From: Jonathan Davis (jonathan.davis@lineone.net)
Date: Mon Sep 15 2003 - 08:59:26 MDT
Regarding anti-American, I accept your points, but I have a simple use of
the term. As Hermit might do, I simply restate Webster 1913: "Opposed or
hostile to the government, official policies, or people of the United
States." This captures a certain mood, personality and class of acts.
Anti-Americanism takes myriad forms, but is essentially a constant.
Why can people fully understand someone being an anti-Semite but cannot
understand labelling something anti-American? If one is routinely hostile
towards the USA, I characterize that hostility as anti-American. Simple.
[Jonathan 1] "That the USA is disliked for simply being powerful is a point
I have also made elsewhere. "
Does it not strike you as being at all odd that this powerful state should
spend so much time enaged in hysterical handwringing over the fact that the
other children don't want to play with it?
[Jonathan 2] Does it really? No. It simply is making an effort to establish
allies and foes. This is both understandable and advisable.
[Kharin 1] Did Kitchener or Bismarck lose much sleep over that sort of
thing? At the risk of sounding like a spiked columnist the only thing the
existence of the term tells us is that US seems to suffer from a certain
lack of confidence.
[Jonathan 2] I disagree, the existence of the term arises to meet a very
real and often unfair hostility towards America and Americans. As you said,
the term Anti-British had wide currency during the empire precisely because
it was an empire. Perhaps the same is true of the USA?
Regards
Jonathan
--- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Sep 15 2003 - 08:59:39 MDT