On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, John D. Giorgis wrote:
> And it also had the advantage of basically arguing that America is nothing
> special (more on that when I get to responding to his post tonight) I
> certainly don't see how by *any* standard, Marvin's post could be
> considered "singing the praises of the US."
>
> Marvin simply told you all what you wanted to hear. Gautam and I,
> however, have argued that America is essentially good, is important in its
> goodness, and in at least my case, that America is great. All of these
> points have proved anathema to several people on this list, and at no time
> has making this point passed by the list without being strongly criticized
> and rebutted.
No, no, and no. I've conceded that America has all the qualities that
will make it go down in the history books, yada yada, and I'm happy to
grant that Americans and America are basically good, as is everybody else
on the list so far as I can tell.
What keeps getting criticized is the attitude that America is privileged
to enjoy a special kind of nationalistic pride which many non-Americans,
if I'm reading them correctly, won't even grant their own countries
because it's an attitude that leaves a bad taste in their mouths. It's
not arguing against loving one's nation and culture, it's arguing against
the language of nationalism.
> Why do you keep equating non-anti-Americanism with liking individual
> Americans? I'm sure that it was quite possible to like quite a few
> Russians from the Soviet Union, just as its possible to like a great many
> Chinese today. At the same time, you can virulently disagree with
> everything that the Soviet Union and PRC stand for, and everything that
> those countries have accomplished.
And nobody, so far as I can see, has taken such an attitude towards the
United States. I haven't seen anybody call for the overthrow of the US
Gov't, except for some disgruntled Democrats :-). I don't see anybody
burning Clinton or Bush in effigy (or whatever the mailing list equivalent
is).
I do see people disagreeing with a handful of contemporary US policies,
and I see people disagreeing with the practice of praising one's nation in
nationalistic terms, i.e. "greatness" and "force for good."
If the bar for anti-Americanism is so incredibly low that saying "Bah!"
when someone puffs up and thumps his chest about how wonderful the US is,
then I, a person to gets choked up when he hears "The Star Spangled
Banner," who genuinely loves his country, who is filled with pride
whenever he votes, am "anti-American."
> Here is the central difference that I see. I believe that the United
> Kingdom, the Netherlands, the EU, etc. are essentially agents of good in
> the world. I am happy that these countries/institutions are in the world,
> and am happy for their contributions to human civilization. I recognize
> that each of these have made mistakes, but recognize that the things that
> they have done right far outweigh the things that they have done wrong.
And I've seen nobody fail to grant the US that same basic consideration.
> For whatever reason, however, there are a great many people who simply
> cannot insert "the United States" into the above paragraph, and that leaves
> me completely bamboozled.
What people can't bear to do is to fuel your smugness, John. It's a
social-dynamic-thing, not an anti-American thing.
Marvin Long
Austin, Texas
