Talk:Anti-Americanism in various countries

What this page is not

I think this page should be clear about what it is not. It is *not* a list of grievances about the US. It is also NOT a list of allegations about the US. It is an analysis/history of anti-American sentiment in various regions. I see a lot of people surfing in and tacking on some personal grievance. The articles should be focused on the phenomenon of anti-Americanism in each region (if it is exists there). Philippe Roger's book "The American Enemy" is a great example: It focuses entirely on France, and shows that Anti-Americanism in France has more to do with France than to do with America. (He sets aside the rightness or wrongness of US policy, and focuses purely on France). Critiques of US policy should be put on a page for that purpose, or put in a context of the local politics.

Another point: Criticism does not equal anti-Americanism, which is a prejudice / hatred for the US. Please don't list grievances if they can not be shown as contributing significantly to a spirit of Anti-Americanism in the country -- AND you are prepared to show (with references!) that it contributes to anti-Americanism.

Anti-Americanism is also not a list of "recent issues" between countries. Countries do have conflicts and disagreements, but the task here is whether a conflict influences significantly the anti-American sentiment. The Iraq war caused poll numbers of the US to drop in several countries, but I doubt tariff fights in the WTO over banana imports is comparable.

Also, please use sources and cite actual critics/references. Too much pretending that ones personal opinion is "widespread criticism". Willowx 06:40, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I really disagree with some of the above. Anti-Americanism is defined in the main article as "broad range of attitudes and actions that are thought to be opposed or hostile to the government, culture, or people of the United States. ". This is NOT the same as prejudice/hatred, because it can be rational oppostion. Anti-American sentiment is often rational and based on the activities of the US, and so it makes sense to say what caused these feelings.Thom2002 10:26, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV creation of topics?

Are there pages detailing anti-Japanese or anti-French sentiment by country? I just wonder if it is legitimate to have a disproportionate number of pages devoted to essentially criticism of a single nation, while none exists for most if not all other countries. I think the NPOV dispute centers on the fact that this page seems not to be truly objective, and instead has the motive simply of listing in greater detail every possible grievance by anyone for anything. Just as a thought experiment, imagine if your local newspaper devoted several pages to criticisms and crimes by a certain group or population (Jews, women, blacks, Cuban immigrants) and none for any other group. Wouldn't this selective focus of criticism be viewed as in and of itself discriminatory? Opinions??Willowx 5 July 2005 14:26 (UTC)

If someone wants to create such articles he can, that's Wikipedia. It's normal that the English version of the Wikipedia contains more US-related articles. --Zimbricchio 5 July 2005 11:16 (UTC)

Yes, you can create anti- topics on other nations -- and they will immediately put up for VfD. I'm not kidding! Willowx 06:40, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, obviously you can make pages, as well as delete. But shouldn't there be some proportion? And I doubt there are so many pages on the German site, for example, about anti-German sentiment. Willowx 5 July 2005 14:26 (UTC)

There's a wikiproject dedicated to countering systemic bias: WP:BIAS, this might interest you. Because we don't have a page talking about anti-Nigerian or anti-Argentinian bias doesn't mean that we shouldn't have one on anti-American or anti-French or anti-British sentiment. All encyclopedic topics should be covered on the encylopedia, if there's anti-Nigerian bias to talk about, is encyclopedic and verifiable, then we should have an article on it. -- Joolz 5 July 2005 15:39 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip on the Bias project Willowx 06:40, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, Id add that if you make a world census, youll find that the USA is the most "disliked" (when not hated) nation in the world, to which the proportion of "anti-.." pages would be just right. Im pretty sure there are some Turks that have anti-Equatorian feelings, but their numbers would be oh so few, in contrast to the anti-americanism in the world today.LtDoc 23:02, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt that. These polls are mostly in the developed world, especially Europe or conversely Muslim populations. No doubt it is widespread but so is anti-semitism, prejudice against blacks, etc. Willowx 06:40, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the reason that the United States may be disliked is because it controls a large amount of world capital, collateral, and culture. You can naturally assume that if the most powerful country in the world does not respect or cater to the needs of a specific country, there will be some friction and prejudice. I say the article should stay, since it helped me understand why many countries feel angry toward my country, and helped me understand their rationale, or lack thereof.--Ikiroid 00:33, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-American sentiments in other parts of the world

This page is lacking of American sentiments from other parts of the World such as the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and Africa. Does anyone have anything to contribute?

Maybe there aren't any Anti-American sentiments in those other parts of the world? Just a thought. Rl 08:04, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Middle East really has to be included. In keeping with the style two representative countries make sense--I'd suggest Saudi and Iran. If no one does this I'll do it myself this week. Good move splitting it incidentally; anti-american sentiment had grown much too long. Marskell 10:56, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Something the international community doesn't really realise is the level of sentiment against Americans in Australia. Australia's Prime Minister, John Howard, is often seen as "Bush's deputy in Asia" - In reality he is. However, the people of Australia (well at least those in Sydney) actually have quite strong views against Americans - particularly teenagers

snobbery

"there is also a certain disdain for American culture and in particular American English, which could be construed as snobbery."

This is definitely not neutral. ----JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 11:58, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this article needs some work to make it more balanced, factual and put some context into these things. If I get a chance sometime this week I may attempt a rewrite. -- Joolz 23:40, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I edited out the 'snobbery' statement and the phrase referencing American English. As a Brit, I'd say that some many stereotyped elements of US culture (McDonalds, oil obsession, the impact of religion on US politics, being overly patriotic) are mocked much more than American English.

Glazer / Manchester United

I think that Glazer's contribution to anti-Americanism in the UK as a whole is rather modest, and not really worth a reference here. Of course if someone ever writes a piece on anti-American sentiment in the Greater Manchester area .. It's also worth remembering that it's the circumstances of his takeover, and the manner in which it incurred a huge debt onto the club that made him so unpopular there, not his nationality. jamesgibbon 17:09, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Agreed - I'm sure many people who don't support Manchestser United actually like Glazer, and surely the fact he is American has very little to do with it?!?

I deleted the paragraph about Malcolm Glazer. Although it is a good example of anti-Americanism in the UK, Glazer has had a very small impact upon anti-Americanism in the UK compared to the actions of the current Republican government and its foreign policy, for example.

about the name United States & and Latin America

it really is a cause of confusion with México's name? I mean the Méxicans don't call themselves Estadounidenses only Mexicans (Méxicanos in spanish). and in Latin American Anti-Americanism someone has information about Cuba or Venezuela?.--Duranguense 23:20, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Goverments or "the people" ?

I would expect the opion of the population of the nations here not the government or politicians. For example the part "Other countries of the european union". I can assure you that no one here (EU) cares about whats written there. There are completely different reasons for Anti-American sentiments here such as:

Attacking other nations for oil. No one here believed in Saddam having weapons of mass destruction. Sure Saddam was a dictator but there are a lot of other dictators around and the USA happily trades with them or even supports them.

American Polititians using the word "freedom" in every third sentence and using it to legitimise wars and at the same time installing things like concentration camps and the patriot act.

American media showing all form of violence and suppresing sex. One Example is Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. In this game you can shoot, drown, burn, stab, kick people to death (among a lot of other things) but as soon as sex is shown the game has to be made adult only. That is something most people in the EU just dont understand. Nudeness and sex is not viewed as wrong or immoral here, but violence is. You can lie naked at a beach or in a park here and no one will even be interested. Uni-Sex saunas in which you are naked are considered normal. At the same time the USA is the western nation with most pregnant teenagers. "If you suck on a tit the movie gets an R rating. If you hack the tit off with an axe it will be PG." Jack Nicholson

Religion: Stuff like teaching Creationism in schools or the whole "pro- (contra-) choice" discussion about abortion. Nobody I know can understand that. not even religious people. This reminds us of the fundametalistic moslems the American government likes to talk about so much.

And I dont even want to start the part about arresting little children (and perfoming daily "full body hole search" on them for kissing another child or helping their sister to pee.

I could not agree more with Jack Nicholson on this subject. Here in Sydney, Australia, the teenage population is anti-american in many ways. Not only politically and historically (the history of the US isn't that crash hot - in fact it's terrible) but also the average American. They're portrayed as ignorant (which they are - i've been to California, Nevada, Arizona and Hawaii) especially of Australians. Just look at a simple Simpsons episode - the one where they go to Australia. It's as if we're all living in the 19th century or something! And with kangaroos jumping around in the streets and with that stereotypical Aussie accent while all these 'blokes' just drink beer. Most australians have never even seen a kangaroo in the wild and Australians actually drink less than Americans when it comes to beer.

Yet I cant speak for the whole Australian teenage population because I only know teenagers in Sydney. Anti-Americanism is strong in Sydney but Sydney is an extremely multicultural city. Where i live and go to school every second person isn't 'skip' (aussies whose ancestors arrived as convicts or free settlers about 100 years ago or so). But aussie teen Europeans, Asians and teens from the Middle East (most of which are born in Australia) just can't stand Americans.

Tip: If you're an American and you ever come to visit Australia - just say you're Canadian.

What about anti-European attitudes?

A related phenomenon which might be worthy of an article, is anti-European sentiment within the US. Much as the rest of the world has had gripes with the US over the years (for various reasons, both good and bad); us yankees have happily dished it back 'cross the Atlantic. Many of the grounds for anti-Europeanism in the US mirror alleged grounds for anti-Americanism in Europe.

Some grounds, over the years. Note, I am not expressing agreement with any of these; just laying on the table what has been expressed elsewhere.

Opposition to monarchy (especially the non-Constitutional kind) and feudalism. Highly prevalent during the 18th and 19th centuries; much less so today.
A belief that Europeans are lazy. Originally derived from the disdain for physical labor among European nobility (though wealthy "society" in the US soon acquired a similar distaste for work, and contempt for the working class). Nowadays, certain European labor laws (such as the French 35-hour work week) are routinely mocked in the US.
General disdain for the more-leftward politics found in Europe; particularly economic policies which (alledgedly) promote a greater welfare state and higher taxes.
A specific disdain for what is perceived as French obstructionism regarding the recent Iraq war
A generic disdain for perceived European pacifism in general, including a belief that Europeans (in particular the French) are cowards.
Some Americans view "European" culture as excessively hedonistic and/or insufficiently religious; in particular, European attitudes towards sex and drugs.
The capital punishment issue. Many US supporters of it resent European criticism of the US on this issue as unwarranted interference in US affairs. (Of course, US criticism of human rights issues in other countries such as China is often met with the same retort).
A general belief that Europeans embrace a form of European exceptionalism, and consider European culture to be somehow superior to that of the US. In particular, a belief that European attitudes towards certain US cultural institutions (such as Disney) constitutes snobbery.
A belief that Europeans are more tolerant of corruption and realpolitik, and willing to overlook human rights issues and such, in dealings with foreign leaders. (A specific charge, popular in the US among conservatives, is that French opposition to the Iraq war was due to a French desire to engage in trade with Saddam Hussein. Another common charge is that European corporations, moreso than their US counterparts, engage in bribery when trying to win business in developing nations).
A belief that European objections to media violence is just as silly as Europeans consider American objections to media sex.
A belief that Europe exercises undue influence in many international organizations, such as the International Olympic Committee. The recent decision to remove baseball and softball from the 2008 Summer Games is widely seen as an anti-American maneuver.
Numerous trade issues, in particular Airbus vs Boeing.

Certainly, folks who hold some of the above positions are rather hypocritical; as the US (or US companies or individuals) frequently do some of the same things that Europe gets criticized for.

This is coming from an Australian - what is it between the Americans and the French? What is going on with that?

Unsourced

I've added a new flag to this article since it's almost completly unsourced.

Also in the interests of NPOV the article needs a section that discusses anti-American sentiment in the context of sentiment about other powerful countries. How do Southeast Asian countries view China? How did other nations view the former Soviet, French, and British empires? To omit this discussion implies an uncritical acceptance of the partisan view that something makes the United States uniquely objectionable. Durova 15:33, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not a topic of knowledge?

While clearly there exists anti-"nationality of your choice" for any nation, as an article in an encyclopedic body, this is not warranted to even exist. It is historically, politically, and geographically decontextualized, and the entire article presents nothing that could not be adressed in articles about specific actions, places, people, etc. How do we delete a whole article?

I agree wholeheartedly with the above statement. This article is not needed. If a country or region really does have anti-anything as a major feature of their culture then it needs to be addressed on the main article for that country or region. Otherwise this could be mentioned on a page relating to American foreign policy (past or present), but having it's own page like this is nothing but a red flag for personal opinions, vandals, and trolls, and is not appropriate in an encyclopedic context. Citizen D 00:17, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

I removed the large section of a paragraph with the statement: "Liberal Canadians disagree with various American policies on..."

This paragraph in this article is blatant POV (essentially saying liberal Canadians only chose these decisions because of antiamerican attitudes). What liberal Canadians or any Canadians really, disagree or agree with in American policy has nothing to do with antiamericanism or preceived antiamericanism. Canada also doesn't have a death penalty, but that wasn't antiamericanism that lead to this decision. Further, many Americans have the same views as liberal Canadians on these same topics. Are they also antiAmerican?

Merge

This page seems best suited to some serious editing and shortening prior to being merged into the USA article. I'm thinking it should be a subsection much like the "international disputes" subsection listed for every country in the CIA world factbook. Thoughts, comments, suggestions? Anne 23:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OR tag

While many of the statements on this page seem to be true, sections of this text are highly open to accusations of "original research". As in "Brazil", the article claims that certain events have caused anti-american sentiment, when this is not backed by any outside source and it is just the observation of the writer. To speculate as to any causal relationship between any action of the US and anti-American sentiments without proper sourcing is OR. The loss of half the national territory in the Mexican War continues to create an image of an expansionist, imperialist United States. What Mexican person thinks back to the Mexican-American War when reflecting on the US? Is this not speculation? Your thoughts? AdamBiswanger1 16:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I could tag the article with a more extreme tag such as "this article is baloney" I would. Cubans, for example, are anti US-Government foreign policy when relevant. And with good reason. To describe Cuba as anti-American is nonsense. Not least because in Cuba the term America is applied to the Americas not the US. But more pertinently, Cuba and the US have such strong historical ties that much of US culture is as idolised in Cuba as it is in the US.--Zleitzen 17:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD time?

While I'm not going to nominate this yet; this article seems to be getting worse and not better. Much original research, lots of unsourced material, and not-well structured. If the article doesn't improve, it may be time to haul it off to AfD. If you have contributed to this article (in particular, adding new content), please add cites. --EngineerScotty 18:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The whole article is deeply misleading, contains absurd sweeping generalisations and is potentially offensive. Here are a few examples of how poor this page is

Pics of demonstrators sweepingly labelled "anti-American" without justification, citation or explanation. Was the old man shown in Liverpool "anti-US" or was he just protesting the policies of Condaleezza Rice?
"French anti-Americanism, which peaked in the 1930s and 1950s, has been criticized recently for its alliance with illiberal philosophies. Jean-Paul Sartre" - what?
"Some early examples of anti-Americanism in Spain took place during the Spanish-American War" - well, it was the Spanish-American war! Perhaps by engaging in war Spain itself was merely expressing "anti-American sentiment", I just don't know anymore.
"While Japan is, on the whole, one of the most pro-American countries" - Good Grief. When was this? Before or after Pearl Harbor?
"Prior to the United States' formal recognition of the PRC, anti-American sentiments have perhaps existed in China since the beginning of Sino-U.S. relations." - perhaps?
"many Mexicans have mixed feelings about the United States" - no comment needed.

Look, the above comment by EngineerScotty should be taken seriously. This article is deeply confused, comprises almost entirely of original research and is basically unsalvagable. It should be deleted.--Zleitzen 04:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]