4 ms·

"anti-American" is such an interesting term for me. It begs the question of what "American" means, which seems to change with each president. How do you decide

by diggan 3y ago

"anti-American" is such an interesting term for me. It begs the question of what "American" means, which seems to change with each president. How do you decide what's anti-american and pro-american? The Iraq invasion for example, anti or pro-american?

subtra3t 3y ago
I agreed with most of GP's comment, but their use of the word "anti-American" did put me off quite a bit.
- wait_a_minute 3y ago
  Consider to what extent you're steeped in the mire accumulated from being very-online. If you agreed with everything else, then that should give you pause on why you're so hesitant or resistant to that usage.
  - verve_rat 3y ago
    Or maybe they are aware of pre-online history? The red scare didn't need Facebook to get started.
    - wait_a_minute 3y ago
      Agreeing with everything and then being trained like Pavlov's dogs to hate a word is not the red scare.
  - john-radio 3y ago
    It's that the poster didn't give any supporting comment to their claim that a lot of [the idealogy that is being foisted on the minds?] is "even anti-American". Claiming something is un-American is fine. We're (mostly?) red-blooded Americans here. However, pointing at something and saying it's un-American and expecting the crowd to gasp in horror and join you in denouncing it, is a very clear signal of a Fox-news-or-something-deadened brain.
  - subtra3t 3y ago
    I think you are partially correct in your judgement of me, though probably not for the reasons you think. If I didn't use the Internet I wouldn't know what the term 'anti-American" meant. Nobody I know uses that word and no books I read or movies I watch mention it too. It is a term that I've encountered only on the internet. As a result, my connotation of the word depends largely on how the internet uses it. On the websites I visit, the term "anti-American" is usually used to justify hate against minorities or some other segment of society. I'm sure it is used in different contexts too (in other parts of the internet), but not on the parts of internet I usually browse.
- rednerrus 3y ago
  Why does anti-American put you off?
  - scintill76 3y ago
    For myself, it reminds me of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Un-American_Activities_Committee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Un-American_Activities_C...
  - subtra3t 3y ago
    As a non-American, I've usually seen that word being used to defend racist ideoalogies or promote hate mongering, in online discourse. So whenever I see that word I naturally brace myself for whatever new idea the speaker is going to promote. I think Americans would have a different association with the word though.
wait_a_minute 3y ago
If it is attacking American institutions and making it hard for an elite institution like Harvard to adequately address an extreme anti-semitism problem, it is anti-American. If it makes people feel worse about living in the United States and tries to impose any concept of original sin onto an American citizen, as is the case with a lot of "woke" propaganda, it is anti-American.
- archagon 3y ago
  In my opinion, anyone who uses the term "woke propaganda" unironically is anti-American.
  - gnicholas 3y ago
    It's been interesting to watch as "woke" morphed from a word uttered with pride to an insult. I can't think of another word whose valence has changed so quickly and unambiguously. It would have been less surprising if the out-group started using it as an insult and the in-group still claimed it as a badge of honor. I wouldn't have guessed that the in-group would have abandoned it so readily.
    - WalterBright 3y ago
      > I can't think of another word whose valence has changed so quickly and unambiguously. maga
      - gnicholas 3y ago
        This acronym was always pro-Trump and has been simultaneously used pridefully and as an insult. I'm not aware of any pro-Trump folks attempting to dodge the MAGA label (which folks who previously claimed the mantel of "woke" now do). This is what I view as the difference — no one says they're "woke" anymore, even if they have the exact same views as before.
    - klyrs 3y ago
      > I wouldn't have guessed that the in-group would have abandoned it so readily. You never understood the meaning of the word, then. Woke is a synonym for "enlightenment." Indeed, the notions of wokeness echo an earlier philosophical revolution we continue to call the Age of Enlightenment. Who, with a serious face, will claim to be enlightened? According to the Buddhism I studied, there was never a surer method to identify a fool. Wokeness was never worn as a serious label. Wokeness may be acknowledged, be that applied to a person or a concept. The only time I've heard anybody self-proclaim wokeness is literally in self-mockery. He's woke, she's woke, that's woke, stay woke, but never I'm woke. So I'd make one edit to your first sentence: it was not uttered with pride, it was uttered with respect. And people still do that today. So there was nothing to abandon. Nobody identified that way. And now wokeness is now a boogeyman. It means whatever anybody wants it to mean. Nevermind that this fight has been raging since the 17th century, but it's got a new name now and hey you can sell fear with that.
WalterBright 3y ago
I would consider it as being opposed to the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Things like the Bill of Rights, separation of church and state, democracy, the President being a civilian, the notion of the inherent rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, etc.
- caslon 3y ago
  On the other hand, if being anti-indoctrination is the goal, it might be a good idea to turn the same lens toward universities that see an oversized volume of alumni participating in the defense industry, something seen as pro-American (albeit against many of the criteria you list off). Historically, some universities have been extremely fond of propaganda in this regard, going as far as to creating direct pipelines from school to participation, like Caltech's participation in the V-12 program, JPL, or Project Vista. If that isn't indoctrination, I'm not sure what is. Indoctrination isn't bad, and students should be able to have a choice between whether they want to get indoctrinated by the types of people who created the nuclear bomb, if they want to get indoctrinated by hippies, or if they want to get indoctrinated by a church-funded university. Education is inherently ideological, and the market is really leaning toward hippie faculty at the moment. Allowing market forces to do what they will seems fine. It'll come back around eventually, and in the meantime, state school kids are doing what prestigious university students are too good for. Look at Anduril, which is far more impressive a defense achievement than anything that's come out of Caltech since before you were a student.
  - WalterBright 3y ago
    > Allowing market forces to do what they will seems fine Sure. But I draw the line when people try to force their anti-American agenda on people. > Look at Anduril, which is far more impressive a defense achievement than anything that's come out of Caltech since before you were a student. Caltech is a very small university. > Education is inherently ideological My education at Caltech was nearly entirely math, science, engineering, etc. I don't see that as ideological. I did get a palpable sense from the profs that these subjects were exciting. I never heard any defense propaganda from the Caltech faculty, none at all. JPL was there, but not a single soul pushed me to apply for a job there. The only propaganda I recall was my economics professor pushing Marxism, and if you didn't regurgitate his Marxist views on the exams, you received a bad grade. I learned my lesson, and instead satisfied the social studies requirement by taking business accounting - something useful.

by diggan 3y ago

subtra3t 3y ago

I agreed with most of GP's comment, but their use of the word "anti-American" did put me off quite a bit.

wait_a_minute 3y ago
Consider to what extent you're steeped in the mire accumulated from being very-online. If you agreed with everything else, then that should give you pause on why you're so hesitant or resistant to that usage.
- verve_rat 3y ago
  Or maybe they are aware of pre-online history? The red scare didn't need Facebook to get started.
  - wait_a_minute 3y ago
    Agreeing with everything and then being trained like Pavlov's dogs to hate a word is not the red scare.
- john-radio 3y ago
  It's that the poster didn't give any supporting comment to their claim that a lot of [the idealogy that is being foisted on the minds?] is "even anti-American". Claiming something is un-American is fine. We're (mostly?) red-blooded Americans here. However, pointing at something and saying it's un-American and expecting the crowd to gasp in horror and join you in denouncing it, is a very clear signal of a Fox-news-or-something-deadened brain.
- subtra3t 3y ago
  I think you are partially correct in your judgement of me, though probably not for the reasons you think. If I didn't use the Internet I wouldn't know what the term 'anti-American" meant. Nobody I know uses that word and no books I read or movies I watch mention it too. It is a term that I've encountered only on the internet. As a result, my connotation of the word depends largely on how the internet uses it. On the websites I visit, the term "anti-American" is usually used to justify hate against minorities or some other segment of society. I'm sure it is used in different contexts too (in other parts of the internet), but not on the parts of internet I usually browse.
rednerrus 3y ago
Why does anti-American put you off?
- scintill76 3y ago
  For myself, it reminds me of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Un-American_Activities_Committee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Un-American_Activities_C...
- subtra3t 3y ago
  As a non-American, I've usually seen that word being used to defend racist ideoalogies or promote hate mongering, in online discourse. So whenever I see that word I naturally brace myself for whatever new idea the speaker is going to promote. I think Americans would have a different association with the word though.

wait_a_minute 3y ago

If it is attacking American institutions and making it hard for an elite institution like Harvard to adequately address an extreme anti-semitism problem, it is anti-American. If it makes people feel worse about living in the United States and tries to impose any concept of original sin onto an American citizen, as is the case with a lot of "woke" propaganda, it is anti-American.

archagon 3y ago
In my opinion, anyone who uses the term "woke propaganda" unironically is anti-American.
- gnicholas 3y ago
  It's been interesting to watch as "woke" morphed from a word uttered with pride to an insult. I can't think of another word whose valence has changed so quickly and unambiguously. It would have been less surprising if the out-group started using it as an insult and the in-group still claimed it as a badge of honor. I wouldn't have guessed that the in-group would have abandoned it so readily.
  - WalterBright 3y ago
    > I can't think of another word whose valence has changed so quickly and unambiguously. maga
    - gnicholas 3y ago
      This acronym was always pro-Trump and has been simultaneously used pridefully and as an insult. I'm not aware of any pro-Trump folks attempting to dodge the MAGA label (which folks who previously claimed the mantel of "woke" now do). This is what I view as the difference — no one says they're "woke" anymore, even if they have the exact same views as before.
  - klyrs 3y ago
    > I wouldn't have guessed that the in-group would have abandoned it so readily. You never understood the meaning of the word, then. Woke is a synonym for "enlightenment." Indeed, the notions of wokeness echo an earlier philosophical revolution we continue to call the Age of Enlightenment. Who, with a serious face, will claim to be enlightened? According to the Buddhism I studied, there was never a surer method to identify a fool. Wokeness was never worn as a serious label. Wokeness may be acknowledged, be that applied to a person or a concept. The only time I've heard anybody self-proclaim wokeness is literally in self-mockery. He's woke, she's woke, that's woke, stay woke, but never I'm woke. So I'd make one edit to your first sentence: it was not uttered with pride, it was uttered with respect. And people still do that today. So there was nothing to abandon. Nobody identified that way. And now wokeness is now a boogeyman. It means whatever anybody wants it to mean. Nevermind that this fight has been raging since the 17th century, but it's got a new name now and hey you can sell fear with that.

WalterBright 3y ago

I would consider it as being opposed to the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Things like the Bill of Rights, separation of church and state, democracy, the President being a civilian, the notion of the inherent rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, etc.

caslon 3y ago
On the other hand, if being anti-indoctrination is the goal, it might be a good idea to turn the same lens toward universities that see an oversized volume of alumni participating in the defense industry, something seen as pro-American (albeit against many of the criteria you list off). Historically, some universities have been extremely fond of propaganda in this regard, going as far as to creating direct pipelines from school to participation, like Caltech's participation in the V-12 program, JPL, or Project Vista. If that isn't indoctrination, I'm not sure what is. Indoctrination isn't bad, and students should be able to have a choice between whether they want to get indoctrinated by the types of people who created the nuclear bomb, if they want to get indoctrinated by hippies, or if they want to get indoctrinated by a church-funded university. Education is inherently ideological, and the market is really leaning toward hippie faculty at the moment. Allowing market forces to do what they will seems fine. It'll come back around eventually, and in the meantime, state school kids are doing what prestigious university students are too good for. Look at Anduril, which is far more impressive a defense achievement than anything that's come out of Caltech since before you were a student.
- WalterBright 3y ago
  > Allowing market forces to do what they will seems fine Sure. But I draw the line when people try to force their anti-American agenda on people. > Look at Anduril, which is far more impressive a defense achievement than anything that's come out of Caltech since before you were a student. Caltech is a very small university. > Education is inherently ideological My education at Caltech was nearly entirely math, science, engineering, etc. I don't see that as ideological. I did get a palpable sense from the profs that these subjects were exciting. I never heard any defense propaganda from the Caltech faculty, none at all. JPL was there, but not a single soul pushed me to apply for a job there. The only propaganda I recall was my economics professor pushing Marxism, and if you didn't regurgitate his Marxist views on the exams, you received a bad grade. I learned my lesson, and instead satisfied the social studies requirement by taking business accounting - something useful.