Juanson World

Christian,

Outstanding column. All over Latin America I've seen the same nasty stuff you've described. It's almost like a bigotry of sorts - yet it is an acceptable, even cool, bigotry for so many.

India has amazed me because I have not encountered any anti-Americanism here. What has shocked me is that even the foreign visitors have not acted like the people you've described. I'm not sure why - perhaps it's because India attracts a different western traveler than Latin America?
 

Christian,

That's unfortunate that you ran into people who espoused that sort of hatred toward Americans, and even self hatred. Since these people seem to be the ones thinking unreasonably, what do you propose that we can do to change their opinion?

As to what Vikrum said, I have traveled very little outside of the United States, but have had some experience dealing with workers from India, China and Russia through Internet companies with which I have been involved, and these people are thirsty for opportunity. Those with whom we have hired are willing to work extremely long days and provide excellent results all in order to reap financial benefits which might not be available through working for companies based in their own country.

And this weekend I had some work done in my apartment by several workers who told me that they had immigrated from Mexico. I enjoyed speaking with them (using my very broken Spanish) and was quite impressed by their work ethic---they worked in excess of 12 hours on both Saturday and Sunday. Apparently some people do appreciate the opportunity that America has to offer. I guess the reason these instances came to mind is because I recently read that France is doing everything it can to maintain its 35 hour work week. Kinda makes you wonder...
 

Even though I am Bolivian-American, I do get defensive whenever someone from another country looks down on the U.S. and cannot separate U.S. policy from the good things that the U.S. stands for.

It is almost as if I see them as hypocritical, as in insinuating that their particular country holds no faults of their own.

I was in Argentina when the war against Iraq broke out. That weekend at various football matches, many players emerged from the dressing room wearing Anti-War t-shirts and I saw many "Aguanta Saddam" signs in the stands.

Why couldn't we see players from the major football teams come out with shirts with Anti-Racism slogans on them? That is an issue that Argentines can actually change in their own country that would respect humans from neighboring countries.
 

I was born in Bolivia; but I proudly claim that I'm an "American." I've had many similar encounters, and my best response is to try to be civil, but show them their own myopic prejudice. Would they hate all Russians because of Stalin? Or all Germans because of Hitler. And, heck, I voted for Bush. So don't htink I'm comparing him to those two.

But the anti-Americanism I found is mostly faux. They still love our movies, music, and TV. They still want to drink Coke, wear Levi's, and visit Disney World. But it is sadly amusing (or is it amusingly sad?) to see so many Americans, especially, enjoy the luxuries of trustafarian life in a third world country and pretend that a Lonely Planet backpack trip through the "beautiful rubish" gives them a PhD in political solidarity. Or something.
 

well done, you young americans. you've ably proved yourself to be right, as always. let's see:

1. someone who is ashamed her country went to war is, of course, an ignorant liberal

2. a liberal must always be shortsighted

3. it's ok to call someone a myopic blonde if she has a different point of view

4. and, of course, "mutiny is fomenting" and we must quell it! after all, what right does the world have to disagree to what we bright young invincible americans say? especially, if the world is full of "bigotry" and cannot understand that we are always right.

we can try and explain, but if they don't get it, we should just ask them to "knock yourself out."

and then we wonder, why do people think like this? why do people call us arrogant? and incapable of considering (forget understanding) any perspective but our own? why, we wonder.
 

An anonymous tip for Juanson World readers (Jean Paul, Neela, and others):

Don't get into drawn out discussions with Reed. He will go on and on and on and on promoting his right wing views and will not accept your point of view.

If you don't believe me, look at his recent debate with D'hernan on Juanson's blog:

http://www.blogger.com/comment
.g?blogID=12411930&postID=
111712454359169306

It goes on and on (31 posts and counting). People let's not have a neverending debate with this guy.
 

thanks, anonymous. this is helpful.
 

Tau,

"1. someone who is ashamed her country went to war is, of course, an ignorant liberal"

This person was not simply ashamed her country went to war. She was disavowing herself from being American without concept of how American she really was.

"2. a liberal must always be shortsighted"

You are putting words in my mouth. I am a liberal myself, as Reed pointed out. I am very wary of those on the extremes of the political spectrum. Both liberals and conservatives (and I use these terms in a general, ideological sense, not in reference to any country's political parties) can run the risk of being shortsighted if they cannot acknowledge the validity of other points of view.

"3. it's ok to call someone a myopic blonde if she has a different point of view"

I described both women I met as myopic because a) they did not hesitate in telling me, an American, that they hated Americans (not just the US) and b) when I tried to engage them (overlooking their bigotry) they could not, in a sensible manner, see me as a person and not a representative of my country's foreign policy (of which, if you read this blog, I am a fairly vehement critic). But I will defend the opportunities and values of America to anyone.

"4. and, of course, "mutiny is fomenting" and we must quell it! after all, what right does the world have to disagree to what we bright young invincible americans say? especially, if the world is full of "bigotry" and cannot understand that we are always right."

Tau, I am unsure where you have gotten the impression that I think that everything I say is "right." It goes without saying that what I write here is my opinion, and I am sincerely flattered that you have taken the time to read and comment.

As someone who considers themselves one of the luckiest people in the world (having grown up in the States and received a quality education, among myriad other advantages I have) I feel a sense of responsibility, and the "power" that the US has could be used in several productive ways. I do not imply that the world should listen to what Americans have to say because we are always right. Rather, I challenge my generation of Americans to use their advantages in productive ways. Therefore, what I meant by my "ship" analogy (which I admit, sounds haughty) was that it would appear that my generation is facing a world that has developed vitriolic anti-American sentiment. Your condescending tone would indicate that you share this sentiment.

Neela and Jean Paul,

I don't think that it is fair to say that Reed is arguing that those who are against the war are unreasonable. He was referring to the manner in which I described being treated, which I think was unreasonable. Do you consider it reasonable, knowing someone's nationality, to tell them without a moment's hesitation, that they hate that country and their citizens?

Finally, anonymous, you warn readers that Reed "will go on and on and on and on promoting his right wing views and will not accept your point of view." Well, it takes two to tango. You could just as easily accuse D'hernan of the same.

I enjoyed reading the back and forth, which was more civil than most "right-wing/left-wing" debates. It's the beauty of the blogosphere.
 

I've been reading and re-reading this thread and the original excellent post for 30 min. I have much to say, so rather than write too much, let me list my comments in brief form. Hopefully some of you will engage these points and we can get into more specifics.

Full disclosure -- I accompanied Juanson on the aforementioned trip.

another N.B. -- as a liberal, I frequently disagree with Reed on this blog, but I have always found his opinions to be nuanced and well thought out. so I disagree with any blanket characterization of his views as one-sided or purely right-wing (despite how frustrating it can be to argue with a worthy adversary)

1) These individuals to whom Juanson refers were indeed narrow-minded. I spoke to two of them myself and I fully endorse Juanson's characterization (which Reed was simply citing in his post). The sad thing is that they seem to be very well-educated and well-informed, but that they interpret all information through a rather rigid filter (imagine a worldview roughly equivalent to an anti-American Fox News).

What is interesting to me is how many people across the world continue to view foreigners through the single lens of national identity while at the same time drawing distinctions among their fellow citizens in their home countries. And I think Juanson was trying to convey his frustration with his interlocuters' inability or unwillingness to accept those differences among Americans. In that respect they were narrow-minded, not in their particular opinions per se, but more in terms of their approach to the discussion.

2)I see what Reed is saying about the dangers of hyperbole in comparing Bush to Hitler and Stalin, but I think Neela's comparison is very important. The real problem is that today many people's view of America is limited to their negative opinion of Bush regime and current U.S. foreign policy. The difference is that in America, dissent and dialogue are essential to sustain our democratic form of government, whereas Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia were totalitarian societies that tried to shut out or destroy any dissent. So my argument to someone skeptical of America would be to say that the right to disagree is what America is all about!

But Neela has hit upon something deeper in looking for historical references, because I believe our generation is indeed at a crossroads much like that of the World War II generation. Just as people's perception of America then was defined by American GIs liberating concentration camps in Europe, today there is a danger that it will be defined by a more negative image of an unwelcome occupation in the Middle East.

I think we need something like a Marshall Plan for the Middle East which would include much more economic aid and strategic public diplomacy. After World War II, America benefited from the advance of democracy as new democratic governments looked to the United States for guidance and more importantly, as people in those societies envied the American way of life. That is why I am concerned that the Bush Administration is being so adamant in its rhetoric about the "march of democracy", because a) people in changing societies in the Middle East and elsewhere today do not necessarily equate greater political freedom with goodwill towards the United States and b) critics of the United States now associate the universal value of "democracy" with current U.S. foreign policy. Both of these factors could have dangerous effects over time if the concept of democracy becomes damaged goods.

3) Self-loathing Americans are the biggest hypocrites. Any American citizen who renounces her citizenship or denigrates the privilege she had to live here INSULTS the thousands of heroes who sacrificed their lives so that we may enjoy freedom and our way of life today. Furthermore, she insults the millions of people who wish to become American citizens (including 11 million within our borders today). Whether the would-be citizen is a hard-working Mexican carpenter, or a Chinese political dissident, it is highly probable that person has risked far more for the chance to become a citizen than the self-loathing hypocrite who has reaped the benefits of living in the most fortunate country in the world.

As it pertains to Juanson's original post, the irony of this misguided self-loathing is that many many Costa Ricans would like nothing more than to live in the United States. While gringo tourists traipse about the Costa Rican paradise trying to "get away from it all", they are spending in one week what some Costa Ricans hope to earn in one year. For Americans, the ability to travel to another country is a privilege
derived from the circumstances of our success. For most Costa Ricans (or any other aspiring immigrants), the hope of one day coming to America is an economic (and sometimes political)imperative. Next time they are waxing poetic about their solidarity with the rest of the world, those self-loathing Americans who considers themselves only to be "citizens of the world" might want to consider what their fellow global citizens find so compelling about the United States.

(Gringo/Gringa Europeans or Canadians who hate America are also hypocrites, but that is another discussion best left for later...)


In conclusion, like Reed, I wonder what we can do to change negative stereotypes about the United States. I believe the real challenge for Americans of my generation is to capture the right balance between leadership and humility, without leaning too far toward arrogance or self-doubt.
 

juan,

i don't know what your definition of a liberal is, and i am sure you are one too.

however, when you say that America is facing 'indoctrinated' animosity, and that America has a moral duty to steady a shaky world, it makes me uncomfortable. why?

a. indoctrination means "to imbue with a partisan or ideological point of view." what you are suggesting is that anyone opposing the apparent American policy cannot think on his/her own, is incapable of forming his/her own opinions, but has been brainwashed. this itself is a huge assumption. you are precluding the possibility of people naturally getting angered with Americans invading a country with an excuse that is turning out to be extremely difficult to defend.

you might ask, why look at only iraq? it is top of mind, that's all. what else do you hear about these days? with so many GRPs (to use an advertising term) and such a wide reach of coverage of an invasion that even allies opposed, this should have been expected.

b. how many people outside America want to have America as their ship's captain? you think that it is obvious, but for once, think about it from someone else's perspective. as for me, i would like to see America steering the world, but perhaps as a more fair, transparent, and perhaps, more intelligent (sorry, Bush projection again) captain. then again, there are people who think America should mind its own business.

i was not trying to put words in your mouth. as for my 'condescending tone,' it does not stem from a vitriolic anti-american sentiment. in fact, i consider myself to be pro-American. i was just reacting to the tone of your post and a couple of following comments - i may be wrong, it does seem like you find the anti-American sentiment inexplicable, and that you respond to it in a rather bizarre fashion (quell the mutiny, knock yourself out, etc.), instead of trying to understand what's causing this wave. the wave seems to be strong enough to have caused some americans to renounce their allegiance to their own country, as you yourself have uncomfortably experienced. perhaps, it warrants a better response.

sturch, thanks for your post. you said, "The difference is that in America, dissent and dialogue are essential to sustain our democratic form of government, whereas Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia were totalitarian societies that tried to shut out or destroy any dissent." i agree. however, the way this administration brushed aside any dissent to the invasion (from EU allies, UN, anyone) leaves a different image in the mind of non-Americans, especially those that do not watch fox news. you have rightly pointed out that the solution to this, if Americans desire one, may lie in a new strategy.