I have come to the conclusion that, no, my opinion on Bush is based solely on his actions and choices in the public view, and not what anyone… including europeans… think of him.
My friends say that he’s got a heck of a personality in person, and can really make you like him. But that really doesn’t change his selection of Ashcroft… and so on, and so on. I can say that the accidentally filmed Egyptian TV of him did improve my opinion of him a little bit, and confirmed my opinion that the job of President molds men, and raises them to a standard.
But no, I’d have to disagree a hundred percent on actually caring what Euros think about him. I certainly care how he behaves with regards to Europe, but since when should government be formed by others dislikes and likes?
Exactly. US media offers diverse POVs. It includes Fox News and much of talk radio on the right, as well as the New York Times, CNN, ABC, et. al. on the left.
My impression is that other countries’ media offer less coverage of US affairs from a right-wing POV than we get here. Foreign newspapers pick up stories from the New York Times and the Washington Post, but not from Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.
Well, there is quite a big difference; The domestic and foreign policies of Nigeria mean dick-all to everyone outside Nigeria’s immediate sphere of influence (which can’t be a big sphere).
Also, I think you contradicted yourself - you’ll judge him on ‘what he has done for the world’, but ‘The world’s opinion of Bush means crap to me.’ Is that because you know best, and non-US people don’t?
The responsibility behind the vote of an American citizen is that much greater than that of other countries voters, as you are voting for such a vastly more powerful entity. Hene my interest in the general attitude US dopers have to foreign opinion.
Oh, and I think you’d be astonished at how disliked Bush is abroad, even by people who broadly agree with his foreign policy. I think he unfortunately epitomises every negative stereotype (apart from obesity) that non-Americans have about America.
Despite the daily bombardment of news from the Middle East, Central Asia, and other world trouble spots, roughly 85 percent of young Americans could not find Afghanistan, Iraq, or Israel on a map, according to a new study.
Americans ages 18 to 24 came in next to last among nine countries in the National Geographic-Roper 2002 Global Geographic Literacy Survey, which quizzed more than 3,000 young adults in Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Sweden, and the United States. Top scorers were young adults in Sweden, Germany, and Italy."
Obviously this isn’t really all that indicative, but I seem to recall similar studies in the past finding roughly the same thing. Namely, the average US citizen knows less about the world than the average non-US citizen (at least, than the average non-US citizens from countries chosen in the study). Anyone know of any other studies off-hand?
I think the largely hostile attitude towards Bush from the rest of the world is a big warning sign, and I think the “typical” American’s antipathy/ignorance of that hostility is a sign of the sorry state of this nation today. The United States is not a small nation that can easily live in isolation from the rest of the world; instead, as a superpower, our fate is closely tied to the rest of the world’s, and we ignore it at our peril. Heck, Bush’s current Israel/Palestinian policy strikes me as scrambling to make up for lost time, given how his policy for the first few years in office was to largely ignore 'em.
Thank you for perpetuating the “ugly American” stereotype. :rolleyes:
Probably on repeated studies and polls of Americans about international affairs. How many U.S. citizens can name the Prime Minister of Canada, for instance? Or find Iran, Libya, and Denmark on a map?
Heck, the recent war with Iraq provided a bumper-crop of examples of American ignorance towards the rest of the world, such as “Iraq was responsible for the 9/11 attacks,” “Islamic fundamentalists hate us because of our freedoms,” “Iraq has violated more UN resolutions than any other nation,” and “France opposes the war because they import most of their oil from Iraq.” IMO, if more Americans knew more about the rest of the world, they wouldn’t believe the bullstuff tossed out by the Bush II Administration so easily – and the fact that they do is a(nother) sign of that ignorance of international affairs.
Just to further illustrate the difference, he’s losing support from his own party here for that same thing.
I’m ambivalent about the guy and world opinion is not a factor at all. Like Jackmanii said of the cowboy thing, the Bush=Hitler signs I was looking at during the antiwar protests were interesting…illustrative of “world opinion”, yet I dismiss those people here as completely apeshit and bitch when they block traffic. Uh-oh. Then, roughly at the same time I saw a Frenchwoman deem one Paris protest a ‘spontaneous convergence of insanities’ and was immensely relieved. No, the rest of the world is not all like-minded. Neither are we. Shocking, isn’t it.
Well, yojimbo, that sure was a scientific sampling! I’m convinced. :rolleyes:
Perhaps there are valid polls to show that vast majorities in every nation loathe Bush. If one is making the claim, one must produce the evidence.
The impression given in the OP is that a significant number of Americans support Bush to spite foreigners. Perhaps the SDMB and the output of certain columnists creates the impression that there is enormous reaction in the U.S. to what outsiders think, but from my perspective that’s not the case. There’s enough of magnitude going on in this country so that Americans don’t feel the need to display an obsessive interest in the blatherings of the foreign press.
And I’ll have to disagree with jshore about the level of understanding of American affairs abroad. There are certainly quite a few Americans who are ignorant of politics and news of importance, but the level of ignorance abroad about America often strikes me as truly staggering.
And many Americans have a good idea of the level of self-interest, hypocrisy and xenophobia that motivates much anti-Administration/American opinion abroad.
One related point is that people tend to pull together behind even a less-than-ideal leader when they perceive a direct threat to their security (i.e. the terrorist threat). It isn’t what the Guardian says that impresses Americans, it’s what al-Queda would like to do to the average American.
As an American, I would like to formally apologize to the entire world for the ignorance and arrogance of some of my leaders and a few of my fellow citizens (zuma, december, don’t make me come back there).
I don’t know if you can truly comprehend what is like living in a society where public opinion is so openly and disgustingly twisted on a daily basis, but take it from me, it isn’t easy.
Many people over here simply do not have the cognitive tools necessary to see their own country from another perspective. Any information they do have on how the rest of the world works is fed through a truly disturbing reality filter that leaves one unable to form an intelligent opinion even if one does have the mental capacity to process said information.
Remember, we allow almost no outside viewpoints to enter the minds of the masses without significant “sound byting” to render them easily digestible and completely harmless.
Yet, there is hope. I, personally, have met very few Americans who retain a high opinion of Bush. Most are fully aware and vehemently opposed to his reckless disregard of international law and basic civil rights.
Please be patient, with luck, we will rid ourselves of these parasites soon and start the long and difficult task of rebuilding a modicum of international trust and goodwill.
Back to the OP – I don’t think it’s so much that he’s got more “cachet”. Remember this: a slight majority of the voters who bothered to show up for the election actually cast ballots against him. Add to that the many of us who are convinced he is not the sharpest pencil in the box (more like a reasonably fresh crayon), but recognize that he’s what we have to work with for the duration (this is not a parliamentary state, we CAN’T “no-confidence” the government every time they futz up).
It’s just that, what the heck would we gain? As has been mentioned elsewhere, there are many other ways in which Dubs affects American lives on many more issues.
I dare say “the world’s antipathy to Bush” actually DOES create discomfort in many more Americans than is apparent. However, it should surprise nobody if expressions of disbelief at how America may ignore “world opinion”, and proclamations of how there is just absolutely not one human being beyond our shores who even remotely supports George except for Tony Blair, will elicit a defensive or dismissive reaction. NOBODY likes being condescended to, even if they know they are wrong. Faced with that, even many Bush opponents will not defend him, but will not join the chorus of scorn due to the undertones of “ignorant Americans” that seem to resonate behind many of the expressions. Bush supporters OTOH will loudly make december’s proclamation, fallacious as it may be.
OK, so if you don’t have to care about the popularity of tax rebates and welfare reform with the voters in Missouri, why should the Republican voter in the USA care about the popularity of George’s policies with the voters in Lower Saxony?(rhetorical question, man, I know why; but can you at least understand why he feels that way?)
Well, what can we say, conversations in vacuums are rarely terribly enlightening.
As such, perhaps I can help alleviate the ignorance at the table.
First in regards to the idea that Bush is not as loathed as portrayed by non-US posters. I draw your attention to the following reporting in The Financial Times. “Perceptions of US show marked decline” 4 june 2003
The article further notes
Other reporting notes that most of the negative feeling both in Europe and the Middle East is directed specifically at the Bush administration as such, and not at American in general. Slides in respect or favorable opinion of American policy was in the double digits across the survey.
Abstracting away from petty resentments, significant slides in national image have real effects, depending on nature and on how long they are sustained. Certainly in my region of activity we are seeing real economic effects on both consumer and business levels. Whether this will be sustained depends on a number of factors, but tied with similar reports from Europe there is initial cause for concern.
Now of course, we know people like certain ideological cheerleaders will support a Bush Admin or near fascimile regardless -short of child sacrifice one presumes, although that may be perhaps moderately optimistic.
However the issue of a highly negative image and double digit declines across multiple regions and countries rather implies significant policy failure, if only at the levelof public diplomacy. Of particular importance is the alignment that I have noted here and in Europe between several “opinion groups.” I personally and I believe this is supported in the data, have noted singicant gains in anti-American / Anti-Bush sentiment in conservative quarters such as the business communities, and elite policy making communities. I mean this not in the public consumption sense, but in private convos.
In such a context, my dear isolated fellow nationals will likely not, as usual give a flying fuck about the rest of the world, but the rational observer will allow that large negative opinion movements are rarely a positive sign when they also occur among groups generally pro-you.
As to december’s analysis, what can we say? He also believes things are just peachy in Iraq and it’s all a liberal plot to smear the US.
BTW my dear Zuma, jshore is correct, the avg US citizen regularly on a variety of polls and tests racks up scores on knowl. of for. current events, geo etc. far lower than other country if one allows exams on current events roughly reflect awareness.
It seems perfectly natural to me that the voters in any country are likely to base their views of their leader more on domestic concerns than international concerns, but if Americans really don’t care about any opinions in the rest of the world why are so many Americans so upset with the French right now?
“You are our enemy unless you agree with our policy” and “it doesn’t matter to us one way or the other what you think” are incompatible points of view.
Do really think that international unpopularity should be the ambition of an American administration? How do you think US security is improved by your country’s leader being disliked?
Sorry, I didn’t meant imply it was a spite thing that possibly made Americans defend Bush, more an almost subconscious ‘us vs them’ attitude.
Referring to foreign press as blatherers is quite an arrogant standpoint though, I feel.
I’d like to make clear that I’m not trying to be particularly provocative or judgmental about this - voters tend to vote for their supposed immediate and direct benefit, wherever they are - and I chose the US as the subject because globally it’s the only game in town.
Rest assured, I think our domestic press does its share of blathering as well.
To Desmostylus: the OP referred to Bush being “spectacularly loathed” around the world. I see little posted here to back up that assertion (Collounsbury took the closest stab at it, though his poll excerpts refer to anti-U.S. sentiment than specifically to Bush, and he falls back on personal impressions to highlight supposed overwhelming anti-Bush sentiment).
You make a claim here, you’re generally obliged to support it when called upon - not demand that others prove a negative.
Incidentally, I do have concern about America being perceived negatively in some quarters abroad. We’ve got to live in the world and gain support in key areas, and arrogance on the part of the current Administration is damaging us. I also don’t believe that anti-U.S. fervor sprang into being with Bush’s election.
If you read closely and for understanding, I noted that the reporting on the issue, seperate article, indicated that the antipathy was directed towards the Bush Administration. Sperate polling, which you can easily search your own self on BBC for example provides ample objetive evidence of Bush’s personal role in that unpopularity, although Rumsfeld also rubs the wrong way it appears.
My personal reflections were in addition to the noted reporting.
So, I believe that for those of us with an ordinary level of reading abilty, we can dispose of the objection to whether the Bush Administration is disliked or not.
I suppose, to answer the OP honestly, I’d have to admit that to some degree, a measure of my support for Bush comes from his negative “world opinion” rather than despite it; a feeling that “If the French hate him, he can’t be all bad.”
It’s no surprise that he’s “suddenly” being demonized around the world – but the lion’s share of that scorn comes with the territory of being the face attached to the world’s only superpower. If France were the dominant political, military, and economic force in the world, does anyone doubt for a second that Jacques Chirac would be the world’s most reviled man?
A lot of Bush’s policy decisions are a guaranteed lock, by definition, to cause anguish from many quarters overseas-- but that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t pursue them. No doubt Clinton enjoyed a much more favorable reputation overseas – but much of that favor stemmed from his tendency to react to foreign policy with more appeasement than aggression. I’m sure the Arab world “liked” him a lot more than Bush – since he was reluctant to hold their feet to the fire and force them to take on any level of responsibility for the spread of extremist terrorist activity. He (Clinton) certainly treaded much more softly on the toes of our European allies as well.
All countries act – and should act – primarily in their own self-interest. It’s just a hell of a lot more visible when we do it than when Zimbabwe does. <shrug>
Actually, a close reading of your non-linked article indicates only a perception that there is some antipathy towards Administration unilateralist foreign policy, and not that Bush is personally reviled.
Feel free to delve into this hypothesis your own self.
**
Conversations with vacuums don’t shed a ton of light either.
No, the rest of the world is not all like-minded. Neither are we. Shocking, isn’t it.