Talk:Anti-Americanism/Archive 19

message: The united states is the single biggest polluter in the world and yet is behind in terms of utilizing alternative energies, pressuring corporations to clean up their dump sites, and especially the recent rejection of the Kyoto protocol. Bush doesnt even acknowlege that global warming is a problem I just want to get the discussion going so we can add something about global views of american ignorance of progressive environmental policy.
: This article is not the place for personal criticism of the United States. Terms like 'biggest polluter' and 'ignorance' also do not meet wikipedia's POV policy. Environmental issues may be a reason people criticize the United States, but they are not necessarily and demonstrably a source of the concept of Anti-Americanism. Tfine80 01:38, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that there should be a mention somewhere that there is widespread global criticism of many US government policies and laws with relation to the environment, especially since nearly all first-world nations' environmental policies are much more progressive and responsible. Honestly, the article seems biased without a mention of this important issue. Does anyone object if I include some info about critisisms of US environmental policy? I'll give it a few days for people to respond, but if no-one does, then I'm going to go ahead. I'll be as objective as possible. --Qirex 10:12, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "Perceived lack of attention to environmental issues" exists under Other Points in the list of Criticisms. If you'd like to make it's own point like so
*Environmental criticsm
**Criticised for producing x% of pollution.
**etc.
**and so forth
ok, but make it in keeping with what's already there. Marskell 11:52, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: What about the environment

message: Someone wrote this, which I removed:
"American popular culture promotes this view to some extent - the popular animated television show The Simpsons, for example, makes frequent references to American beliefs that they alone are, and should be, responsible for the planet's welfare and development - a view that is not well-accepted by the 97% of the planet's population outside the USA."
if you can give examples of this, fine; but as the simpsons is highly satirical, i imagine the writer is confusing reality with parody.
Benwing 06:27, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Homer is stupid. I don't think his opinions are supposed to be taken seriously. Cadr 20:16, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

text: Actually the text reads (or read, since it was deleted) that "American popular culture promotes this view (that americans are self-centered and believe that the world spins around them , bla bla bla)". Then it states that "the simpsons (...)makes frequent references to American beliefs that they alone are, and should be, responsible for the planet's welfare and development". 
Please read before making such statements.LtDoc 20:13, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  the simpsons?? 

message: getting away from the simpsons stuff, the current opening photo needs to have a caption saying it's a protest against the Vietnam War, which was not imperialist in any literal sense of the word -- and in any case using "American Imperialism" with regards to that conflict is POV. J. Parker Stone 05:01, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: picture

message: A lot of the people here have some very strong opinions for and against anti-american sentiment, and that is a valid discussion. But the fact that this sentiment exists and is extremely prevelant not only in foreign countries but in America as well means that it deserves an article for itself, explaining anti-american sentiment and it's causes, no matter how wrong, biased, or wrongly stereotypical you think anti-american sentiment is. So I suggest we stop bickering over the validity of Anti-american sentiment. Discuss it somewhere else, or be constructive and add your justifications for or criticisms of anti-american sentiment into the article. Xunflash 03:58, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: yeah, and someone replace the goddamn picture. no one cares about a coupla hippies in Wichita J. Parker Stone 04:13, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Relevance of this Discussion

message: imo this article confuses anti-americanism with criticism of particular us policies.  anti-americanism is stereotyping of the u.s. as a whole, or vague accusations such as calling the u.s. "imperialist", which is usually a term of abuse.  it is not simply criticism of some aspect of u.s. policy.  some of the items in the list are typical of anti-american criticism e.g. "Cultural imperialism through spread of English language and American popular culture" and "Claims of excessive nationalism (or patriotism), widespread ignorance and arrogance toward foreigners"; others are merely policy criticisms, e.g. "Support for military dictatorships and totalitarian governments during and after the Cold War"; others may or may not be depending on what exactly is said, e.g. the vague item "American social problems, including high rates of imprisonment and homelessness".  the list needs to separate these out.
also, the pov tag needs a *specific* accompanying discussion in the talk page, or it shouldn't be there. Benwing 05:40, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is that there is no threshold to determine what type of rhetoric is anti-American and what is criticism. What seems anti-American to an American just seems like normal criticism in anti-American POV.  It would actually be more POV to declare what is Anti-American rhetoric definitively. The article had gotten completely out of control and this grouping of rhetoric tried to incorporate all of the previous criticism, so it is an effect the result of an interesting experiment of how people define Anti-American criticism.  I think that there is a kernel of validity in nearly every major criticism, but anti-Americanism can only be the pathological use of this criticism or the criticism of America as the basis of an ideology. Tfine80 14:27, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I still think it's reasonable to separate out the vague criticisms that are *typical* of an anti-American ideology and those that are criticisms of specific policies but which may appear as part of such an ideology.  For example, "support for military dictatorships" refers to specific policies that can be pointed to; "cultural imperialism" OTOH is extremely vague.  The vaguer a criticism, the more likely it is to be "pathological". Benwing 02:39, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I see your point. I partially created the list to eliminate the mess that had been created without being accused of deleting people's edits for no reason.  Look at the history.  Before this list there were endless and contradictory criticisms about the United States along with aggressive attempts to respond. On the other hand, if someone hates American culture is that anti-American? what if they think Americans are ignorant? what if they are still angry about some war 40 years ago? what if they see malicious motives in every American policy action? What are the exact differences between possible Anti-American strands within Communism, Radical Islam, the European left, Latin America, etc....  If we tried to define the strands and decide what parts of their rhetoric makes them Anti-American, we would just be guessing arbitrarily. If it exists, Anti-Americanism is less its rhetoric, than its ideological and political function. Tfine80 04:39, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  laundry list in "anti-american rhetoric"; concept of "anti-american"; pov tag 

message: I feel that at least half of the Europeans have strong doubts as to whether the Americans landed on the Moon and a consistent minority think it was a hoax. That has left me wondering quite a bit, thinking of why they should come to such conclusions even when they haven't even read or listened to academic but also more popular publications. Usually they are big supporters of the conspiracy theory and I think that this all fits within the anti-American movement. Maybe this article could have additions about space exploration, how people perceive it, and the facts about it as it seems it is strictly related to all other subjects contained in the article. --Wikipedius 11:41, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Now, Now... I know many Europeans, in fact I am one myself and I don't think any of them has any serious doubts about the American moon landing. Not more than in the US I would think. And to see this as related to Anti-Americanism seems very far-fetched. You will find many better reasons in the article. --Piet 16:51, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Its nonsense to say that "at least half of the Europeans" don't believe the moon landing. As a European, who has lived in various European countries over many years, I can tell you that the only person I've every met who doubted the moon landing was an American friend. Seabhcán 15:22, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The Americans never landed on the Moon?

message: Anti-American sentiment → Anti-Americanism – Consensus in talk is for new name. Edit history unfortunately already exists there so this can't be done easily. There have been previous mergers. Marskell 09:53, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
*Support Marskell 09:58, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Add any additional comments
Copied request from WP:RM. Struck out double vote. If a strait choice, proposal counts as a vote for the move. Gets around the problem of the WP:RM rough consensus threshold for a requested move when no one else votes! Philip Baird Shearer 14:53, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: :Add any additional comments
Copied request from WP:RM. Struck out double vote. If a strait choice, proposal counts as a vote for the move. Gets around the problem of the WP:RM rough consensus threshold for a requested move when no one else votes! Philip Baird Shearer 14:53, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion