open Democracy News Analysis - Fashionable anti-Americanism Dominic Hilton, - Comments

John Rhys-Burgess on "Fashionable anti-Americanism Dominic Hilton"

John Rhys-Burgess — Sun, 06 Feb 2005 00:43:14 +0000

As one who is often derided for the supposed anti-Americanism of my views and comments, I would say that I was "anti-American" only in the same way that those who opposed totalitarianism in Russia or Germany, were accused of being "anti-Soviet" or "anti-Nazi". The context in which such accusations are made, is pure and unadulterated McCarthyist bigotry. Anti-Americanism implies being opposed to Americanism or what America appears to stand for. As far as I can see, this is to be perceived from the images of Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and Fallujah. It is the recollection of a little child running screaming down a country road in some remote corner of South East Asia, scalded by napalm. If being opposed to defiant breaches of international law, the indiscriminate bombing of civilian targets and infrastructure, arbitrary arrest, detention without trial, torture, death squads, abductions and disappearances, the degrading and inhuman treatment of prisoners: in short, all the traditional instruments of U.S. policy abroad practised and perfected by its agencies of government for decades, then I am indeed anti-American. http://JohnRhysBurgess.tripod.com

gray on "Fashionable anti-Americanism Dominic Hilton"

gray — Sat, 05 Feb 2005 23:34:43 +0000

Dominic Hilton paper on anti-Americanism addresses a very important issue, but does so in a way that does no favour for America, nor to the quality of debate. A pervasive anti-Americanism is dangerous, as it prevents us valuing the enormous creativity that comes from that culture and its organisations, and the positive contribution that the administration can and still does make to world affairs. It also inhibits us from taking seriously the causes of problems that lie outside the US, and what the rest of the world can do about them. Finally, it may further degrade the ability of the US to use its incredible power in the interests of the world as a whole. However, to dismiss criticisms of the US to an “imperfection” hardly does justice to what many see as the result of US policies: widespread death and destruction, exacerbation of the causes of terrorism, massive misuse of resources on military rather then humanitarian goals, blatant disregard for the need to preserve fossil fuel resources and conserve the environment, support for despotic regimes when it suits them and undermining the international institutions which bring coherence to the world. No, the US is not alone in many of these crimes, but it is a dominant player. Further Dominic resorts to dismissing his opponents with such terms as moron perpetrators, pitiful inadequacies, fatuous bunkum, obsession, rank hypocrisy, orgy of anti-American infantilism. Such prose may be entertaining, but destroys any semblance of rational debate. Yes, we need to face the many nuances of our relationships with the US honestly, but let us raise the standard of debate above what Dominic provides us.

tjcass7880 on "Fashionable anti-Americanism Dominic Hilton"

tjcass7880 — Sat, 05 Feb 2005 16:02:15 +0000

hsp62uk:
If Mr hilton doesn't like the negative reaction from the rest of the world, then he and his fellows should never have re-elected the "Toxic Texan"!
You should have voted.

hsp62uk on "Fashionable anti-Americanism Dominic Hilton"

hsp62uk — Sat, 05 Feb 2005 11:47:50 +0000

Hmmm "anti-Americanism" Hermann Goering once quipped "Whenever i hear the word culture, I reach for my revolver!" I feel a similar sentiment whenever i read the phrase "anti-Americanism". Much like "pornography" (or for that matter "anti-Semitism"), the phrase defies precise definition. Conspicious by their absence from Dominic Hilton's self-pitying "isn't it terrible how everybody hates us" screed (shades of The Wall Street Journal!) is the Bush Administration's stance on the Kyoto Accords on global warming, its obsessive hostility to the International Criminal Court, regime change in Iraq, the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal and continuing claims of torture in "Gitmo". For the record I have travelled in America (mainly to attend thanksgiving with my relatives in the Philadelphia area) and have good and true friends there. While I have observed decency, humanity and compassion in individual Americans (ranging from celebrities like Drew Barrymore and Sharon Stone to "ordinary stiffs" such as my Philadelphia friends), I fail to see such qualities in US Government policies from "Dubya" downwards. If Mr hilton doesn't like the negative reaction from the rest of the world, then he and his fellows should never have re-elected the "Toxic Texan"!

wcbn007 on "Fashionable anti-Americanism Dominic Hilton"

wcbn007 — Sat, 05 Feb 2005 09:12:27 +0000

I would say that both America and Dominic are entering that state of denial where everyone else starts praying they learn to change in time. Specifically I pity Dominic for his conclusion America's problems are mainly its own. The world's biggest system problem is a compounding one that goes under various neighbouring technical names but google economics of externalities and that will start you up. One way to interpret this term is your home system knows something is risky and even life critical but over time determines to compound all the risks of death onto a foreign people's or place. This strategy was invented (or has become most common) in America and has become legally constituted into the way that some of America's largest powers measure what they do quarter after quarter as the documentary (by a lawyer) www.thecorporation.com demonstates. Unless we universally abolish externalities economics we will have: at best increasing incidences of global slavery, and worst increasing Tsunami's and Iraqs and far worse. And because its constitutionalised into America's big management systems, unlike it is in any other country, America has become the leading destruction agent with the weapon of externalities. That is why the rest of the world does pray that America learns to desist in time because networks/globalsiation have made some aspects of state separability unsafe- on stuff like abolition of externalities and of policies that compound extreme foreign poverty, globalisation is but one interconnecting system that unites 6 billion beings, and drawing boundaries around any state, but most of all the superpowerul, one is the most dangerous ignorance any writer or media conversationalist could spread chris macrae http://whynotworld.blogspot.com/

douglas-jones on "Fashionable anti-Americanism Dominic Hilton"

douglas-jones — Sat, 05 Feb 2005 07:26:59 +0000

Well somehow my reply has vanished in the maws of the system. I try again. My main point is that this article represents special pleading-not that this is new. The British (Limey) Empire the Dutch, German Spanish,---Roman Empire did similarly.(Less so? -there was little recording) Gradually the world has built up a rule of law and in this case Geneva Conventions and the UN and The laws of international relations are relevant Each empire has sustained "unfair" criticsm for its actions. Sometimes the basis is fashion, envy or any of the human emotions we express sometimes on the basis that the actions contravene what has already been agreed. This latter applies. But a bit more, The Brits wanted to make the world over in their image, perhaps less than some, but they and now the Americans have done so. Douglas Jones Australia

erinleonard2 on "Fashionable anti-Americanism Dominic Hilton"

erinleonard2 — Sat, 05 Feb 2005 04:57:41 +0000

Okay, “uncle!” is Dominic Hilton snowing the snowman, or in this case conning the Neocons? Otherwise it seems this master of swimming through the political rhetoric has stayed in the deep end for too long. Something I know for sure is WHERE it is fashionable to point out how “fashionable anti-Americanism” is, not to mention, also usually the first to let the “anti-,“ “-sims,” “-philes” and “phobes,” and tagging of “apologia” is in Neoconland. Right when the Bush administration and Neocons started in the their war drumming, any who questioned and dared to voice those questions were quickly tagged. Here is an example still posted on the FrontPageMagazine.com from November 11, 2002: Anti-Americanism By Jamie Glazov FrontPageMagazine.com | November 11, 2002 “Anti-Americanism continues to grow more powerful and to mutate into increasingly bizarre and pathological forms. After 9/11, masses of people from all over the world not only celebrated America’s tragedy, but even blamed the victims rather than the perpetrators for the terrorist attacks. As the Bush administration attempts to build a coalition against Saddam Hussein, it becomes evident that the American President’s efforts are frustrated by the vehement strain of anti-Americanism in the international environment. And let’s not kid ourselves: anti-Americanism is no dying force in America itself. To be sure, members of the fifth column in the U.S., led by such radical gurus as Noam Chomsky, continue to hate and despise their own country and society like never before. The war on terror, therefore, must not distract us from one powerful and disturbing truth: that today there are more America loathers outside of militant Islam than inside of it.”http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=4489 One doesn't need to leave these OpenDem boards to verify the tagging of “anti-“ to members who were questioning the wisdom and reasoning for pre-emptive war…anti-war quickly became anti-liberation when the WMD story change…now let’s be sure the demarcation is clearly drawn as “anti-American.” All this name-calling is method to deflect attention from the questions being asked or point being made. I am not a person of means, however I am fortunate that I have traveled to many places around the world. The example of anti-Americanism in the swift and attentive waiting habits of a waiter in Paris is sort of funny, however lets get a little closer to behavior worth worrying about. If anything, wherever I go [as an obvious American who only speaks one language] I invite conversation that asks for opinion or views. This world would be a better place if Washington engaged in honest debate with those who I have heard criticize or question the policies of the United States. Hilton must have lost consciousness in that rhetoric pool during the inaugural address, enough to cause brain damage with the “the United States of America a hiding to nothing”…please…that unmentioned horse race in Iraq was rigged. Sure, it doesn't seem fair the horse takes the beating when it’s the jockey that needs to be run out of town. And I certainly hope Hilton is kidding when he writes, “It would be futile for America to respond in a soul-searching manner to the trash talk of its detractor. Why? Because most of the time, it’s not America’s fault the world so condemns it.” –is a really steaming pile off the track. What has and is being asked for to President Bush and his Administration is accountability. And if “a net incline in Abu Ghraib scandals = a net decline in Pepsi sales” we Americans and the rest of the world just may have been given a clue here as to how to get that accountability, if we switch out transnationals to say Halliburton or to whoever else is pocketing big slices of that 200 billion dished out [it isn’t going to the people of the purple fingers] maybe that would get King George of the Second Coming onto some truth telling therapy couch. Oops. Yikes, yes I got a little touchy there. I suppose it is because I belong to True Majority…never can remember if the founder was Ben or is it Jerry? But because I am fed up an angry with the lies and the non-accountability of the Bush administration in not only foreign policy matters but also environmental and domestic I am DISMISSED by the likes of Anne Applebaum ...oh great... now speaking out this frustration could be tagged as “anti-democratic.” Maybe I'm going to have to wear some big scarlet "A" on my chest for now seeminly being associated with the offensive feelings of being “anti-Christian” AND “anti-Semitic” because someone from Commentary magazine equates “Americanism” as a religion….oh please deliver me…just a little reminder from what springbox doth that flow from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentary_Magazine “Commentary Magazine is a publication of the American Jewish Committee, although the magazine is editorially independent and often takes very different views than the majority of that organization's membership. The magazine is considered a leading voice of the American Jewish community and the neoconservative movementCommentary is known for its passionate support for Israel, for opposition to any Palestinian state, and for favoring American unilaterist foreign policy. It has advocated regime change by force in Iraq and other countries considered hostile to the interests of Israel and the United States, including Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Libya. The case for placing the oil fields of Saudi Arabia under permanent American military occupation has also been advocated by Commentary”. Then to go on and quote Michael Ledeen...Ann Coulter..."The world would do well to be a little more like America, a tad mor insular, self-involved." ???????So what shall we name this New World Order--Planet Michael Jackson? Americans and non, most likely “anti-isms” too, all love to quote that famous Kennedy, “And so, my fellow Americans…” and now it is suggested to all citizens of the world…:to me nothing could be more critical that what my fellow and non alike are doing regarding the actions and accountability of this current American Administration and that is to stand up and speak out!

kvullis on "Fashionable anti-Americanism Dominic Hilton"

kvullis — Sat, 05 Feb 2005 01:24:35 +0000

In the decades ahead if we don't win the war on terrorism and terrorists get hold of chemical, biological and even nuclear weapons anti-Americanism will no longer be a luxury people can afford, they'll have alot more to worry about.

Todd Kurland on "Fashionable anti-Americanism Dominic Hilton"

Todd Kurland — Sat, 05 Feb 2005 01:02:52 +0000

I'm starting a new trend - anti-anti-Americanism.

rfelsing on "Fashionable anti-Americanism Dominic Hilton"

rfelsing — Fri, 04 Feb 2005 23:59:25 +0000

What's worse is Mr. Hilton's irrational rhetorical gambit in which, by virtue of the mere existence of America's principles, we must or are even ABLE to excuse those actions that radically deviate from said principles. Such writing crumbles to dust when examined closely for the kind of character, rationality, or common sense Mr. Hilton SEEMS to espouse. So, let's be explicit, in order that he may not willfully misapprehend: On the contrary, those principles DO NOT excuse, but rather indict the means and the ends, the policies and the purpose of King George V. A pointer, for free. You will not find ingenuousness in David Brooks' columns, nor will you find courage. You'll be hard-pressed to find consistency of core beliefs, particularly if it means holding like-minded politicos to the cherished ideals of personal responsibility or institutional accountability. Mr. Brooks does not feel the need to cater to accuracy or adhere to factual disquisition; he is no less than the NYTs NEWest Jayson Blair. Mr. Hilton! Principles, like ideologies, are fine things -- but THE issue here is, as it ALWAYS is -- how well you live up to them in practice. You write: "And freedom, like charity, discipline and intelligence, begins at home." Ahh. THIS must be where I am to tremblingly beg leave of Ashcroft/Gonzalez/(Bush): "Please, Gov'nah, may I have a second bowl of porridge/(freedom)?" Mr. Hilton forgets, if he ever knew, that those liberties were endowed by our Creator -- and were not contingent upon Bush's generosity, arbitrary whim, nor upon the (falsely) claimed "necessity" of protecting the free, nor is it EVER an option on his part to suspend or curtail those liberties. Despite what you may have been told. So you will NEVER find us, begging like Oliver Twist, for a meager dollop of our BIRTHRIGHT. Of COURSE freedom begins at home. But Bush & Co. would, as The Onion rightly put it, Destroy Liberty in Order to Save Liberty. They destroy American freedoms at home, in substance, while their actions abroad put this nation at great risk -- and come nowhere close to practicing those glorious goals & liberties. We've clearly not learned the lessons of Vietnam: we had to destroy Fallujah in order to save Fallujah. Civilians or not. Lawless civilian contractors engaging in torture or not. So before you go calling Ben & Jerry anti-American, you'd best be sure to verify your assertions of fact, for that is not true. It is, in fact, as Orwellian a statement as can be made. You bandy about words such as conformist, hypocritical, obsessive, and pathetic. Without verifying that factually, and without holding pro-war ideologues to equal account. WHO is hypocritical and blinded by ideology? Who is "just following orders"? Who are the "good Americans" who are "just doing their jobs"? Who lied about WMDs, about the fictional al-Quaeda link w/Iraq? YOu bandy about pejoratives, but they are lies as long as you cannot apply them accurately, and as long as you fail to apply them with equal fervor to the political party currently shredding the rule of law in the U.S., eviscerating America's fiscal health, and actively imploding our national security. These are all substantive and legitimate questions -- none of which have received adequate debate in the wider mainstream media. Mr. Hilton! You got the quote right! Freedom does begin at home. But you got the point and the application of the quotation wrong, inverting it 180 degrees! Freedom begins at home. As long as good men say nothing, freedom will also end at home.

charries on "Fashionable anti-Americanism Dominic Hilton"

charries — Fri, 04 Feb 2005 23:31:50 +0000

Americanism is an ideology. Americans have been telling us that for a long time. For years the House of Representatives had an Un-american Activities Committee in which the nature of "americanism" was refined by the likes of Martin Dies. So to be "anti-american" in the sense of being opposed to "americanism" is something very different from bigotry against an ethnic group. George Bush has told us what Americanism is which is that it is a law unto itself. He may be right. Americanism may be a philosophy which is vital to the future happiness of humanity and the survival of life. Those of us who differ, however, and see Americanism as merely a provincial form of the old imperialism whose opponents have always been subject to the silly charge of being anglophobic (for favouring Irish independence) enemies of civilisation (for seeking to expel French troops from Algeria) and so on. I am resigned to being called anti-american just as the best americans have long resigned themselves to being called "un-american." The truth is that most of those called anti-american just want citizens of the United States to tell their government to put an end to the killing. For America has become what Marx fancied Russia was, a reactionary policeman whose influence is malignant and terrible, that power whose head is in Washington and whose hand is in every cabinet in Europe and every other continent. Dickens, who learned to his dismay that to venture any criticism of America and things US was to risk being accused of bigotry, foresaw "that the heaviest blow ever dealt at liberty will be dealt by this country, in the failure of its example upon earth." The ruins of Fallujah, where the dogs scavenge for the flesh of our brothers and sisters are a monument to just such a blow. Beside such things what is difficult to understand about the irritation people feel when they hear an American voice or see an American flag? And why do Americans have such difficulty in understanding how Americanism is viewed ? Is it simply racism, the sense that nobody sincerely cares about dead Afghans, Serbs or Iraqis ? Is it ignorance born of indifference to others? Is it the consequence of a national mythology which is the only serious work of fiction the US has ever produced?

rfelsing on "Fashionable anti-Americanism Dominic Hilton"

rfelsing — Fri, 04 Feb 2005 23:15:36 +0000

While this article may be well-written, the thoughts behind the words to not even begin to remotely approximate a provocative, incisive, or principled look at the roots and reality of anti-Americanism. I am an American. I don't feel the need to label myself an "America-phile" dilettante-ishly. Why? Because I love America, in specific terms, wiht all of me, and with bottomless depth. My ancestors fought and died in every major war undertaken by America -- including the Revolutionary War and the Civil War (both sides, plus at least one bushwhacker). The bottom line is America needs no defense from folks who CAN'T EVEN RAISE the legitimate issues surrounding America's character, founding principles, and recent refusal to adhere to those laws or act in good conscience according to that character. Mr. Hilton fails to express even the most obvious issues at hand. Americans and Europeans alike are pro-American -- but have legitimate and lengthy and well-documented reasons for objecting to American behavior and policy that contradicts, undermines -- and betrays those core American principles and laws for which my ancestors and yours fought and died. Current US policy makes a mockery of that service, and is a SUBSTANTIVE REVERSAL of everything this country stands for. You just watched John McCain vote to confirm Alberto Gonzalez for AG -- despite the fact that McCain was tortured in Vietnam, he voted to confirm a man who knows so little about this country and who clearly does not believe in or uphold the most profound and unshakeable principles that make this country great, successful, and respected. In the run-up to the war with Iraq, John Bolton kept braying shrilly that the Germans "should just shut up and follow orders." Hmmm. Anybody know why the Holocaust happened? According to those with the capacity to analyze the 'event,' citizens of the Third Reich excused their inaction by saying "I am a good German." "I was only following orders." "I was just doing my job." NOW, Bolton was telling Schroeder, the duly elected leader of a democratic sovereign nation, to simply "just follow orders" again, to again commit whatever atrocities they were instructed to by the New Leader -- GW Bush. The implications of Bolton's words and of the general policy are staggering. There will be a new genocide, of sorts, there will be torture -- but it must be ok because it is America that is doing it this time around. The Germans were reviled for their actions in WWII, and the US is unlikely to escape the same historical judgement and sentence, win or lose in Iraq. The rift, Mr. Hilton, is not between Europe and America. It is between Washington DC and America. There is an arrogance abroad in the land, and it will not prevail in eliminating American democracy here at home through the raw exercise of power. We have a leader who protesteth too much by continually uttering the words "freedom" and "liberty" while actively, unilaterally, and illegally snuffing that liberty out at home and abroad. War is Peace. Arbeit macht Frei. Again, the tear in the social fabric, the cancer in the body politic, the betrayal here -- is by Washington DC, and of the American nation. For Mr. Hilton to trivialize or to wax smart-alecky, to gloss over the issue or to spin eruditely and anecdotally about conversations with EUROPEANS is not only an abuse of language, but a betrayal of what we all know to be true. I am pro-American. Always will be. Can Dominic Hilton say the same thing? I don't believe that he can credibly assume that position.

Fashionable anti-Americanism Dominic Hilton,

Fri, 04 Feb 2005 22:02:15 +0000

Your article did shake up the reality of anti-Americanism for me. I also learned some more sophisticated things than I had known. Thank you. Yes, I think it is pseudo- as you say, just like best-friend arguments are pseudo. They value America and they need America to be on their side. They are simply disappointed. The idea of European snobbishness is completely out-of-date. They are really disappointed. Bush was lucky and therefore we were lucky, because the first Iraq election came off. But going into war the way we did, with what the higher-up non-scholar politicians did not realize about the Middle East politics and religion was traumatically dangerous. Educated Europeans on the whole are more widely educated than Americans, with the exception of scholars. They hated the kind of demoralizing torture that Americans resorted to. That's like finding your father or your husbland is sleeping with a whore or your mother is working for a pimp. They have a right to feel injured. I certainly do and I'm all-American. Read the rest of this post...