place).
I had no idea you're a psychology student, Kayless
I agree very much that it takes hard work and willpower not to hate, when terrible things happen to you. Hate can be called the pathological form of aggression, and there's nothing wrong with aggression as a basic emotion we humans share with many other species - but a healthy and constructive way to deal with aggression is much more difficult to achive than simply letting it out as hate.
Let's say my children get murdered by a Russian man. Should I hate all Russians? Should I hate all men? Should I even hate the murderer? And, if I hate, what should I do about it? Seek revenge? On whom? And what do I achive by seeking revenge?
Generalisation sprung from hate, is one of mankinds most unpleasant features. The idea that revenge would ease our pain and our losses, is also a highly dangerous idea. Some people also confuse revenge and justice. Whereas I very well understand how "doing the same" to your antagonist can seems just, it is often not the case. If I kill the man who murdered my children, his children will be fatherless. Is that justice? If I kill his children because I wish to inflict the same pain on him that he did to me, his innocent children are bereft of life - is that justice?
Thinking about what one really wants to achive, goes a long way when we are looking to express unbearable feelings.
@Nippy and Viv: Please never hesitate to post your opinions. I don't
Politics, science, religion - all these are topics of importance for and concerning all of mankind, not just a selected few. Not knowing anything should never be a reason not to express oneself - instead we can all learn something from each other since we are all experts and novices on different subjects.
So to avoid "Foot-in-Mouth" disease, (not be confused with Hoof-and-Mouth) I avoid topics where I know I'm out of my depth (which basically limits me to one-word stories and most bar threads). 
