The United States has given plenty - much that is good and beneficial, and some that is arguably counter-productive to a strong and harmonious society.

It is hard to argue against the individual freedoms that Americans hold so dear. Yet it is those very 'freedoms' that are causing the US such heartache, and delegitimising it in the eyes of the rest of the world.

Of course, the US is free to do whatever it wishes to itself. But because the US is such a dominant influence around the world, it is hardly surprising that the world observes US society - probably much more intently than the US observes others.

Individual freedom in the US has been adopted as an almost 'absolute' right. Yet it must be contextualised to have real meaning and usefulness. Although people are pretty much free to do what they like within the law, those very laws define and contextualise the extent and dimension of such freedom. You can't drive on the wrong side of the road, for example, because it is dangerous and disrupts social harmony.

The right to say pretty much anything you like under the freedom of speech is wonderful in principle but hurts those people and groups who are the target of frivolous comment and accusation and who are often powerless to protect themselves or their reputations.

Where the law and freedom of speech collide, the American legal system commonly rules in favour of freedom of speech as the higher principle.

Under the cloak of freedom of speech, many lies are presented as facts; peoples' mind are poisoned with unsubstantiated accusations or statements; vested interested are championed and the minds of the weak and unthinking are twisted and manipulated.

Maybe that's the price the US society is prepared to pay for its 'freedom of speech' - but those minds are also the minds that vote. And just look at the mess the US is in at the moment. Some of it, caused or at least inflamed by a governments elected by myopic, uneducated, doctrinaire and naïve people who have been seriously manipulated by conniving  and ruthless power-hungry individuals and groups who are commonly promoting a cause that seriously disadvantages or discriminates against a range of people.

People living in a society cannot realistically expect to be able to insult and threaten others within that society, in the name of free speech, and still expect that society to remain harmonious. If you are free to say anything you want, then at least make people accountable for the consequences of causing harm used by that freedom of speech.

Again, maybe this disharmony is the price one pays for free speech.

On another matter, the right to bear arms, appears to the rest of the world, to be insane.

Modern man is more a social being than he is a protector of life, possessions and land. In other words, most of us are more involved with other people in our normal lives than we are in protecting our livestock, farms and selves from real and imminent threats. We live as social beings in a social context, and as such, the definition and application of 'bearing arms' needs to be interpreted in that context.

The right to bear arms in a social context is both the threat and the counter to the threat at the same time. This understandably generates tension which is visible in many US cities today. Just look at the spate of mass shootings.

My last reflection at this time, is about the Western, Capitalist and individualistic society in the US - one which is being increasingly adopted by others.

As I understand the US culture, it is all about individualism and the ability of maximising oneself - as an individual, as a wealth accumulator, as an experiencer. Embedded in that context is the implied ethos that "I am striving to be the winner," and for me to achieve that, "you need to be the loser."

This is having catastrophic impacts on American society and it's future. Firstly, those with means are most commonly the winners. Those with means have access to the law. Those with means have the connections and relationships to ensure victory. These factors reinforce the old adage, that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The US has one of the largest discrepancies between rich and poor in the world. These discrepancies are manifest in education, housing, access to medical services, career opportunity, retirement sufficiency, and so on.

The inevitability is that the gap between rich and poor will worsen over time rather than improve. And the problem is that the poor have guns by virtue of their constitutional rights. Therefore the future looks quite bleak for American society. Desperate people will resort to desperate measures to protect and feed their families.

A modern enlightened society should be all about 'Optimisation' rather than 'Maximisation'. When you optimise, everyone gets the best outcome possible for all. If everyone maximises, then you get a lot of losers.

And before someone accuses me of being a Socialist or Communist, (and I am a confirmed Capitalist), government has the responsibility of looking after all its people. It does that by allowing and encouraging capitalism and entrepreneurialism, but also by having a tax system that contributes enough to provide necessary services to lift all people above poverty and enable them to live in personal dignity. Those who wish to work hard, can and are encouraged. Those who can't work, need to be protected from indignity and poverty.

The American system is clearly not doing this and thus is creating the dialogue for its own impending social troubles.