Anti-America? | Articles | the bombsite

. . . . . . . . . . .

About the Post

Author Information

I enjoy working with HTML, XHTML, CSS and designers as a web developer. At home I enjoy listening to music, playing music, reading and food.

Anti-America?

We have D-Day almost upon us and I find that I despair at the anti-American demos and rallies which seem to take place somewhere in the world on an almost daily basis. Whilst I may have problems with American politicians and the political system as a whole, I don’t have any such problem with the American nation and what it represents to my country and Europe in general.

When I watch these demos I see that most of the participants are a lot younger than me, and even at my age I am not old enough to have experienced in any way the horrors of World War II so their experience is even further removed. I was, of course, raised through the 50s and 60s so I have experienced in part my country’s slow rise from the economic plight caused by the War. Because of the coincidence of the day of my birth I have always taken an interest in the events of D-Day and World War II in general however what I know I have, for the most part, had to find out for myself.

History teaching in school did not encompass the War and indeed hardly touched the twentieth century at all. History teaching in school was mainly concerned with kings and queens from the Dark Ages up to Elizabeth 1st. This has very little to do with the state of the world today, and history teaching in school today is the same as it was when I was there. If you were to ask some of these demonstrators about the Cold War or the Berlin Wall they would probably look at you blankly. History in school should be totally twentieth century based. It is what got us where we are. If people want to learn about earlier history they can take that option when they get to university but current generations and future ones should learn about what has brought them to now before anything else. Only if this is done will people realise that freedom and liberty is expensive and that, if we forget that, we will lose it.

I consider my country to be the bravest fighting force on the planet. Problem is we are a small country. Even conscripting men in their 40s into the army during World War II did not give us a large enough fighting force to take on the Nazis. Even with the Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, Polish and others our forces were not big enough. D-Day was only possible because of the massive force of America. Without D-Day the continent of Europe and most likely Britain too would, even now, be under Nazi domination.

The younger generations know nothing of this and they demonstrate against America through total ignorance. It is time this situation was changed by teaching kids about what is important. Maybe if they understood why they are alive today, why they can eat what they like and live in freedom they might not be so keen to take part in pointless demonstrations, and they might realise that the very freedom to demonstrate at all is due, in no small part, to the existence of the free American nation.

Comments ( 33 )

Hey Stuart, I'm sort of on-line at the moment yet my service is still half-the-speed of a snail. I've abandoned all hops of upgrading this weekend. When it takes 35 min to down load your Email, the buck has to stop somewhere, and throwing the computer out the window is not the answer... although the thought keeps coming up... he ha ha.

Anyway, you touched upon a great concern that most people share about young people who engage in demonstration, albeit each from different perspectives, nonetheless, this is a common criticism. However, I would like to add a defense to one of your thoughts regarding the relevance of the young demonstrators who engage in protest of events that occurred long ago, and current affairs of today. So I'll only focus on the last paragraph of your BLOG entry:

As you may or may not know, I have returned to University, where I decided to further my academic standings with the current degrees I have now. I'm slightly younger then you therefore I believe I can relate to what you are saying. Now, siting in classes with students who are half my age, you begin to feel and see the changes in the atmosphere from when I was last a student. When I sat in a Political Science class back in 1988, the mode was totally Left. Today, I'm shocked as most students are almost Right in their thinking. What has changed?

I believe a number of things have changed: whether your ideology is Left, Centre or Right. Mass media is available with the push of a button. So the influence of Media of what the younger generation sees is a huge factor. You now have access from your own home, the 500 channel universe, the InterNet and schools that are more advanced then ever before.

The young have a greater handle at their age then we did in proportion to what world events are currently taking place. By this I mean, we never had reality TV and Up to the millisecond coverage of War, Disasters and Politics. So current affairs would shape your mindset on a verity of topics both past and present.

Now, do kids really understand what is going on in the world around them? My answer is that as a Kid, (age 18 or younger) they may not understand the dialectic fundamentals of history and the reasons of their existents with common everyday events, but they have us to remind them of that – both parents and media.

The very reason D-Day, the 60th anniversary is so important in this case, is that this will probably be the last time that any of the living survivors will attend the ceremonies. So media will be there and the opportunity of knowing that the world will be watching, you now have the perfect recipe of capturing the greatest amount of viewers to your cause on one stage. An Anti-War demonstration at a War memorial event: why not?
6 June 2004, 00:27
To my mind there is something very deeply significant about the Sixtieth Anniversary being commemorated so comprehensively. In some way , it is tied to the moral confusion many people feel, about the present combined Anglo / US military operations in the Middle East. At least with the Germans we knew who the enemy were and where they were at. That kind of simplicity has long gone.
6 June 2004, 06:06
Well said Thomasso but I wonder how many of the younger generations will watch or listen to any of the D-Day coverage. Oh I'm sure there will be some but I feel that most will be out with their mates down the pub or playing football or just "hanging around". They have little interest because it is "old" so it just can't have anything to do with them. I understand and agree with your point about the immediacey of todays news coverage but I think that only serves to give people a view point based on "now" and does not relate to great and recent historical events. I didn't attend university but I can remember the "leftist" days you talk about and the anti-Vietnam protests and the kids dying in Ohio but even then the kids where acting with a short term view. As I said at the start of my rant I have big problems with American politics but that is another subject and another post. I was talking about the American nation here. The point I am pushing is that these people are ignorant of the historical facts and that is the fault of, in my view, a lack of good historical teaching at school level. If we taught history properly at school it would only concern the twentieth century as that is really the only history that has relevance to today. We want our kids to behave well, have manners and know right from wrong but we should also want them to know how we got to where we are and who got us here and how much it cost. If they knew that then maybe when they went on these demos it would be on an anti-Bush stance rather than an anti-American stance which is quite frankly pathetic.
6 June 2004, 06:07
I couldn't agree more with that point Root though that would be combined with the fact that it may well be the last that many of the veterans will attend.
6 June 2004, 06:10
Honestly I'm not sure a more thorough historical education would change things much. I think America represents many negatives to the world right now - it's a nation which represents itself as a dominant force & often flaunts itself as 'superior', a nation of people largely ignorant about foreign policy and world events, a nation of people who are seen as self-absorbed and apathetic to the trials & needs of others, a nation whose current president has a worldly unpopular war agenda, etc., etc. In many ways I can understand why we are (as a nation) so hated or, at the very least, unappreciated. America is currently the world's favorite foe. It's easy to forget the positive things America has done in the past when things are looking so bleak now.

I love my country. As a whole, I believe it is a great nation. I am grateful I was born here with the priviledges I often take for granted (but shouldn't). So although I understand the general criticism, I do get weary of anti-American sentiment and the 'typical American' stereotypes. I do believe we have the power (and therefore the responsibility) to do better for the world than we're currently doing, however. :wall:
6 June 2004, 08:46
I shall not disagree with you other than to say what you speak of is the political stance of your government not the nation. I shall have a good rant about your politics in the not too distant future because my post words are well out of kilter with my comment words. Remember that figure of 16,000? Have a look now. Didn't take long did it? I've sent you an IM on Yahoo. Don't you have an ICQ number? :pray:
6 June 2004, 09:22
Way off topic: :cussing:OH YA, new smilies! I like ....:boohoo:

All you need now are the ones that have the "qutation marks" with the left and right hand doing the Nixon pose.:liar::drool:
6 June 2004, 11:43
You lost me there Thomasso. What smilie is this then?
6 June 2004, 11:48
@Stuart - I meant 'nation' in the sense of how we're perceived as a whole by others. And unfortunately our politics often dictate how we're *individually* perceived. In a sense that's fair - we are a democracy after all (or so they say, hehe). :boohoo: (Oooh more smilies).

I didn't get an IM from you on Yahoo although I did get a notice to accept one when I got online to check for it. Never came through though - weird. I used to have an ICQ number (or two or three) ages ago, but the digits & password are in another dimension where all the stored information in my brain seems to go (I think it's the same dimension that socks disappear to). I always forget to turn on whatever IM program I'm running - it's a mystery why I install them at all.
6 June 2004, 12:36
Happy Birthday again, btw! :notworthy::clap::dance: :!:
6 June 2004, 16:57
@Jess - Mmmm. I have always thought ICQ was better but that's just me. :think: I'm a bit bothered about Yahoo cuz I spotted that they had introduced a blocker to stop other IM software using their system. That might be why you didn't get the message. They sound like they are getting a bit Microsoftish. :hithead:
6 June 2004, 20:42
@Stuart - I always liked ICQ best when I used it, but very few of the people I keep in touch with will use it (they don't think it's user-friendly, I guess?). So I only have yahoo installed because it's what my mom knows how to use.
6 June 2004, 21:19
Oh, perhaps my browser could not see all of them before? I can now see at least 10 to 12 new ones: :cussing::hithead::boohoo::snooty:
:liar::help::hand::drool::pray:

If you had these from before, I never saw them.... Sorry from going off topic like that.
6 June 2004, 22:24
No problem. I haven't long added them and not all in one go anyway. "hithead" was the last and on it's own.
6 June 2004, 23:02
Well, I did the upgrade! :notworthy: Everything seemed to go well, without a hitch and I have kepted the wp-layout.CCS from before, becuase everyone, even CryptoLILY(pad) seems to have a green BLOG these days, but I used the default index.php. So, I figure I should start from scratch on the index.php page?

So, I gotta ask: what changed from the old to the 1.2 mingus?

Maybe you should give me your Email so I don't kill the topic flow of today's entry in your BLOG. :idea:
7 June 2004, 01:35
I do not want to get into any kind of us and them with the kind folks of the US of A. They have bailed us out in two World Wars.
And we know a thing or two about electing unsuitable leaders ourselves. But I do wish that when their tourists went abroad that they would not wear those wierd checked trousers :boohoo:
7 June 2004, 03:42
Ha ha. And we're not talking on the golf course! :hithead:
7 June 2004, 04:22
I have never owned nor known anyone who owned any such 'checked trousers'. Hopefully when I get the opportunity to travel abroad, I will not feel compelled to buy some. :shifty:
7 June 2004, 13:41
i misse dyour birthday
happy belated birthday!

i used to like icq so much and then it got so big...and my *friends* started using MSN...grrr...and y! did some weird things sometimes....
i hate msn...you can't send offline messages...why is it a hit??

*sigh*
aim too
*sigh*

and i never actually reached the study of the wars in my history classes...did do it in french a levels tho, i think
7 June 2004, 19:18
@Jess - I'd hate to have to try and picture you in a pair of checks. I think it's to do with the kind of clothes you wear on holiday but wouldn't be seen dead in at home. :oops:

@Lily - I thank you. You only missed it by 78 minutes and technically it was still my birthday over there.
7 June 2004, 21:35
@Stuart - Hmm interesting concept. I would think you'd want to dress *better* apart from home. It's a mystery. :eh:
7 June 2004, 21:38
@Jess - it's no concept. I've done it myself and it's not that these holiday clothes are better or worse. It's the style of them. I think when you are on holiday, particularly abroad, and it's really nice, sunny weather, you dress kind of "happy". It's when all those really colourful, flowery, Hawiian style shirts and funny caps come out. With American men visiting Britain it seems to be check trousers. Of course it's by no means all of them but they are the ones that stick out like a sore thumb.
7 June 2004, 22:04
Hey, Stuart: I want to add another perspective to your BLOG Entry, and something that kinda gets missed in the anti-American redirect that is thrown around a lot. If you read the first chapter in Noam Chomsky's “Hegenomy or Survival, America's Quest for Global Dominance, The American Empire Project; You see a great line that sums up the Bush Administration and the World:

“These are all matters that the second superpower, world public opinion, should make every effort to understand it is hopes to escape the containment to which it is subjected and to take seriously the ideas of justices and freedom that come easily to the lips but are harder to defend and advance” (Chomsky: 2003 p.10).

Here Chomsky is arguing that the White House and public opinion have always being at odds. Now the statement regarding public opinion is not just “world” but that of the “American” public opinion also. Many authors in the United States have written entire books on this very concept: more so then that of Micheal Moore who, in his last book presented the same generalization. For Moore, it is Bush against the people.

However, don't even think that Moore is on the same level as Chomsky, because Moore presents a almost conspiracy approach while Chomsky paint a picture that draws a line from the 1700s to the present using history in his model.
7 June 2004, 22:46
hey stuart: it was monday for me when i posted...

and you have to grant me my confusion because remember i was a bit lost for a long while about what the 6th was (aside from d-day)...:-P
8 June 2004, 03:14
It's my clock that counts though.
8 June 2004, 04:55
hm

i want the stats plugin
8 June 2004, 14:53
@Lily - then go get it. It's here.
8 June 2004, 15:10
Well I disagree with a lot of what Noam Chomsky is writing these days. Somewhere he seems to have lost his perspective and his moral compass. I have given up reading him too much. It is quite transparent what his real leanings are. I was hoping for more. A lot more. God knows we need it.
@ Jess on the checks. I believe you. I am sure you wouldn't wear them. Or maybe you could as a kind of double ironic fashion statement. Who knows? But someone needed to lighten this thread a little bit. :)
9 June 2004, 04:29
@Root - I'm just glad you spelled checks properly. You could have been in trouble there and I wouldn't have edited it for the world.
9 June 2004, 06:04
Yes but how the heck are checkered trousers meant to be spelled?
13 June 2004, 21:14
I think it's "checkered", exactly as you have there, but I think the use of the full word is more American. We would tend to use "check".
13 June 2004, 23:21
too tired...
20 June 2004, 13:26
Ahhh. You poor thing.
21 June 2004, 02:24

Commenting is closed for this article.