"Anti-Americanism"...what is this critter?

ehBeth

Wow. Much of this is simply not in my experience. I confess my papa would have gotten upset if I'd peed on the flag, but he was born in England and had a residual connection to certain ideas from there. But I really don't see what you describe here at all.

Let me ask you though...how many times in your life have you heard or seen written "un-Canadian" in political discourse?

fbaezer

Thank you for the detail!

So, if I get this right, there are perhaps two 'classes' of usage; the first being an ethnic use (such as perhaps one African American indicting another for going 'whitey'), and some small use in political discourse. Can you give a reading on why the usage backfires in the politcal sphere?

Not ethnic, cultural.
To give your back to the nation's cultural heritage.
To go for everything foreign: watching American and French films, but not Mexican movies; celebrating Halloween and not Day of the Dead.

All 3 examples backfired.
The result of the 1968 repression was cultural at first. The assasins wants us to be "true to our roots", then we'll embrace rock'n'roll, American football and laugh at "Mexican family values". It also was a landmark for a new level of struggle for a European or American type democracy.
The malinchista cries of the left in the early 80s almost swiped it away from competition.
The PRI anti-Fox strategy was so bad, that -even with their well oiled political apparatus- they lost the Presidency for the first time in 71 years. (Of course, their anti-Spanish stance was only one of many campaign blunders)

Just discovered this very interesting thread. I thoroughly enjoyed Setanta's and Asherman's posts, and even found a couple of Blatham's to be tolerable as well (a new high for me).

Not much that is significant that hasn't already been said well. In an attempt to focus on what may be both potentially relevant and new to the thread ------ The United States was created in what was perhaps the defining revolutionary movement of the Enlightenment. (The French version which followed it quickly degenerated to the Terror and then to Napoleon. The real French revolution was a bourgeoisie movement after the Franco Prussian War.) I believe this event endowed the USA with a unique self-consciousness that is behind much of what perplexes Blatham. This self-consciousness was reborn in the hearts of successive waves of immigrants, almost all of whom were fleeing oppression and economic disadvantage in places from Ukraine to Ireland and more recently from China, Korea, Vietnam, Mexico, Central America and others. Each rebirth modified it somewhat but, more importantly each reinvigorated it in the experience of another generation of Americans. We are a nation of people who fled here to escape something somewhere else and each wave has, in its own way embraced the original Enlightenment revolutionary state of mind.

Contrast this with the founding experience of Canada and you have your explanation. No revolution, instead a rather steady evolution from empire to Dominion to independence. Canada is, however, left with visible after effects of some of its own defining birth experiences, most notably including the cultural and linguistic gulf between Francophones and the Anglo Saxon population. Certainly both have seen a wave of quite varied immigration in the years since WWII, but that is a relatively recent phenomenon.

Blatham:

When I go to Ireland to visit my kin, I see a lot of anti-Irish government, politics, etc.

However, the Irish (in Ireland) display a great dislike for America. They actually have a love/hate relationship with us.

I've also run into people (English) who despise the British government and all it stands for.

Misti

Yes, all countries will have that element within which speaks against those who govern. But that is sort of the opposite direction. I'm speaking of notions within the populace itself which 'police' membership, values, and loyalty and acceptable ideas about the state through phrases/notions such as 'un-American'.

george

I don't think that immigration explains this, as immigration to Canada is not significantly dissimilar to that of the US except in total numbers. There is a difference however in how the two receiving countries directed the arrivals in that Canada encouraged locales where particular groups would settle, thus less of the melting pot mixing.

The other point you make re revolution vs paternal administration within the Empire does seem a relevant difference. But as Setanta suggested earlier, early independence era history doesn't reveal the sort of notions and speech I refer to.

blatham - sharp comments about others being uncanadian or anti-canadian are not unknown here. I'm trying to decide whether i'd say not uncommon as well.

i really don't think anti-"name your country"ism is specific to the u.s. We (canajuns) hear a lot about it (anti-americanism), because of where we sit next to the elephant - and our constant exposure to u.s. media (unless you go the route i have gone and turn it off whenever possible).

Look at the experience in the low countries in Europe, or Spain ...

Yes, you are right, Gushenko was GRU, i had forgotten that. However, he tried to contact the Mounties, not any American attaché, which would have attracted attention--he asked his neighbors to contact the Police, being certain that his telephone was tapped. When some evil-looking types showed up, but not the police, the neighbors got irate, and one of them called the Mounties. Gushenko's attempts to defect were an hilarious series of mishaps, except that i'm sure he and his wife were in a state of terror at that point, and the situation was not terribly hilarious for them.

Inasmuch as my use of the "wolf at the door" metaphor was with regard to the danger of "un-American" vigilantees, i would repeat that the wolf is far from door--it is ludicrous to assert that the wolf is in the salon, unless you have information on lynch mobs or other undeniable signs that rigid adherence to a specified set of "patriotic" behaviors and attitudes is being enforced. I'm callin' ya, lay yer cards on the table . . .

Again, our experiences are disparate. I have never, so far as I can recall, ever heard either unCanadian or antiCanadian used in this manner. Google gives 81 hits for anti-Canadianism (only two of which weren't speaking of sentiment originating in the US...and one of these instances was from a religious figure arguing against gays and the second was from David Frum, who of course, was contributing writer to Bush's axis of evil speech) vs over 60,000 for anti-Americanism (though most would relate to sentiments from outside); and google gives 2000 hits for un-Canadian but nearly 99,000 for un-American.

These sorts of things are never on/off or black and white, but such discrepancy as this has significance.

Hey Boss, i really do think yer dealin' with the hoary old tempest in a teapot here.




I particularly enjoyed ehBeth's casual use of PET's metaphor of the US as the sleeping elephant next to which Canada lives it's life, quietly. You have pointed out yourself that the great majority of the Canadian population lives in very close proximity to the US. Given the economic and military power of the US, as well as the antipathy which the US attracts in other parts of the world, it just makes sense that Canadians would react strongly to anything which lead them to believe there would be a return of "McCarthyism," or an new House Un-American Activities Committee. I may be wrong on this, but i doubt that that will ever happen our lifetimes. Too many people remain in this country who remember that era (our elementary school library was filled with "anti-Red" books, and we had posters up in the school to admonish us that the big bad Red boogey man was gonna get us if we weren't 100%, say the Pledge of Allegiance every day, God-fearing American boys and girls). Far too much of the population today is sceptical of the motives of politicians in and out of office, and of the agendas of demagogues for me to believe that such witch hunts will resurface. If this happens again, it would, in my opinion, happen in the distant future, when Tailgunner Joe and Tricky Dick are long forgotten.

Nonsense--unless you can relate your 2000 hits v. 99000 hits to a set of statistics which show that this is not a product of the larger population of the US, as well as the concentration of internet activities within the US, you have really proven nothing. It is not even suggestive evidence, since google trolls for the "most popular" pages, i.e., pages which have already had a significant number of hits. All it would take is for the word to go around, the link to be posted and e-mailed, and a crackpot page extolling "patriotic" virtues, and decrying "un-American" behavior and attitudes would be properly positioned to be "crawled" by google. Supposing that some such page also existed in Canada, the number of likely hits would be about 1/10th that which could be expected for a page on a US site, based soley on population, without even considering the disparity between the number of sites and posted pages in the US as opposed to Canada. Really, BLatham, this is really below your usual standard of evidence.

Setanta

For goodness sakes. I've not said what you suggest in any post here even if you think it has been somehow implied. How proximate the 'wolf' is is probably similarly estimated by you and I. Exactly what costume he is wearing is, I think, the disparity.

But frankly, I'm just getting ******* depressed with present political discussions regarding America, her place in the world, and factors to account why she's there, and why so many sign on to the idea that being world-boss is a fine thing, a right thing, a necessary thing. The avenue of investigation I was trying here has precedent in historical analysis by folks like Hofstadter...the present situation would not surprise him at all, though it would surely worry him.

All cultures have myths, stories which define themselves in particular ways - Canada does, Belgium does, America does. The consequences of Canada's or Belgium's myths are not terribly important presently, but that's not so regarding America. Ossie Osbourne got arrested one time for pissing on the Alamo. How many Americans would have been willing to shoot him for the act? What could possibly be comparable here? Celine Dion pissing on a Hudson Bay trading post. We wouldn't care a pense, at least no one I know would.

But presently, even with you Setanta, I can't broach a look into why that might be so without your apparent assumption that I'm up to no good. It's too depressing by half. So, I'll end off the thread and my time in politics too.

Setanta - thank you for the quote. Will stand by my account concerning the GRU defector as originally posted. Agree with you that handling would have delighted Inspector Clouseau, and that Canadians were happy to see the last of all involved.

As to the wolf: that was a joke, certainly understood by our host Blatham, but unrelated to the sense in which you were using the same term. Too esoteric, too long to explain; kindly disregard <G>

BLatham, i was making my wolf comment to HofT, not you . . . and why are you threatening literary suicide, did you expect us all to come here and nod our heads, "Yup, that's us, all over." Not bloody likely. Yeah, you hit a "hot button" topic, because this is something about which we all need to be vigilant. My contention is that your point is unproven, and likely unprovable. I also think you are either being careless, or side-stepping a great deal. Ozzie pissing on the Alamo (an hilarious picture, an idiot peeing on an idiotic symbol), is not to be equated with pissing on a Hudson's Bay Post--but suppose someone of equal noteriety trotted on down to the Victory Square Cenotaph in Vancouver and commenced micturating on it. If there were a policeman/woman present, are you suggesting the act would be ignored? I doubt it. We need apples to apples here, which was the meat of my criticism of your comment about the number of hits you got.

My attitude toward you hasn't been hostile, and i do regret if you feel that it was. But you should take my word for it that the most of Americans i know would not take kindly to any attempt to enforce a rigid definition of patriotism in our communities. Osama down at the bank has never been harrassed, and the droves of Mexican- and Latin-Americans who work in this little town have gone unmolested. I've had crackpots give me grief because i have a Canadian flag hanging from my rear view, but they were few (2 or 3) and others present have given me that "damned right" nod, or actually spoken to support me when i turn on the idjit trying to pick a fight. I recognize the significance of this for Canadians, especially, and i really don't think you have to worry about it. I also have wanted to get across to you that this is not a big issue here, and not likely to become one.

Come back, Blatham! The missing link was just this millisecond posted on subscribers only link by The Economist magazine from its edition appearing tomorrow:

"India expelled two Pakistani diplomats and two other officials for "incompatible activities", believed to be spying."

"Incompatible activities" were left undefined in the Indian communique - phrased in impeccable colonial English, since incompatibility with *what* was left undefined <G>

Blatham,

Have you considered the possibility that this could be a personal problem of your own making? It appears to me that you are a principal author and stimulator of threads whose subject matter involved the supposed dominance of the United States. This may be your obsession, not ours.

I do not observe that this "dominance" is a topic that occupies much of the attention of most Americans. Indeed here it often appears this is a subject that occupies far more of the attention of our friends and allies than of our own. Perhaps that is merely a natural outcome of the situation. Given the turmoil that surrounds almost any decision of our government that has inplications for our friends and neighbors, that "dominance" does not appear to be worth much. One would hope to at least get some quiet obedience our of it - if it was authentic. We don't see much of that.

Perhaps the real problem is the insecurity of some Canadian observers. I have noticed that, despite numerous, cooperative efforts on the part of Setanta, Asherman and several others, no one has been able to come up with a commentary or explanation that has entirely satisfied you. Why??

Have been reading with interest.

And thought of this thread a few minutes ago, while watching BBC. A reporter from the World Economic meeting said something happened, which in the seven years of his covering this group, had never happened before.

"Anti-Americanism" he said. Someone diverted from the topic and made a very negative statement about America re: the possible war. He recieved a one minute ovation. He said America is being isolated.

Will look for a link, if it is in print.

Anti-Americanism
More is going on, when America's flags are burned <anti american protests figuratively> then a protest against a superpower.

America's place in the world continues to evolve. Founded on ideology,
interpretations of what America is, are endless.

There are as many variables as there are people.

In a political sense - debates, name calling, anti this and anti that, wars,
defamation, etc. will be decided by how each nation defines themselves.

Blatham: if your still around, i guess i may have misunderstood the original topic question, i had thought this was about internal USA attitutes not international ones. sorry for my response

Dys

It was directed towards internal attitudes. I thought it the only way, here on a forum such as this, where we might get some perspective on certain uniquenesses of America - uniquenesses which much of the rest of the world are not terribly comfortable with as the US government and a whole mess of its population grow a big hardon for war and God-sanctified custodianship of all the peoples of Creation.

But you win some and you lose some. And attempting to discuss such issues is an activity I am retiring from. But I do leave you a parting gift....

from Timothy Garton Ash in the New York Review of Books..."Anti-Europeanism in America" http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16059