Anti-Americanism/Irish Neutrality

rsynnott

lazydaisy wrote:

"Un-American" was a term used by McCarthyests to label Americans suspected of sympathising with or assisting communists. It was an accusation of treason.

I think he was referring to it being a bit of crazy sensationalism more than anything else...

bonkey

lazydaisy wrote:

I do not equate anti-American sentiments with the support of communism if that's what you mean or certainly not of treason, as I am clearly not talking to Americans here.

But if you were talking to Americans who were espousing teh same attitudes, what would you call them?

The trend (at least as reported by the media) seems to be to label them as being unpatriotic, and the moer extreme accusers do indeed wander across the line and throw allegations of treason / treasonous behaviour around.

I sincerely doubt that those who use this term mean it in the way McCarthy and his supporters did.

Except for the distinction of the nationality of the person being lambasted, I'd say they're pretty much identical. As I said...if you check out the names levelled at "American anti-Americans", rather than "non-American anti-Americans" it becomes even clearer.

jc

The Corinthian

rsynnott wrote:

IBM, you mean? Well, they sold them equipment, which helped them with the concentration camps, yes. It wasn't exactly active help, any more than, say, America selling weapons and such to Iraq a while back was.

They also devised the original numbering system that was tattooed on concentration camp prisoners:

http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com/articles/auschwitz.html

Oh and Hitler didn’t make the trains run on time, that was IBM:

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0213,black,33412,1.html

And, on a related note, the less said about Henry Ford, the better:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/nov98/nazicars30.htm

I just can’t shake this image of a consultant presenting a PowerPoint™ presentation to Himler...

rsynnott

The Corinthian wrote:

They also devised the original numbering system that was tattooed on concentration camp prisoners:

http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com/articles/auschwitz.html

The Hollerith system used was patented in 1887. IBM did supply the infrastructure, tho. Whether the parent company knew what was going on is questionable; the German subsidiary certainly did.

They also supplied machinery to help run the apartheid system in South Africa.

None of this is really a particularly big deal; the likes of Boeing and EADS provide nasty things to oppressive regimes on a daily basis.

lazydaisy

Ken Shabby wrote:

I think the lads are probably considering the phrase in the manner in which it's used. It was crystal clear to me that that's what Victor was saying anyway, and I agree with him. But I think perhaps you know that very well, and you're being obtuse just for the sake of it, for appearances.

I have to ask.... so I know what page people are on. It might have a different resonance for different people. Un-American in the way McCarthy used it has a very potent and specific evocation. Anti-American does have a different significance. As far as I could see, Victor was asking a question, not making a statement. BTW McCarthy's un-american, is distinct not only from anti-american but also from the more generic usage of unamerican [which does not have the connotations of accusing someone of treason or of witch hunts.]

Bonkey-

Firstly let me say that I don't see all the attitudes here as necessarily anti-American. If I were talking to Americans and found these attitudes would I call them anti-american or treasonous? . That's an interesting question because I dont usually find the same sentiments among Americans. Treasonous - no. If they joined or helped Al Q than yes I would call them treasonous. Americans often have an apologetic undertone about their country if they dont support the Iraq war, even the ones who supported war in Afghanistan. Or the ones who really hate their country want to live in Europe where they can find sympathisers. Yeah - they are very clearly anti-american, and will call themselves that too.

rsynnott

lazydaisy wrote:

Americans often have an apologetic undertone about their country if they dont support the Iraq war, even the ones who supported war in Afghanistan.

Which is quite reasonable; I'd feel embarrassed if my country conducted an illegal and pointless war, too. Would you really call them Anti-American? They are simply unhappy with the current dodgy administration and its policies.

lazydaisy wrote:

Or the ones who really hate their country want to live in Europe where they can find sympathisers. Yeah - they are very clearly anti-american, and will call themselves that too.

Or possibly they simply feel that they can't live in a (hopefully temporarily) increasingly totalitarian regime, or they don't want to live in a country where soon their children may be taught religious ideas in science classes, or in a country that tortures people (America uses interrogation techniques considered torture by the EU and Israel, but not by themselves or the UN) or in a country which wants a constitutional ban on gay marriage... Again, many of these people may simply have problems with the current regime. I'd be inclined to emigrate if at all possible if Sinn Fein got a majority in the government here; that doesn't mean I'd be "Anti-Irish", it just means I'd be against the current regime.

On a related note, what do you think about the proposed amendment to ban flag burning?

lazydaisy

Flag burning, confederate, american, EU, whatever it is - should absolutely not be banned. To me the issue is more about the burning - as long as its safe and no one gets hurt- burn away. Freedom of speech has to be protected.

No I wouldnt call Americans who are embarrassed about the war anti-american. I believe I said that.

Totalitarian - are you kidding me?

They come out and say it "I hate America. I'm anti-american. This piece of **** country." The adminsitration will be out in a couple of years. Uprooting your life every election does not for a good life make. You'd just jump ship when things werent going your way? You wouldn't want to stay to help make changes in your country like Michael Moore who loves America tried to do despite not liking the current administration? Just wait and what happens when Sinn Fein secures power in the Dail and you go abroad. You'll know exactly what I'm talking about.

rsynnott

lazydaisy wrote:

Flag burning, confederate, american, EU, whatever it is - should absolutely not be banned. To me the issue is more about the burning - as long as its safe and no one gets hurt- burn away. Freedom of speech has to be protected.

Good; there's some hope for you

lazydaisy wrote:

Totalitarian - are you kidding me?

It is certainly heading in that direction. The police and military have been given broad new powers under the fear of terrorism (note that terrorism kills orders of magnitudes fewer Americans than those who die for lack of basic medical care.) A few people were even briefly detained for speaking out against the USAPATRIOT act. Its dealings with other countries are also less than desirable; it is considering changing its policy to allow use of nuclear weapons against countries with none of their own (it would become the only significant nuclear power to allow this).

lazydaisy wrote:

They come out and say it "I hate America. I'm anti-american. This piece of **** country." The adminsitration will be out in a couple of years. Uprooting your life every election does not for a good life make. You'd just jump ship when things werent going your way? You wouldn't want to stay to help make changes in your country like Michael Moore who loves America tried to do despite not liking the current administration?

I'd be skeptical of how much change anyone can make at this point. In practice, though, how many people (besides Moslems, for whom things have been made very unpleasant; in one state, a government body asked truckers to report any Moslems (or anyone who looked a bit Moslem) they saw driving lorries, for instance.) have left out of moral outrage?

lazydaisy wrote:

Just wait and what happens when Sinn Fein secures power in the Dail and you go abroad. You'll know exactly what I'm talking about.

I don't think this will happen. But if the country elects terrorists, it'll be far too far gone for anyone to make a difference. (Note that I'm not just picking on SF/IRA here; I'd be just as dubious of a Paisley-led government, though that seems far less likely. Also, Paisley at least has the decency to be obviously evil, and possibly insane; Adams, on the other hand, seems more each year to be a happy, smiley, Rolf Harris impersonator.)

Victor

lazydaisy wrote:

As far as I could see, Victor was asking a question, not making a statement.

Actually it was a "pertinent question", one where I knew the general direction of the likely answer.

McCarthy, like Smathers and Nixon[1], used his words, not in an objective manner, but as a means of insulting, demeaning and vilifying his opponents. His objective was not to seek the truth, but to win.

I see allegations of "Anti-Americanism" as an localised version of "un-American". It is vilification for not following the cause of the speaker. Of course it is quite possible that the speaker is merely repeating a mantra of someone else, not having thought the point out fully, for fear they themselves will be branded.

[1] http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=190227
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/994680/posts
http://www.sptimes.com/2003/11/29/State/A_born_winner__if_not.shtml

lazydaisy

rsynnot says:
Good; there's some hope for you

Explain please. What do you mean?

Victor says,

McCarthy, like Smathers and Nixon[1], used his words, not in an objective manner, but as a means of insulting, demeaning and vilifying his opponents. His objective was not to seek the truth, but to win.

What you describe is also known as verbal abuse.

fly_agaric

Victor wrote:

I'm wondering is anti-American the same as McCarthy era "un-American"?

Coming from some people, it's a bit like the mirror image of the perjoratives "fascist" or "imperialist running dog" as used by communists to describe anyone who disagrees with them.