Text 3830, 66 rader
Skriven 2010-01-27 12:53:11 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
Ärende: Britain -- England -- UK
================================
Hello Robert,

On Tuesday January 26 2010 07:43, you wrote to me:

 MV>> Honesty compells me to admit that anti Americanism didn'start with
 MV>> Bush. Johnson contributed his fair share too.

 RB> Which is just slightly hypocritical, since Johnson only continued what
 RB> "Saint" Kennedy started.

Possibly. But keep in mind that my generation was the first to have no first
hand knowledge of WWII. My generation was the first not having to carry the
traumas and hence not saddled with "we must be grateful because they freed us
from Hitler".

We were the first post war generation that could look at the US through a
different pair of glasses. Glasses that also showed the dark side.

It was at the dawn of the political awareness of my generation that things went
badly wrong in Vietnam and then Johnson was in the driver's seat. So naturally
the focus of our awakening political awareness was on Johnson.

I'd say that at least for Western Europe, the reign of Johnson marks the start
of anti Americanism.

 RB> But in the final analysis, anti-Americanism exists because:

 RB> - The Americans are militarily powerful and people fear that

Especially since in the perception of many they abuse that power.

 RB> - The Americans are not insular as in the days before WWI
 RB> - The Americans still have the (questionable) idea that they can
 RB> change the world for the better, and act accordingly -

And make a mess in the process.

 RB> Some Americans, after seeing the mess others have made of the world,
 RB> tend to adopt a cynical attitude toward other nations and peoples -
 RB> and often go too far because of that

Yes, there is that.

But there is more. I won't list it, the observant reader knows my POV.

 RB> If America were militarily weak and/or insular, there would be much
 RB> less or no anti-Americanism. But of course, there would also be no
 RB> really strong, stabilizing influence in the world either, presumably
 RB> no NATO and no UN, as both were initiated after WWI by the Americans.

That "stabilising influence" has done more harm than good over the years.

 RB> As in the case of politicians, if you do something - anything - you're
 RB> damned for it by some of the people.

Very true.

 RB> The only time you're not criticized is when you do nothing - unless
 RB> you'ere an American, and then people criticize you for that too.

Not true. Not only US politicians are citicized for doing nothing.

Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)