From: Kharin (kharin@kharin.com)
Date: Mon Sep 15 2003 - 10:01:49 MDT
"This captures a certain mood, personality and class of acts."
Pity it fails to provide a definition though. We are still at the point where someone with an intense dislike of American film and television must have the same label as an Islamic terrorist.
"Why can people fully understand someone being an anti-Semite but cannot understand labelling something anti-American? If one is routinely hostile
towards the USA, I characterize that hostility as anti-American. Simple. "
If one is routinely hostile to France does anyone characterise that hostility as anti-French? No, of course not. A term that appears to lack any antonyms or synonyms in common currency, and where equivalent terms do not exist for any other democratic nation, has some obvious problems. The anti-semitism parallel is an interesting one, particularly as the term has been similarly diluted, so that criticism of Israel/Zionism can be considered anti-semitic irrespective of the actual arguments.
"the term Anti-British had wide currency during the empire precisely because it was an empire. Perhaps the same is true of the USA?"
I'm not aware that that term was used during the British Empire, except outside of very specific military contexts. As I said, I don't think it's the sort of thing Kitchener or Palmerston cared much about. I'll check on it though.
---- This message was posted by Kharin to the Virus 2003 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=54;action=display;threadid=29259> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Sep 15 2003 - 10:02:16 MDT