Pro-Americanism
On the plane back home from Toronto, I read Howard Zinn's "You Can't be Neutral on a Moving Train". I realise that part of the reason why his empowering accounts - of struggle against racial segragation, the Vietnam war and so on - are very moving is that I feel his culture to be mine as well. I probably wouldn't feel as connected with the life of, say, a French activist.
Indeed, I watch mostly US movies and TV series, I am familiar with mostly US comics, most of the political books I read are written by US authors: I know mostly US popular culture and US politics. Generally, the United States (along with Britain) is most important cultural reference point in Finland after the national layer. Occasional claims of singling the US unfairly for criticism are properly viewed in this light. If a fish says the water she swims in is polluted, is she unfairly singling out her pond?
At times, one also hears the term "anti-Americanism", which I find particularly illustrative. People who think that Chirac belongs in jail are not labelled "anti-French"; it would be laughable to suggest that those who oppose Berlusconi as a fascist thug are "anti-Italian". Yet, the "anti-Americanism" of people criticising the US government is the subject of serious discussion in the US, and this has spilled to Europe.
Implicit in this language is the idea that the government is interchangeable with the country, so that criticising the government -even by citizens of the country- is equivalent to scorning the people and the culture (which are properly identified with the country). This is a totalitarian idea; in fact, I can't think of an example of a non-totalitarian state other than the US where such a corruption of thought would have taken root.
The endurance of the concept of "anti-Americanism" lies in its handiness in stifling dissent. There is no corresponding positive term in wide use, presumably because it is not as useful. Of course, literally speaking, when I praise Howard Zinn, a deeply American writer, or commend Star Trek, a quintessentially American TV series, I am being "pro-American".
Indeed, I watch mostly US movies and TV series, I am familiar with mostly US comics, most of the political books I read are written by US authors: I know mostly US popular culture and US politics. Generally, the United States (along with Britain) is most important cultural reference point in Finland after the national layer. Occasional claims of singling the US unfairly for criticism are properly viewed in this light. If a fish says the water she swims in is polluted, is she unfairly singling out her pond?
At times, one also hears the term "anti-Americanism", which I find particularly illustrative. People who think that Chirac belongs in jail are not labelled "anti-French"; it would be laughable to suggest that those who oppose Berlusconi as a fascist thug are "anti-Italian". Yet, the "anti-Americanism" of people criticising the US government is the subject of serious discussion in the US, and this has spilled to Europe.
Implicit in this language is the idea that the government is interchangeable with the country, so that criticising the government -even by citizens of the country- is equivalent to scorning the people and the culture (which are properly identified with the country). This is a totalitarian idea; in fact, I can't think of an example of a non-totalitarian state other than the US where such a corruption of thought would have taken root.
The endurance of the concept of "anti-Americanism" lies in its handiness in stifling dissent. There is no corresponding positive term in wide use, presumably because it is not as useful. Of course, literally speaking, when I praise Howard Zinn, a deeply American writer, or commend Star Trek, a quintessentially American TV series, I am being "pro-American".
posted by Syksy at 23:55
11 Comments:
I was told that the comments don't work, so this is a test.
Second try.
OK, seems to work. If problems persist, please send me an email. (Address from Google.)
I think you need to take into account that while "Italian" or "French" are primarily ethnic concepts, the concept of "American" is based more on shared ideology and values. You become French or Italian by being born in those countries (or by having French/Italian parents). To be American means that you subscribe to a certain set of values no matter what you background is. The US debate on American/anti-American can only be understood against this background.
But yes, I think it is an exaggeration to claim that someone who dislikes President Bush is automatically anti-American.
Thanks for the comment.
"French", "Italian" and "American" (in the usual sense of referring only to the United States) are all nationalities. One becomes a member of any of these groups in the same way: having parents who belong to them, or immigrating to the countries and applying for citizenship. France, for example, is certainly a multiethnic society, so "French" is not much of an ethnicity.
It's true that the US is more multiethnic, which means that US nationality has even less, not more, implications of shared values.
The thing that distinguishes the label "anti-American" is that it is readily applied even to Americans who are proud of their country but criticise their government. I think the concept's pretty similar to "anti-Soviet" during Soviet times and "un-German" in the 1930s-1940s.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
(I accidentally posted my comment twice. I now removed the copy.)
Of course, Istael takes this a step further. If you criticise the actions of the Israely government you are not only anti-Israel, but antisemitic. Which is even more preposterous.
If someone could define what is "american", then a flipside would be possible as well. As it is there is no such thing as "american". Or french. Or finnish. They are all fictions, rhetoric violence.
L
The difference is that Israelis opposing the policies of their own government aren't generally labeled "anti-Israeli" (as far as I know). If they're Jewish, probably not anti-semitic either. (With regard to foreigners and non-Jews, the usage is indeed similar to "anti-Americanism".)
I think national labels such as American are meaningful and even useful.
"I think national labels such as American are meaningful and even useful."
Mostly yes, if all you care is physical living or something very general, tax paying and working... but these merely indicate other physical things and generalizations like the tax rate, the climate, the language etc.
The more one emphasizes abstract (less place dependent) concepts like values and the way of thinking, the smaller is the correlation between nationality and the concept. This is hard to notice and thus easy to exploit (Bush is idiot -> He's American leader and "democratically" chosen -> Americans are idiots). It is a tool that can be used to manipulate masses - maybe that whole anti-Americanism/anti-government confusion is to help to make US more solid and to make the people to stand behind it's government in all conditions. As a mass human being is simple minded.
"I think national labels such as American are meaningful and even useful."
Mostly yes, if all you care is physical living or something very general, tax paying and working... but these merely indicate other physical things and generalizations like the tax rate, the climate, the language etc.
The more one emphasizes abstract (less place dependent) concepts like values and the way of thinking, the smaller is the correlation between nationality and the concept. This is hard to notice and thus easy to exploit (Bush is idiot -> He's American leader and "democratically" chosen -> Americans are idiots). It is a tool that can be used to manipulate masses - maybe that whole anti-Americanism/anti-government confusion is to help to make US more solid and to make the people to stand behind it's government in all conditions. As a mass human being is simple minded.
Post a Comment
<< Home