3 ms·

Well there is a distinction between "Gulf of the United States of America" and "Gulf of America". Calling it "Gulf of America" does not equate it to "Gulf of t

Well there is a distinction between "Gulf of the United States of America" and "Gulf of America". Calling it "Gulf of America" does not equate it to "Gulf of the United States of America" which is what Trump probably wants, but he is too stupid to realize the difference. He just deprived the Gulf of its association with Mexico without truly associating with the US. Why doesn't he go all the way and call for New Mexico to be renamed to New America though? I wouldn't put it past him. Do some white people think these petty attitudes will restore the former industrial glory of the US? Is he miffed at the Gulf referring to a country of mostly Latinos/Hispanics rather than White people? Is this guy just racist or petty/both? The citizens of the US should be ashamed of themselves for voting him in as President, though truth be said their political system doesn't give them much of choice. In any case what choice is there between an GOP apple and Democrat pear if they are both rotten?

mdp2021 2y ago
The continents, I understand, are the "Americas" - use adopted to disambiguate, since the anglosphere soon started using 'America' for its colonies there. Vespucci spoke of the "New World" (at the time, 1504, only South America), the first one to say "that's really not India" - so Martin Waldseemueller called the continent "America" (1507). Edgar Allan Poe had some irritation about the matter: > It is a thousand pities that the puny witticisms of a few professional objectors should have the power to prevent, even for a year, the adoption of a name for our country. At present we have, clearly, none. There should be no hesitation about “Appalachia”. In the first place, it is distinctive. “America” is not, and can never be made so. We may legislate as much as we please, and assume for our country whatever name we think right — but to use it will be no name, to any purpose for which a name is needed, unless we can take it away from the regions which employ it at present. South America is “America”, and will insist upon remaining so
pb7 2y ago
Maybe it has nothing to do with race.

mdp2021 2y ago

The continents, I understand, are the "Americas" - use adopted to disambiguate, since the anglosphere soon started using 'America' for its colonies there. Vespucci spoke of the "New World" (at the time, 1504, only South America), the first one to say "that's really not India" - so Martin Waldseemueller called the continent "America" (1507). Edgar Allan Poe had some irritation about the matter: > It is a thousand pities that the puny witticisms of a few professional objectors should have the power to prevent, even for a year, the adoption of a name for our country. At present we have, clearly, none. There should be no hesitation about “Appalachia”. In the first place, it is distinctive. “America” is not, and can never be made so. We may legislate as much as we please, and assume for our country whatever name we think right — but to use it will be no name, to any purpose for which a name is needed, unless we can take it away from the regions which employ it at present. South America is “America”, and will insist upon remaining so

pb7 2y ago

Maybe it has nothing to do with race.