4 ms·

Canadian perspective: it seems like many (not all) Americans are also explicitly brought up with, and heavily absorb, "greatest country in the world" rhetoric t

Canadian perspective: it seems like many (not all) Americans are also explicitly brought up with, and heavily absorb, "greatest country in the world" rhetoric that also leaves them incapable of understanding that this is not necessarily how people outside of it see the USA. Trying to be diplomatic? I've seen a lot of really insane shit in comment sections -- and even more insane shit from public officials -- over the last year since these "topics" came up. Belief in or unconscious absorbance of the concept of "manifest destiny" and American exceptionalism seems to run deep in a portion of the American psyche. No, it's not "their" continent to take. Might doesn't make right. And it certainly doesn't make for superiority in anything but brawn and bravado. I'll also add this: the (imho encouraging) trend in the north and with the indigenous populations there has been in the opposite direction from what the Trump regime is proposing: sovereignty and autonomy for the Inuit to run their own lands. Canada carved out new Inuit administered territories, trying in some respect (and inconsistently) to rectify over a century of mis(mal?)governance and exploitation and mistreatment. From the polls I see the Inuit in Greenland want more self governance, not a new external boss.

nephihaha 10mo ago
My perspective is from Scotland, and what annoys me is the vanilla press continually going to the Copenhagen government and even the Danish royal family for quotes. Greenland is a Danish colony/overseas territory (delete according to view), and I'd prefer to hear from Greenlanders. I'm sure the average Dane rarely thinks about Greenland, or didn't until recently. (Much like most British never thought about the Falkland Islands until Argentina invaded.) We had a similar scenario during the Scottish independence referendum with the international media going to London to talk about the matter. As for the Manifest Destiny thing, maybe I'm wrong here, but I'm thinking more Monroe Doctrine. Manifest Destiny was heading westward, and grabbing Greenland, or even Venezuela, seems more aimed at those who would influence them from outside the Americas.
- cmrdporcupine 10mo ago
  Monroe Doctrine I think has always been considered to apply to Latin America. But probably mainly because the US has almost always (in the 20th century) had a subservient "partner" here in Canada. But we were invaded (twice) here in Canada (or what became Canada) by the US. The only people to have ever invaded us. And when they did so, their leaders at the time were definitely flying the Manifest Destiny rhetoric. So much so they could not even imagine why the Quebecois and others didn't just welcome them with open arms. So, no, I think it definitely applies northward too, not just westward. Or at least some of the ideological underpinnings of it.
  - nephihaha 10mo ago
    Greenland, and Canada are in the Americas, as are Venezuela and Cuba. Three of these are independent nations while one is more or less a European colony. Venezuela and Cuba have strong ties with Russia that the USA resents. Yes, I'm aware of the US attempts on Canada. I think US pop culture, and TV has done a better job of Americanising Canada than the military... Same with Europe.
    - cmrdporcupine 10mo ago
      I tend to think of it more like this: There is a North American culture and then subcultures. "Canada" is in large part contiguous culturally with two North American cultural regions -- the midwest [hi there Minnesota, we love you!] and (at least parts of) New England. This isn't really because of TV or cultural export but because of real population origins and movements. We say "pop" and have "Canadian raising" in our speech, and so do people from Minnesota or Wisconsin and that doesn't come from TV or radio or movies. It comes from being neighbours and descended from the same population groups. The border also used to be a lot more porous. My mother's mother were (German descendant) North Dakotans who just basically popped across the border and started farming and lived in Sask and Alberta... without a lot of legal hassle at all. Overtop of that, yes, there is a whole set of other cultural/legal/economic overlays, and media is a big part of that. But this is still a regional story-- there's I think more in common culturally between e.g. regular families in Ontario and Wisconsin than there is between Wisconsin and Florida. From that perspective, I have rarely fallen back to Canadian nationalism. I would in fact have been more in favour of a stronger union between some US states and the US economy and Canada -- in the past. But events of the last year have made clear what many our Loyalist ancestors already tried to warn us about 200 years ago: there is a dark and frankly kind of insane undercurrent in American political culture, and the foundations of the Canadian state are anything but artificial, they are based on an entirely different perspective on governance and culture because there's something kinda messed up in the kernel of the American conception of governance. Which I think the people of Minnesota are seeing right now.
rayiner 10mo ago
From an American perspective, it’s not the “rhetoric,” it’s just “noticing.” My mom is an immigrant who was not brought up here to absorb the rhetoric. But when she went to Canada and Australia to visit family, she came back ranting about how poor everyone was and how small the houses were. (I take it you have fewer suburban McMansions and giant SUVs.) It’s hard not to notice our GDP per capita is 50% higher than yours. It’s big enough now where we notice it just going up there to visit family. And you can say what you want about safety nets for poor people, but that doesn’t affect most Americans. My parents are on Medicare and they head down to the ER every time have a stomach ache and get a CAT scan. Meanwhile my family is convinced that Canadian healthcare nearly killed my aunt when she had a kidney issue because they didn’t immediately schedule her for a million tests and surgery. (I suspect that isn’t true and the Canadian system reasonably triaged the care.) And to be clear, I like Canada (and I love Denmark). I’d rather have a more orderly society with an efficient and expansive government that’s focused on comprehensive outcomes across the population, in contrast to our system where you have McMansions but randomly you can fall through a giant crack. But Americans temperamentally are biased towards upside potential and they devalue downside risk. This is a cultural trait that seems very quickly absorbed even by immigrants. My immigrant family isn’t meaningfully American in many respects—they don’t have Anglo sensibilities about things like civic institutions and personal freedoms—but they’re indistinguishable from other americans in their materialistic optimism
- cmrdporcupine 10mo ago
  I take a drive through Detroit and I "notice" entirely different things which somehow your screed above is mostly blind to. That's about as diplomatic as I can summon up as a reply to your comment, whose substance mostly proves my point about the bizarre exceptionalist world Americans seem to occupy in their heads. It really isn't "noticing"... what you're talking about. It's ideology. Also GDP per capita is the kind of garbage metric I would expect someone frequent on this forum, and hopefully literate in statistics, to understand the ridiculousness of deploying in conversation. Also, there's rarely anybody more invested in seeing the superiority of their new (chosen) place other than immigrants, so I don't think that's the argumentative flex you think it is.
_zagj 10mo ago
[flagged]
- cmrdporcupine 10mo ago
  Way to prove my point about arrogance, buddy. Absolute eye-roll territory here.
  - _zagj 10mo ago
    > Way to prove my point about arrogance What was arrogant about my post? My point was that Canadians (like you) often exhibit this baffling, unfounded sense of superiority, one completely at odds with cold, hard migration data, as well as the habits of successful Canadians. It's especially baffling in light of Canada's "lost decade" of flat real GDP growth. Canada now has a per capita GDP that's lower than all but one or two U.S. states, and its economic "growth" is just people selling overpriced houses back and forth to each other. Yet the arrogance and condescending attitude towards their southern neighbor remains.
    - cmrdporcupine 10mo ago
      I have no sense of superiority, my dude. And never asserted it. Just a profound sense of your lack of it.

nephihaha 10mo ago

My perspective is from Scotland, and what annoys me is the vanilla press continually going to the Copenhagen government and even the Danish royal family for quotes. Greenland is a Danish colony/overseas territory (delete according to view), and I'd prefer to hear from Greenlanders. I'm sure the average Dane rarely thinks about Greenland, or didn't until recently. (Much like most British never thought about the Falkland Islands until Argentina invaded.) We had a similar scenario during the Scottish independence referendum with the international media going to London to talk about the matter. As for the Manifest Destiny thing, maybe I'm wrong here, but I'm thinking more Monroe Doctrine. Manifest Destiny was heading westward, and grabbing Greenland, or even Venezuela, seems more aimed at those who would influence them from outside the Americas.

cmrdporcupine 10mo ago
Monroe Doctrine I think has always been considered to apply to Latin America. But probably mainly because the US has almost always (in the 20th century) had a subservient "partner" here in Canada. But we were invaded (twice) here in Canada (or what became Canada) by the US. The only people to have ever invaded us. And when they did so, their leaders at the time were definitely flying the Manifest Destiny rhetoric. So much so they could not even imagine why the Quebecois and others didn't just welcome them with open arms. So, no, I think it definitely applies northward too, not just westward. Or at least some of the ideological underpinnings of it.
- nephihaha 10mo ago
  Greenland, and Canada are in the Americas, as are Venezuela and Cuba. Three of these are independent nations while one is more or less a European colony. Venezuela and Cuba have strong ties with Russia that the USA resents. Yes, I'm aware of the US attempts on Canada. I think US pop culture, and TV has done a better job of Americanising Canada than the military... Same with Europe.
  - cmrdporcupine 10mo ago
    I tend to think of it more like this: There is a North American culture and then subcultures. "Canada" is in large part contiguous culturally with two North American cultural regions -- the midwest [hi there Minnesota, we love you!] and (at least parts of) New England. This isn't really because of TV or cultural export but because of real population origins and movements. We say "pop" and have "Canadian raising" in our speech, and so do people from Minnesota or Wisconsin and that doesn't come from TV or radio or movies. It comes from being neighbours and descended from the same population groups. The border also used to be a lot more porous. My mother's mother were (German descendant) North Dakotans who just basically popped across the border and started farming and lived in Sask and Alberta... without a lot of legal hassle at all. Overtop of that, yes, there is a whole set of other cultural/legal/economic overlays, and media is a big part of that. But this is still a regional story-- there's I think more in common culturally between e.g. regular families in Ontario and Wisconsin than there is between Wisconsin and Florida. From that perspective, I have rarely fallen back to Canadian nationalism. I would in fact have been more in favour of a stronger union between some US states and the US economy and Canada -- in the past. But events of the last year have made clear what many our Loyalist ancestors already tried to warn us about 200 years ago: there is a dark and frankly kind of insane undercurrent in American political culture, and the foundations of the Canadian state are anything but artificial, they are based on an entirely different perspective on governance and culture because there's something kinda messed up in the kernel of the American conception of governance. Which I think the people of Minnesota are seeing right now.

rayiner 10mo ago

From an American perspective, it’s not the “rhetoric,” it’s just “noticing.” My mom is an immigrant who was not brought up here to absorb the rhetoric. But when she went to Canada and Australia to visit family, she came back ranting about how poor everyone was and how small the houses were. (I take it you have fewer suburban McMansions and giant SUVs.) It’s hard not to notice our GDP per capita is 50% higher than yours. It’s big enough now where we notice it just going up there to visit family. And you can say what you want about safety nets for poor people, but that doesn’t affect most Americans. My parents are on Medicare and they head down to the ER every time have a stomach ache and get a CAT scan. Meanwhile my family is convinced that Canadian healthcare nearly killed my aunt when she had a kidney issue because they didn’t immediately schedule her for a million tests and surgery. (I suspect that isn’t true and the Canadian system reasonably triaged the care.) And to be clear, I like Canada (and I love Denmark). I’d rather have a more orderly society with an efficient and expansive government that’s focused on comprehensive outcomes across the population, in contrast to our system where you have McMansions but randomly you can fall through a giant crack. But Americans temperamentally are biased towards upside potential and they devalue downside risk. This is a cultural trait that seems very quickly absorbed even by immigrants. My immigrant family isn’t meaningfully American in many respects—they don’t have Anglo sensibilities about things like civic institutions and personal freedoms—but they’re indistinguishable from other americans in their materialistic optimism

cmrdporcupine 10mo ago
I take a drive through Detroit and I "notice" entirely different things which somehow your screed above is mostly blind to. That's about as diplomatic as I can summon up as a reply to your comment, whose substance mostly proves my point about the bizarre exceptionalist world Americans seem to occupy in their heads. It really isn't "noticing"... what you're talking about. It's ideology. Also GDP per capita is the kind of garbage metric I would expect someone frequent on this forum, and hopefully literate in statistics, to understand the ridiculousness of deploying in conversation. Also, there's rarely anybody more invested in seeing the superiority of their new (chosen) place other than immigrants, so I don't think that's the argumentative flex you think it is.

_zagj 10mo ago

[flagged]

cmrdporcupine 10mo ago
Way to prove my point about arrogance, buddy. Absolute eye-roll territory here.
- _zagj 10mo ago
  > Way to prove my point about arrogance What was arrogant about my post? My point was that Canadians (like you) often exhibit this baffling, unfounded sense of superiority, one completely at odds with cold, hard migration data, as well as the habits of successful Canadians. It's especially baffling in light of Canada's "lost decade" of flat real GDP growth. Canada now has a per capita GDP that's lower than all but one or two U.S. states, and its economic "growth" is just people selling overpriced houses back and forth to each other. Yet the arrogance and condescending attitude towards their southern neighbor remains.
  - cmrdporcupine 10mo ago
    I have no sense of superiority, my dude. And never asserted it. Just a profound sense of your lack of it.