What America means to me ;-)

[sistermagpie]

Happy birthday shusu and wayfairer!!!

And a very happy Guy Fawkes Day! Somebody light something on fire for me.:-)

This is probably going to be another rambly post as I try to work things out. I don't usually think about America as a mythical entity, but I sort of have been since Tuesday. This isn't a criticism of anything on lj, really, just a general something I've noticed since 9/11. Maybe it's mostly due to my personal perspective and projections, but

Right after 9/11--the day of, actually, I remember watching BBC news and they had a correspondent in NYC and asked him, "What's it like there? Presumably there's quite an atmosphere of fear and dread." At home I thought, "Huh? No, not really." And the correspondent paused and said, "No...no, actually there is no overwhelming atmosphere of fear. People are out, walking around, talking, eating at restaurants. If anything this seems to have convinced them even more that they live in the best city in the world." Heh. It was kind of true. But anyway yes, there really was no panic. It was sad and disturbing, but I guess Rudy Guilliani was the perfect face for it in the way he got to work and consistently appealed to people's common sense. When someone asked a hysterical leading question he called them on it. He kept saying things like, "NY is stronger than this. This is not the end of the world. We are not the first city to be attacked." That was very reassuring.

Unfortunately, I felt like immediately afterwards, as soon as the Federal Government snapped out of its deer-in-the-headlights shock, it set to work destroying just that kind of feeling. I kept thinking myself how 9/11 probably would have been a great mobilizing force to get people to, for instance, cut down on their fuel consumption, but no, the opposite was encouraged. I think people really wanted to do something constructive, but the government and the media, it seemed to me, kept telling people no, don't do that. If you do that the terrorists win. Here's what you do: Buy stuff. Worry about you and yours. Quietly panic. Pray to the Christian God to smite non-believers. Worry some more. Drive around in a gas guzzling car. Practice being a victim.

And people did.

In a way, those days were probably the time I got my first inkling of being "the liberal elite." I remember talking on a mailing list and saying something about how one good thing that might come of this was maybe it would inspire more Americans to see themselves as part of the world where there were other countries that affected us and that we affected. I thought this was a pretty non-radical thing to say, and was surprised to find that this statement seemed to be considered offensive by a lot of people. For two reasons: one, it was taken to mean that I was saying people were hicks for not having made The Grand Tour of Europe or something. They didn't have the money to go to Europe! How dare I suggest they go to France when they had bills to pay! I was completely confused--I didn't mean you had to tour Europe, I just suggested a sort of change in perspective. Second it was bad because thinking about other countries seemed to be the same as putting other countries ahead of America: Why should I go to Versailles? Have you ever been to Carlsbad Caverns? Ha! You hate America! So I learned: don't even suggest that other countries are countries the way America is.

Unfortunately it began to seem that for a lot of people (not all, of course), the main way they began to relate to other countries was to consider whether they felt sorry enough for America after 9/11. Genuine sympathy was sadly often taken as owed rather than really appreciated. I've just felt like the media/gov't whatever continues to appeal to just that side of the American character and it's really embarrassing! So I think it kind of is probably hard for me to not ever come across as sounding sort of...contemptuous at times, and hopefully not just along something like red/blue state lines, because I don't think it's that. It's not that I have any sort of blanket hatred for people who voted for Bush or live in a red state; I honestly don't. It's just it worries me that there seems to be such a big movement right now in this country towards both seeing yourself as a victim and easily writing off anything like the real thing. Sometimes it feels like the strong part of the country (by which I don't mean "me" or "my part of the country" but just individuals or groups that don't see things this way) is constantly having to adapt to the needs of the weak and demanding.

And I really feel--getting back to the attitude after 9/11--that this is something that can be changed, because I thought the original response to that day was healthy and strong. I think I was just really disappointed that the heroic image we immediately had seemed to get taken over by tackiness and schmaltz. I really believe that if the government had stepped up and given people positive things to do and laid out a reasonable change in attitude we would be much stronger today no matter who was president. Instead I feel like we're just encouraged to throw a blanket over our heads all the time, to be resentful and defensive for no reason. When that kind of attitude takes control I find it hard to believe we'll be able to do anything successfully. I just feel like we spend so much time convincing ourselves we've done nothing wrong we can't fix anything we have, and so much time accusing other people of being mean to us we can't benefit from any good advice we might have for us.

I mean, I realize that when somebody calls you stupid it gets your back up, but you know? Maybe I'm weird, but no matter how angry I am at somebody calling me stupid, I'll pretty much always consider the possibility before I completely dismiss it. Likewise, I do actually read posts by people who voted for Bush and wonder if they are correct in the way they see things. Honestly, there have been few that I have come across of any substance, unfortunately. But not all of them. So really, while I currently still believe I made the right choice in my vote for President, I hope that if somebody proved to me I was wrong I'd have the guts to just admit it-and be happy, really, because I would love to have the best man for the job in office. As I've said before, I'd rather be right than just win a stupid argument. I just feel like somewhere along the line somehow this country lost the desire to be that way and settled for something worse. We don't seem to strive to be anything I would consider, for lack of a better word, cool. Our national character just seems kind of petty, and that's not something I'd want my own name attached to, let alone God's.

Comments

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

I'm annoyed at the people who get mad at the rest of the world for, I don't know, caring about an election that will have an affect on them in the future.

This is a huge deal for more than just US citizens. And while I wish that it weren't, wishing doesn't change the fact that it is. And anyone who has the potential to be hurt by an election certainly has the right to speak out about it. Otherwise, we really are becoming a petty, fascist, doomed country.

[anehan]

Unfortunately it began to seem that for a lot of people (not all, of course), the main way they began to relate to other countries was to consider whether they felt sorry enough for America after 9/11.

"Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." And that attitude is by no means productive. Rather, it causes resentment in other countries. I know that my first, admittedly stupid, reaction to it is that I'd rather be with the terrorists. And some people wonder why America is so hated.

[kind-strangers.livejournal.com]

Amen. I , also, was appalled that more consumption was touted as a way to prove America's strength. A hate the 'with us or against us' attitude. Too many people take the attitude that having the biggest economy and strongest military mean that no other country has things America should learn and adopt.

As a foreign example of the same kind of arrongance: I was talking to Japanese school principal who had recently been overseas to observe foreign education systems. I asked him what ideas he saw that he would like to implement in Japan. He said, "Nothing." I was appalled. Even tho I consider the Japanese education system inferior (but not lousy), I still can name several things from the Japanese sytem that could be beneficially implemented outside Japan.

[ljash.livejournal.com]

I really believe that if the government had stepped up and given people positive things to do and laid out a reasonable change in attitude we would be much stronger today no matter who was president. Instead I feel like we're just encouraged to throw a blanket over our heads all the time, to be resentful and defensive for no reason.

One of the fascinating movies that came out about 9-11 and such was called "Hijacking Diaster". It had most of the general information that these type of things do, stuff we all know. Their main message was that the Bush administration hijacked 9-11 as purely as the airplanes were hijacked.

One of the best things said in this was brought up by an Indian woman, talking about Gandhi. She said that the only good politics were the politics of fearlessness. Bush encourages a politics of fear. She said that those firemen and other people who helped get people out of the buildings on 9-11 were fearless. They were fearless because they had something to do, they had a concrete way of helping, and they did it.

Our country was swept together right after 9-11 largely because what we saw was how brave people can be in a crisis. Those firemen and others were the heroes. But then quickly that image became supplanted by Bush's face--he became the hero. He stood proud with his megaphone and said we'd bring them to justice, and then everyone breathed a sigh of relief and said, "good, we don't have to do anything anymore, our leader is here to make it all better." And I think that's what most people wanted to hear.

It doesn't feel good to be a victim. It feels good to be the fireman, the person with the concrete things they can do and know that they're helping. Yet people desire against their better interests and desire to have someone else do all the work. Then they don't have to change anything, or give anything up. Or do anything. People always think they'd rather have a life of not having to do anything. But that's not true. They just don't want to do stupid pointless things, which is what most of us do in our jobs. They want to do meaningful things.

But we were given no option of that. Specifically, intentionally. Even the left gave us no options. Giving things up is not really action in that way that makes you feel like you're helping. It's probably good and necessary, but just giving up your toys doesn't make you feel strong. What can anybody do that would be helpful? That film I mentioned said get involved, go protest, be an activist. That's partly good... but I never saw much real good in protesting. It was one of those things where people told you that you were doing something but you just stood around, knowing that you weren't really. I think that's why it's so easy for mobs to break out into violence in a protest--people long to be actually doing something, and waving a sign and yelling doesn't really cut it.

Hmm I'm rambling off topic. I also liked what you said about how you'd rather be right than win an argument. Nobody is like that anymore in politics and media. It's kind of chilling. Everyone is just trying to win. It's not about being right or doing right. It's about winning.

[chresimos.livejournal.com]

Yeah...I mean, what can I say? You are totally right. The government did take the experience and turn it into panic. I didn't know there *wasn't* great panic at the time it happened, though. But the fact that the state it happened to, went so predominantly for Kerry? Yeah.

It's just that the government encourages it because that helps it to stay in power. I guess to the people in far away states it's like this weird nebulous thing that creates, well, terror. It's not really as if terrorists are going to attack Appleoak, Montana, are they?

I have some strong opinions on terrorism that would take a while to write out, but basically. Terrorists are weak people who are up against a vastly superior enemy. They strike small but they strike vicious. They can't wage actual war so they have to think up the thing that does the most damage with the least amount of effort.

It's just like killing one in every ten men in your army makes them more obediant - you don't know who's next, so you get in line. The purpose of terrorism is to create terror. And the fact that America just seized up into a terrified ball of fear makes me so sad. It's exactly what they wanted.

A lot of it is also to with nationalism. I extremely dislike nationalism. Probably because I was raised in a lot of different countries. But I'm so much so that the concept of a country that 'feels like home' is just...well, foreign to me. I can understand loving a country but I can't understand being part of one. But nevertheless. I think that, well, nationalism, along with religion and, ethnicism? (I mean, extreme ethnic loyalty), are the three main causes of much of the world's conflicts. We need to get to a state where nations don't matter, and look out for ourselves as a planet, not in the interests of our countries. That's...quite possibly stupidly utopian, but there you go.

To be fair, though, it's probably not as if America is the only country that has this problem, it's just more obvious. I guess no one really knows whether or not disagreeing with the people of Tajikistan gets you labelled anti-Tajikistani unfairly.

Also I should really stop going on now as I'm probably incoherent from lack of sleep. Apologies *wanders around in dazed state*.

[ex-lonicera600.livejournal.com]

I remember talking on a mailing list and saying something about how one good thing that might come of this was maybe it would inspire more Americans to see themselves as part of the world where there were other countries that affected us and that we affected.

For generations now Americans have developed this very annoying attitude of 'God's own country/God's own nation, we're the best and superior and yaddayaddayadda'. Welllll... Sorry to break it to you, America, but not everyone shares that opinion. France thinks it's 'La Grande Nation' and Japan still considers all Westerners Barbarian. And you know what? From their POV they have at least as much reason to think so than you do. A good piece of humble-pie would serve the US well, imo.

Unfortunately it began to seem that for a lot of people (not all, of course), the main way they began to relate to other countries was to consider whether they felt sorry enough for America after 9/11.

I have to admit that while I felt terribly sorry for the singular people who were killed in that event (I remember crying out loud when that poor woman jumped out of a window somewhere on the 40th floor or something), I felt that the USA as such had reaped what they had sowed. You just don't slap people around and look down your nose at them while you steal their resources. Especially not when they have pride and guns.

I just feel like we spend so much time convincing ourselves we've done nothing wrong we can't fix anything we have, and so much time accusing other people of being mean to us we can't benefit from any good advice we might have for us.

How could the USA do something wrong, ever? Remember, they're the world police! Surely they're right at all times. Sounds Gryffindorish somehow? Well, I think it's the same attitude.

Perhaps it really has something to do with age? As nations go, America still is a pimply teenager. So perhaps this is just a phase?

[conniemarie.livejournal.com]

Magpie,you and JewelSong and I reached the point where we had to express ourselves today, it seems. :) *HUGS*

I tell you, there is little more disturbing than the attitude you describe, and which I have also experienced, of intentional and prideful ignorance as regards the rest of the world.

As the single remaining Superpower, I have always felt, it is our responsibility to set the tone for the rest of the world --a tone of collaboration and respect. And here we are, swaggering around like a macho dipshit in gangland. Even worse, I have heard people gloat over the discomfort of the Europeans --proud that we just showed 'em who's boss! It's as though there is some mass fantasy that George Bush acting unilaterally is akin to John Wayne being a hero.

HEL-LOOO-OOOO!

After years of training in cross-cultural communication, international business, and political science, not to mention a 2 year stint working at the American Embassy in Moscow, I am embarrassed and ashamed by this attitude. I can see how people can be called "stupid" over it, because it DOES look like: "Shit, howdy, Joe-Bob! Lookee here! We sure done showed them for'ners, ain't we?"

We've had reason to be proud of who we are. And perhaps we can be excused some ignorance, just by virtue of our distance from much of the world --although that geographical distance means less and less as time goes on. But, people, we cannot bully our way through the 21st century and have any good come of it. Surely, that is obvious?

(Or am I just being stupid? Is the whole agenda to bring on Armageddon as soon as possible? In that case I guess runaway spending and insulting your friends doesn't matter much--we won't be here to live with the debt, eh? *shudder* Only, we will. And more than one kind of debt, I'm thinking.)

maybe this will help

[petitesoeur.livejournal.com]

What's the Matter with Kansas?
How Conservatives Won the Heart of America
by Thomas Frank
http://www.henryholt.com/holt/whatsthematter.htm

yes, indeed!!

[ex-leianora730.livejournal.com]

I remember seeing those commercials wherein people were saying, "I'm going to fight terrorism by going to my brother's wedding." "I'm going to fight terrorism by going to college."

I remember seeing those commercials and crying with absolute joy. It meant that we weren't going to just sit there and cry in our soup. Then, suddenly, those commercials disappeared. I thought to myself, WTF? Where did they go? Soon after, Bush's face began taking their place, and I quickly saw the writing on the wall, as it were. I didn't want to acknowledge what I was seeing, because I thought I was over thinking things. I hate the fact that I was right, though. It makes me sick. :-(

[bookshop.livejournal.com]

thank you! <33333

[arclevel.livejournal.com]

My brother posted this on Tuesday.

I remember really liking the way that the country did seem to unite in the immediate aftermath, but I also remember feeling like it was really shallow. Our college paper printed a full-spread American flag that people posted in their windows -- a nice sentiment, but nothing that helped anyone. More disturbing to me was the attitude that went with the genuine outpourings, especially to the Red Cross. That organization is *always* in need, frequently rather desperately. After September 11, people were suddenly lining up to donate both money and blood. By about September 13 or so, they didn't need much blood for the events in NYC, and they had gotten far more than they could use for that. Logically, they wanted to put people's generosity to good use in the rest of the country, finally having the level of blood (more, actually), they always need. Yet people were horrified that their donations weren't going to help the relief efforts. Never mind that they were saving lives, they wanted to help with the terror relief, even if that wasn't what was needed. And donations died down quickly, even though the Red Cross was asking people who wanted to help to make appointments to give in a month, when the current supply would no longer be any good.

This afternoon I was discussing our international reputation and the rest of the world's horror at our election outcome, along with the idea that they do have reason to care and maybe we should wonder why they hate Bush (and us by extension) so much. Someone responded that this was probably one reason some people voted *for* Bush; we have to be "independent" from what other countries think, which apparently means deliberately doing whatever they'll like least.

I have this horrible sinking feeling that one set of internationals who are happy with this result are the leaders of terrorist movements in charge of recruiting. Getting more people to join your violent anti-American group must be much easier when the Americans keep the man who, in your view, is most hurting you and keeping you down. Of course, if you say something like this, then clearly you're allowing the terrorists to decide who should be in office. Not that they don't already, based on the amount of Bush-voters for whom terrorism was a top issue.