–verb (used with object)
5.
to make a stereotype of.
6.
to characterize or regard as a stereotype: The actor has been stereotyped as a villain.
7.
to give a fixed form to.
I can't speak to my French family without thinking they love wine.
?
Your approach is standard, but simple and of no relation to the point I was getting at. Sterotyping is categorizing and people categorize everything around them. Birds, cars, animals, plants, people, dirt, life, death, and anything you can think of is by definition a stereotype. Connotatively, the word 'stereotype' is used in a more negative sense as demonstrated by prejudices. When you identify a thing, you compare it against other things you are aware of. It'll either be stuck with other things like it (i.e. Hawk = a type of bird) or given an entirely new category of its own.
Ehm.. of what did you base your opinion that they think democract is all about voting every two years?
By watching peoples' actions and listening to their complaints. Everything here is focused on the next election. A Democracy is a process, not a product.
The analagy I find most effective at explaining is this:
Imagine you're in a canoe on a river. To stay on the river you have to steer the boat, else the river will eventually strand you on the shore. To steer the boat you have to paddle. The government (canoe) is simply a tool, the people (person steering the canoe) have to constantly 'correct course' as the environment changes (river twists/bends). They do this by use of democracy (the oar/paddle).
In the US, people reached a nice, easy, wide, straight/calm section of 'the river' and relaxed somewhat, riding on their momentum. Eventually, the river changes course again and to an extent they could maintain course with very little effort. The river got harder, tighter, and rougher. The people are desperately trying to maintain their previous momentum without doing anything, thus the river (life) and boat (government) begin steering instead of the person (people).
Now, you can argue that the american people have never 'steered' the government and so would I.
There are no 'citeable sources' on the internet for my stance, all I have to go off of are my experiences living here, conversations with others who live here, and the actions taken by people here.
.. wat
America splits apart due to new policies that allow greater freedom? Unlike the USSR, America isn't composed out of many ethnicities. Also, Korea? What? In a stalemate with an enemy that constantly threatens you?
The ethnicities has already been covered. The US has been in Korea's position once (Civil War - North's business interests vs. the South's business interests) and will likely return to it again. It probably won't be as clearly cut as a North vs. South next time around though, it'll be more complex.
.. Uhm, nobody likes North Korea. Everyone, including China, would like an unified Korea better under the south, so no, it aren't only 'your' interests. Besides that, we don't live in the Cold War anymore.
Should we get back on Korea?
I'm aware nobody likes N. Korea and that other nations would like to see a united Korea. It wasn't my intention to state otherwise. The Cold War is over, but the 'commies' and 'socialists' labels are still widely used to influence americans (controlling the 'Land of the Brave' is easy - just scare them).
We haven't gone too far off topic. If Korea begins fighting again, the rest of the world is going to be affected directly or indirectly. The larger nations are influenced by Korea and want to significantly influence Korea. They will use the Korean War to further their own agendas.
We are discussing the Korean War's past and present consequences for other countries/people.
//\\oo//\\