[SimeyTheLimey]

Bruce Bawer, an American living in Norway (and before that Holland) has an interesting essay. It's pretty long, and certainly opinionated, but interesting. These are just snippits, and not necessarily one that is all that representative of the article as a whole. Much of it is a literary review.

I moved from the U.S. to Europe in 1998, and I�ve been drawing comparisons ever since. Living in turn in the Netherlands, where kids come out of high school able to speak four languages, where gay marriage is a non-issue, and where book-buying levels are the world�s highest, and in Norway, where a staggering percentage of people read three newspapers a day and where respect for learning is reflected even in Oslo place names (�Professor Aschehoug Square�; �Professor Birkeland Road�), I was tempted at one point to write a book lamenting Americans� anti-intellectualism�their indifference to foreign languages, ignorance of history, indifference to academic achievement, susceptibility to vulgar religion and trash TV, and so forth. On point after point, I would argue, Europe had us beat.

***

Living in Europe, I gradually came to appreciate American virtues I�d always taken for granted, or even disdained�among them a lack of self-seriousness, a grasp of irony and self-deprecating humor, a friendly informality with strangers, an unashamed curiosity, an openness to new experience, an innate optimism, a willingness to think for oneself and speak one�s mind and question the accepted way of doing things. (One reason why Euro- peans view Americans as ignorant is that when we don�t know something, we�re more likely to admit it freely and ask questions.) While Americans, I saw, cherished liberty, Europeans tended to take it for granted or dismiss it as a naive or cynical, and somehow vaguely embarrassing, American fiction. I found myself toting up words that begin with i: individuality, imagination, initiative, inventiveness, independence of mind. Americans, it seemed to me, were more likely to think for themselves and trust their own judgments, and less easily cowed by authorities or bossed around by �experts�; they believed in their own ability to make things better. No wonder so many smart, ambitious young Europeans look for inspiration to the United States, which has a dynamism their own countries lack, and which communicates the idea that life can be an adventure and that there�s important, exciting work to be done. Reagan-style �morning in America� clich�s may make some of us wince, but they reflect something genuine and valuable in the American air. Europeans may or may not have more of a �sense of history� than Americans do (in fact, in a recent study comparing students� historical knowledge, the results were pretty much a draw), but America has something else that matters�a belief in the future.

Over time, then, these things came into focus for me. Then came September 11. Briefly, Western European hostility toward the U.S. yielded to sincere, if shallow, solidarity (�We are all Americans�). But the enmity soon re-established itself (a fact confirmed for me daily on the websites of the many Western European newspapers I had begun reading online). With the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, it intensified. Yet the endlessly reiterated claim that George W. Bush �squandered� Western Europe�s post-9/11 sympathy is nonsense. The sympathy was a blip; the anti-Americanism is chronic. Why?

Hating America, by Bruce Bawer.

Enjoy!

[Drakino]

I've read a third of it so far, and skimmed the rest. He seems to start out well, but then just gets focused on countering Hertsgaard. Not a bad read thus far, and it does show that people on both sides need to look at all sides to an issue before making a decision on something.

Being here in Europe for 12 days so far has been an interesting experience. There are benefits to some things here (dependong on the country), and benefits to America. Neither is perfect. Bot both are decent places to live compaired to many other places around the world.

[macvillage.net]

Read some, skimmed more.. will read all later... very interesting.

Though I must agree, especially with your little quote above. It's really embarassing how the US gloats about it's world-class education, and educated workforce... when really it's pretty terrible for a first world country, and only tolerable for a 2nd world country.

Europe has such a strong focus on social problems for so long, they are decades beyond the US.

But the US still likes to think it's well ahead.


Also seeing a nipple on TV, or a nude beach doesn't cause congress to form a commission. They realized it's just skin on part of the human body, in particular a female. No big deal. Here in the US, we have people speak before the FCC saying how their young son had to go to freaking thereapy to get over the superbowl halftime show!


Europe really is the American ideal when it comes to society. It learned it's lesson from the American revolution and people realized what they wanted. They learned from the willpower of early Americans that they didn't have to put up with BS.

Americans then formed burocracy, and bickered.

Europe moved forward to achive the goals set by the revolutionaries in America.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
Read some, skimmed more.. will read all later... very interesting.

Though I must agree, especially with your little quote above. It's really embarassing how the US gloats about it's world-class education, and educated workforce... when really it's pretty terrible for a first world country, and only tolerable for a 2nd world country.

Europe has such a strong focus on social problems for so long, they are decades beyond the US.

But the US still likes to think it's well ahead.


Also seeing a nipple on TV, or a nude beach doesn't cause congress to form a commission. They realized it's just skin on part of the human body, in particular a female. No big deal. Here in the US, we have people speak before the FCC saying how their young son had to go to freaking thereapy to get over the superbowl halftime show!


Europe really is the American ideal when it comes to society. It learned it's lesson from the American revolution and people realized what they wanted. They learned from the willpower of early Americans that they didn't have to put up with BS.

Americans then formed burocracy, and bickered.

Europe moved forward to achive the goals set by the revolutionaries in America.

Did you read past the first paragraph?

[OreoCookie]

I have yet to read the full article.
His claim in the excerpt Simey posted that Europeans are less likely to form an opinion of their own or present their opinion is not what I have experienced in the states.

For me, America had a certain shallowness. Shallowness in politeness, in cherishing their valued ideals, in most things. There is a broader gap between what Americans say and what they do -- the Department Of Home Defense is a good example of that. The lack of sincerity in the support is the result of something, the author more attributes to Americans: make up your own mind on issues.

I will post more than just those random thoughts as soon as I have read the whole article.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Did you read past the first paragraph?

Yes, though that's really the part of it I find most relevent.

'anti-americanism' is really quite an arbitrary word.

You can really attach it to anything you don't like.

Civil Rights, Womans Suffrage movement? All were labeled.

Heck calling those who vote for a political opponent 'anti-american' has even been used as a campaign tactic. (Despite the idea of elections being a core part of american politics).

To deny freedom of speach is 'anti-american', but to say America could be better (as all Americans should do if they care about their country).. is 'anti-american'. A strange as it is, it's part of life. Our founding fathers by this definition were anti-american. So were all of our nations great leaders.

You can say the constitution itself is 'anti-american', since it allows changes in the form of ammendments, and the ability to critique it via Ammendment #1.



The Author makes some points, some better than other... but it's his opinion.


Regarding freedoms, freedoms aren't the same for everyone. An African American in a white community still in many cases feels much more hostility than a white male in a white community in Europe. Does that make Europe more free? America less free? Equality perhaps a better word? Is one better? Or are we comparing two different beasts?

I'd say it's pretty hard to pinpoint as much as the Author tries. The best the author can do is give their personal experience to the reader and allow the reader to read, and see the world through the authors point of view. Not the only point of view, but the authors point of view.


I could tour bevery hills, and say Americans have too much money. I could go to an extremely poor area like parts of the Bronx NY, and say Americans live like Somalians. Or perhaps those are two extremes.



Article is a bit arbitrary from what I've read. So I don't think it's really worthy of much comment.

[angaq0k]

I read half of it, and got tired because it seems to be redundant.

"Hating America" is a title that conveys such a generalization that it reflects not only the author's lack of objectivity, but also, that of those criticizing it through a similar process of generalization (especially Hertsgaard's argumentation). But then again, his document tries to eliminate any reasons to hate America.

Bawer makes the same mistakes he accuses Herstgaard; he brings his own observations that he elevates to generalizations

One reason why Euro- peans view Americans as ignorant is that when we don�t know something, we�re more likely to admit it freely and ask questions.
(...)
Americans, it seemed to me, were more likely to think for themselves and trust their own judgments, and less easily cowed by authorities or bossed around by �experts�; they believed in their own ability to make things better.

I don't see why this is specific to Americans, and how it applies to all Americans.

About Hertsgaard:

What he fails to acknowledge, however, is that most foreigners never set foot in the United States, and that the things they think they know about it are consequently based not on first-hand experience but on school textbooks, books by people like Michael Moore, movies about spies and gangsters, �Ricki Lake,� �C.S.I.,� and, above all, the daily news reports in their own national media.
(...)
it�s really a jeremiad by Hertsgaard himself, punctuated occasionally, to be sure, by relevant quotations from cabbies, busdrivers, and, yes, a restaurateur whom he�s run across in his travels.

I am not saying Bawer is not right to criticize Herstgard for his prejudice, but sounds like Bawer is not innocent from it either. Everyone who loves his country is entitled to show it and that is not so much a bad thing as long as nationalism does not turn the believer into a blind person whether is name is Bawer or Herstgaard.

The problem in judging the inhabitants of other countries is that it will always lead to unfair generalizations. Unfortunately for the members of any country, any inhabitants becomes a national representative when confronted by a plethora of media, from the tourist from abroad asking for directions, to the television shows.

Once we start a ride on the bandwagon of comparing nations, the depreciation over the "other" is easy to do, and comes from a need to sustain self-esteem through national identity. We are all bound to be confronted to that at some point in our lives. What is unfair is when it crosses a certain ethic (Hertsgaard is certainly guilty of it when comparing the U.S. with Africa but Bawer uses it quite well to counter-argue but may have missed the point on the same token).

In my opinion, the U.S. is no more a victim of this phenomenon than Norway, except for its government' foreign policy, and its claims to be a "leader" in whatever... Since the end of WWII for sure. That is a big responsability that no other country asked for, that the US claimed for themselves (after ending WWII under the circumstances that we know) and for which all other countries became more or less dependant of.

On the other hand, the criticization of Purdy is rather interesting, for Bawer does not counter-argue as much as he did for Herstagaard as he tries to expose Purdy for the inappropriateness of his ideas.

His argumentation against Crockatt is weak, I think, especially considering that for those whom have been in these threads for a while, that issues related to the Guantanamo detainees being compared with the victims of Saddam Hussein is a dangerous mixture.

But in the end, it is very difficult to make a final and solid judgement of Bawer's propositions because I have not read any of the authors he criticizes (except of Rogue State).

It also feels like an act of self-victimization I do not care much about for the reasons explained earlier in my post (everyone is bound to be prejudiced, whatever their nationality). Finally, nobody will come to the same judgement about another person, or another nation; as soon as we start to dig, we see more of ourselves in the others, because in the end, were all humans.

[Timo]

I found the article disorganized, hard to read, irritatingly polemical, dependent on heresay and even in bits reactionary, but *sigh* often quite correct.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
The Author makes some points, some better than other... but it's his opinion.

It's an essay, not an article. An essay isn't meant to be objective.

Timo: I agree that it was disorganized and hard to read. The guy needs an editor who should introduce him to the concepts of paragraphs, topic sentences, and large scale organization. I got bogged down in his middle section, but I am glad I persevered.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
It's an essay, not an article. An essay isn't meant to be objective.

Agreed.

Timo: I agree that it was disorganized and hard to read. The guy needs an editor who should introduce him to the concepts of paragraphs, topic sentences, and large scale organization. I got bogged down in his middle section, but I am glad I persevered.

Agreed as well... though it wasn't to bad from what I read so far. Not quite easy, but I understood... which is really the point of writing and publishing.