I recently finished Why Do People Hate America? by Ziauddin Sardar,Merryl Wyn Davies and I have a debate topic for the noble readers of the Dope.
The book was, I believe, intended for Americans with a shaky history education and almost no knowledge of the consequences of US foreign policy decisions. Still, it reads like a Junior High School assignment. We’ll save a lot of time if I break up their nebulous arguments into:
People hate American because,
1.) American pop culture spreads globally devouring other cultures.
2.) Americans view the world through a predominantly Western lens through which American value systems are then imposed on other societies.
3.) America often disrupts democratically elected stable governments for its own agenda, often with serious consequences for said state.
My initial reaction to all three of these was, “no shit, but how are Americans implicitly wrong?”
The first two don’t really interest me because I don’t see this as uniquely American, so to some extent it’s all about calling pots and kettles.
I’d instead like to focus on the # 3 argument with these questions:
Since when has a nation implicitly been expected to act against its own interests for the benefit of another?
Is this a modern phenomenon?
Is it because of the 50 years young global respect for national sovereignty?
Is it specific to America?
I don’t want to get into Machiavellian politics, I believe we should help if we can, but why do other nations feel they can expect it?
If I don’t nip this in the bud right now I feel this thread will devolve into another tedious Iraq debate, so for the sake of my sanity and any hope of rational perspective let us pretend its pre 9/11 for any US foreign policies brought up.
It is complicated, to say the least. There is some resentment at times over decisions of the American government. Meanwhile, American culture is generally respected and embraced freely. The spread of our movies and music was entirely because of worldwide demand for them.
American business and business people are also respected internationally, and when I served overseas as an enlisted serviceman, I was always treated well by military personnel and civilians alike in nearly every country I visited.
So the argument that America is implicitly wrong is specious. It does not fit with the reception I have had in countries I have traveled in and conversations I have had with people there.
There are many many people who dislike the USA, but not Americans.
I have a problem with all three reasons listed, but I’d be blind if I claimed that only USA does those things.
I do think the USA opens itself up to attacks by claiming to be “A responsible superpower” etc. For a nation to claim to be more developed than everyone else and then use the “Everyone else does it” defence just winds people up. Again it would be blind to claim the USA is the only country guilty of this.
I’m not entirely sure you’re right to disregard the first two points; you’re right in saying that those are things that happen with any country and culture, but due to the U.S.'s dominance on the global arena, they tend to have more of an effect. I’m sure there’s an Uzbeki or a Bolivian that looks at Americans from their viewpoint, but that isn’t as likely to have any actual effect. Same for culture; sure, all places tend to spread it around. But America more so than others.
With regards to point three, I think there’s a big difference between a nation acting against it’s own interests for the benefits of another, and acting towards it’s own interests for the problems of another. Think of it as the difference between invading every country with a corrupt leader and not propping up corruption so they’ll slip you a little something. Not really as clear-cut as that makes it sound, but I think it’s an important distinction. Sure, act in your own interests, but there’s still a line that can be crossed. I am not learned enough in American history to say whether the U.S. has crossed this line, however.
Since you ask, maybe you would like the view from a country where the people generally like Americans and are probably more culturally similar to the US than any other country on Earth: Canada. Sometimes it is easier to tak criticism from friends who love us.
Sorry, but we cannot just ignore the first two questions because they are bound up with the 3rd.
Take culture. People LIKE American culture, pretty much universally. Did you know that the Muppet Show, when it was on, was the no. 1 program world-wide?
But that same culture can be seen as a threat. Some of it is America’s fault and some is not. By that I mean that somethings are actually the result of arrogance and greed by some Americans, and some just happen because an elephant in a room full of cats is bound to crush a few no matter how hard it tries not to.
Ever hear of Cnadian films? There IS a Canadian film industry, believe it or not. But did you know that Canada’s original attempt to found a film industry in the 1930s was actually frustrated by Hollywood? Canada was after all 10% of their market. So Hollywood and the US government pressured Canada NOT to start a real film industry. In return, Canad would be mentioned in American films. Like a guy in the movie would say, “I have an uncle in Montreal” instead of “I have an uncle in Cleveland”.
What may come across as anti-Americanism by Canadians is nothing more than a fear of having our identity swamped by this huge megalo-monster next door. Ironically, French-Canadians are MORE pro-American than English Canadians, because they speak a different language, watch more of their own home-grown TV programs, and feel less culturally threatened.
Americans have this feeling that Canada does not even exist, or is not a “real” country. It can get very annoying. I remember a few years ago when Bill Clinton Came on a State Visit to Canada. Now admittedly, this was during the Monica L. affair. He and the Prime Minister had talks in private and then they came out to speak to an enormous American Press corps that had followed Clinton, and was gathered in a very beautiful room with a maginificent view of the Parliament Buildings. The place was full of US and Canadian flags. The two leaders announced a series of Canada-US initiatives they had just approved, many quite significant and newsworthy…
The American press corps sat there, cameras off but ready, and seemed to look around like people waking up from a dream, as if to say, “Oh yeah, I guess we are in Canada. Oh well, who cares?”
Then began the question period. Immediately, ther were 10 questions about the Lewinski azffair, some questions about fiv or six situations in the US, and that was it. I remember a Canadian journaslist skaing his head and saying “They just don’t believe we exist”.
Regarding the third point, you have made an illogical leap. You have gone from this statement: “3.) America often disrupts democratically elected stable governments for its own agenda, often with serious consequences for said state.” . . . . . .
. . . . . .And you have transformed it to this question: "Since when has a nation implicitly been expected to act against its own interests for the benefit of another? "
You are not, of course. But manufacturing the overthrow through the CIA of someone like Salvador Allende, a democratically-elected Marxist, and replacing him with a bloodthirsty fascist murderer and torturer like Augusto Pinochet in Chile is closer to the first statement than the second. Sorry, man, but people have the right to elect a government the US does not like.
Take Cuba. Yes, Castro is a Dictator. So was the Shah of Iran, who was not royalty, but an army officer that the CIA put into power in the 1950s. So was Diem in Viet Nam. So was Pinochet. So was SaddamHussein whom the US supported with arms and chemical weapons. The US has no real problem with dictators when it suits them. The REAL crime of Cuba was that it was a virtual US colony that revolted. For that “crime” it has been under an eceonomic embargo that has hobbld its economy for the past 50 years. This is one reason that Canada does not emrago Cuba and that Cnadians travel there as tourists. Not because we sympathize with a dictatorship but because we sympatize witgh another small country in our hemisphre who has the balls to stand up to the US.
I have travelled often in the US and I believe the American PEOPLE are basically good and decent and peace-loving. I think that the problem is that the actions of their government and the military-industrial complex (a term invented by Dwight Eisenhower, BTW) are hidden from them by biased media reporting, and by trashy jingo patriotism that is used to shout down any serious criticism of US foreign policy.
It is very difficult to negotiate treaties with America. Why? Because no administration wants to be accused of “compromising America’s interests”. But wait a second! Isn’t mutual compromise of interests exactly what nations do to arrive at an agreement? In any other county, this would be understood. But in America, you have only to say, "But these are AMERICA’S intersts and that is that. No compromise, unledss you are a traitor.
Look, I think it can be summarized this way. The US is the only remaining superpower. Its people are, understandably, patriotic, decent and love their country and the brave fighting men and women who defend it. Nothing wrong with that. You have a country worth being proud of. But even though you are a democracy with free speech and a free press, it is very easy for the government and certain news media to dress up gross, self-seeking agressions and defend them with slogans like “support our troops” (or would you rather be a traitor?)
Of course this has happned in other countries. The average Brit at the height of the British Empire probably believed that all those darkies were being raised to civilization by a wonderful Britannia whom God had mandated to Rule the Waves.
Ditto the French Empire, mutatis mutandis.
My advice to Americans. Get rid of the phoney Hollywood concept that you are the “good guys” in the world and accept that you are nation like any other, capable of good and evil, albeit more powerful. Americans are good, decent folks that can be manipulated by greedy governments, corporate interests and the media they own, and that will always use your quite legitimate love of country as a club to beat down any thinking man or woman who objects to their imperialistic adventures. But you are a democracy, and you can fight back with reason and criticism. People in places like Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia could not.
No matter how much you may hate Michael Moore or* Bowling for Columbine*, the short course on American geopolitics told in clips as part of that documentary is bang on.
I studied the ‘Invasion’ of Afghanistan by Russia. Turns out that the leadership had pleaded and begged with the US for help prior to turning to the Russians. RAND researchers also reported back to the US administration that the situation in the country was grave and predicted the debacle that eventually happened.
The world at the time had been divided into ‘spheres of influence’; The Soviet Union didn’t interfere in the affairs of countries that were under the American ‘sphere’ and the US returned the favour. As a matter of fact, both Hungary and Czechoslovakia also pleaded for American assistance before Russian tanks rolled into them. To no avail.
Similarly, the US ‘exerted influence’ over nations in Africa and Latin America and went unchallenged by the USSR.
The whole ‘Soviet Threat’ was pretty much sabre-rattling and it served both sides to some extent. It was as unlikely and impossible for the Soviet Union to ‘take over the world’ or even the US as it is that Iraq or Afghanistan will. Too expensive, would require too many loyal troops (not possible to muster) and couldn’t possibly succeed.
By the time I finished studying international relations, I was pretty disgusted by it all. It was clear that the superpowers talked one way but behaved another entirely - and that, in the main, the public will buy pretty much anything a politican will say if the politician claims to be operating from some honourable motive. It’s easy to hide covert operations - at least for a while - and it is clear that it’s done to this day.
I think the only reason there have been so many leaks exposing the behind-the-scenes machinations of this administration is that the ‘war’ has gone so horribly wrong and was so seriously misconceived. But note how long it took for them to come out.
It’s frustrating to see people be so naive about international relations; particularly about the role of the US in world affairs because there are many, many cases of interference in the affairs of other nations that did very little good for those nations and instead caused much harm.
Remember that the US both armed and trained Saddam and Osama, for starters.
I think I’d need a cite to believe this, because it sounds preposterous.
How would Hollywood “pressure Canada” not to “Start a real film industry”? To whom would they make this rather absurd suggestion that “we’ll replace mentioning Cleveland with mentioning Montreal as long as you don’t start a real film industry” and why would anyone in Canada accept that?
This would be more accurately stated as “America has often supported corrupt dictatorships when it suited American interests”.
Bad as that is, it’s not the same as “often” disrupting “democratically elected stable governments”. Chile and earlier Iran are examples where we in fact contributed to the overthrow of elected/at least nominally democratic governments, though it’s hard to say how “stable” they were if internal parties were ready and eager to take over.
#3 is the only legitimate factor in resentment over #2, where America has values (i.e. civil liberties, not mutilating female children etc.) which it thinks other countries should uphold. Every nation thinks its values should be paramount.
Mention should be made of missing reason #4, which is that America is disliked for the same reason that people in this country dislike the N.Y. Yankees - wealth, power and winning too much.
You’ve been a member of this board long enough to know a dozen examples of this ‘line crossing’. Begin with Iraq and work backwards through Iran-Contra, Nicaragua, Vietnam, Indonesia, Chile, Iran, etc.
I heard this on an interview on a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation interview several years ago with an author who had written a history of Canadian films. Sorry, I do not hav a specific cite, so if you want to reject the story as apocryphal, you can. It is not quite as preposterous as you think, though. I believe the Canadian Government was getting ready to pump considerable money into getting a Canadian film industry going. Holloywood got the US government to pressure the Canadian government not to do this. The idea was quietly dropped. Hollywood studios “sweetened” the pill by agreeing that they would henceforth use their own films to refelect more of Canada. In practice, this often amounted to nothing more than “my uncle in Montreal” but I doubt if Hollywood studios proposed something that idiotic right off.
Since much of this was back-room and informal inter-governmental-industry pressure, it is hard to prove. Anyhow, it is not the main point of what I am trying to say, and if you want to reject it, go ahead.
I dunno, Revenant Threshold [if I quote the proper way I’ll screw it up]
“I’m not entirely sure you’re right to disregard the first two points; you’re right in saying that those are things that happen with any country and culture, but due to the U.S.'s dominance on the global arena, they tend to have more of an effect.”
No argument from me…but is it Americas fault people like hamburgers?
“With regards to point three, I think there’s a big difference between a nation acting against it’s own interests for the benefits of another, and acting towards it’s own interests for the problems of another.”
I agree, but for good or ill of other countries when, in the history of time, has a nation ever been expected to put another’s interests first? Disrupting a peaceful economy for better banana prices at home sounds crazy, but thems the rules.
“I am not learned enough in American history to say whether the U.S. has crossed this line, however.”
My question is IS there a line and when was it drawn?
But it’s nothing new. As mentioned above, the British and the French did it. The Romans did too. So did the ancient Persians. Like it or not, it’s SOP. And it’s going on today - never mind America, look at China and Tibet or China and Nepal.
If there is no line, if might makes right I hope you remember that when you feel the urge to bitch about people blowing themselves up or flying planes into buildings.
Reply stands for Quartz’s post too.
In an era where any competent bio phd with a basic lab can aspire to kill tens of thousands if not more, ‘might makes right’ is not acceptable. Terrorists had the might to kill 3000 innocents.
“This would be more accurately stated as “America has often supported corrupt dictatorships when it suited American interests”. Bad as that is, it’s not the same as “often” disrupting “democratically elected stable governments”.”
I don’t know if there is a significant difference in the mind of the average Jose between being the direct cause of an oppressive regime and supporting an oppressive regime.
“#3 is the only legitimate factor in resentment over #2, where America has values (i.e. civil liberties, not mutilating female children etc.) which it thinks other countries should uphold. Every nation thinks its values should be paramount.”
So Canadians travel to Cuba to stick it to the US? Funny, I thought it was the climate and beaches.
For what is worth, Cuba was not a US colony in 1958, virtual or otherwise. The US had investments in Cuba, much the same way that Canada and Spain do today. And while the embargo has kept the US ouf of Cuba it has not been hobbling the Cuban economy. Fidel himself acknowledges that until the fall of the USSR the US embargo had zero economic impact on Cuba. That’s 1958 to 1992, 33 years during which the Cuban economy “flourished”, except that it did not flourish, like every other communist economy in the world it stagnated and worse.
“If there is no line, if might makes right I hope you remember that when you feel the urge to bitch about people blowing themselves up or flying planes into buildings.”
No one has yet said America is right. I’m simply questioning this book and a general world assumption (gleaned from my 28 years and plenty of world travel) that it is Americas responsibility to put other nations before its own…even once.
Let me restate. I don’t feel that I know enough about American history to back up instances of line crossing with anything other than “well, that’s obviously past it”.
That doesn’t seem to be a reason not to dislike the practice - merely a reason to dislike those countries too.
Nope. But the pervasiveness of American culture against, say, Ecadorian culture, means that a larger amount of dislike (and like) is inevitably addressed towards the former rather than the latter. It’s not a fault, but it is a consequence.
Just because it’s a practice with a long track record doesn’t make it good. I would imagine that, given the power, land, and influence of the U.S., every country would behave like that. And in their own way, of course countries act in their own interests.
The problem is, merely giving a good reason doesn’t necessarily make the action itself good. If I kill 1 person so that 100 do not die, then that’s a good reason. But that doesn’t make me actually killing the guy a good thing. International affairs are worse since these are inherently selfish decision. Don’t get me wrong, countries should be selfish in that way; but again, there’s a line.
I would say yes. In very abstract terms, I would say the line is the point at which the benefits no longer outweigh the problems. Disrupting a peaceful exonomy for better banana prices would be a good example of that, I think.
I’m of the opinion there is no such thing as ‘national interest’. Just the sectional interests of those in power and their backers.
It was clearly not in the National Interest of the USA and the UK to overthrow the democratic govt of Iran. But it was in the short-term and short-sighted interest of BP.
