5 ms·

or, perhaps, they are wryly pushing back against the USA capturing a generic geographic term for themselves

by smarf 6mo ago

triceratops 6mo ago
To be fair though, that horse bolted a couple of centuries ago. What other name would you call it by? There's another "united states" on the same continent. The country to the immediate south is formally known as the "United Mexican States".
- Brian_K_White 6mo ago
  But the whole hemisphere is not "Mexico". USA and Canada are not also "North Mexico". Their harmless little reminder is more correct than any of the attempted arguments against it.
  - triceratops 6mo ago
    It was the first group of united states on the continent. North America was, relative to the land that became Mexico, thinly peopled. Unlike in Mexico there was no pre-colonial, indigenous empire that had ruled and named the land which eventually became the 13 colonies. So there wasn't necessarily a better alternative to put after "United States of" at the time. Do you know of one?
    - nobody9999 6mo ago
      >Unlike in Mexico there was no pre-colonial, indigenous empire that had ruled and named the land which eventually became the 13 colonies. Actually, there were multiple indigenous political entities both along the Eastern Seaboard (where we find those 13 colonies) as well as across what is now the US and Canada[0]. We just took their land and killed most of them, but they were still pretty organized -- with political groupings of various types. [0] https://scholar.flatworldknowledge.com/books/32177/ourhistory_vol1-32698-20190228-133137-189989/preview https://scholar.flatworldknowledge.com/books/32177/ourhistor...
      - triceratops 6mo ago
        Where's the Tenochtitlan of the 13 colonies? Of course colonists committed genocide against indigenous people everywhere they went. No one's denying that. I'm addressing precisely what you yourself said > there were multiple indigenous political entities both along the Eastern Seaboard They were fragmented and smaller than the Aztec empire. That doesn't make it right to take their land. It does explain why their names didn't apply to the entire land. Because none of them was so big and centralized. If you look at the geographical features of the Eastern seaboard - mountains, lakes, streams, rivers, cities and towns, even 2 states (Massachusetts, Connecticut) - native names abound. The lands that became the US and Canada really did have fewer people living on them than the lands that became Mexico. [1] Again because Mexico had centralized states and large-scale agriculture capable of supporting large populations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_the_Indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_the_Indi...
        nobody9999 6mo ago
        >They were fragmented and smaller than the Aztec empire. So what? Portugal was smaller than the Aztec Empire too. As was the Netherlands. And England. Should we pooh pooh them as unimportant as well? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahokia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahokia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iroquois https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iroquois https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salish_peoples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salish_peoples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancestral_Puebloans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancestral_Puebloans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algonquian_peoples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algonquian_peoples And many others. Just because they had brown skin and often didn't engage in wholesale slaughter doesn't make them unimportant -- or not political entities.
        triceratops 6mo ago
        You're putting words in my mouth. I don't see the point in continuing this conversation.
- ciupicri 6mo ago
  If I'm not mistaking the name "United States of Mexico" appeared in 1824, whereas "United States of America" appeared earlier in 1787.
- gib444 6mo ago
  How about its real name, the USA? Crazy idea I know
marssaxman 6mo ago
The level of arrogance some western-hemisphere Spanish speakers have, trying to tell foreigners that the name they use for their own country in their own native language is wrong, demanding that they translate the Spanish name and use that instead, is so absurdly entitled that it's just... hilarious.
- guzfip 6mo ago
  > The level of arrogance some western-hemisphere Spanish speakers have It’s almost exclusively Western Europeans doing this IME
- Brian_K_White 6mo ago
  It's so wierd to perceive that as arrogance. Actually "wierd" is being too nice.
  - marssaxman 6mo ago
    In your world, then, is it normal to complain about other people's names, and expect them to change what they call themselves to better suit your preference?
    - Brian_K_White 6mo ago
      Again, wierd. No one is doing that. But for some reason you decide that someone has done something to you, or done anything at all to anyone.
      - marssaxman 6mo ago
        I am sure it sounds bizarre, if you have never encountered it before, but people really do this. A few quick examples - all in English: https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/a96v93/america_is_the_whole_continent_not_only_the/ https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/a96v93/am... https://www.reddit.com/r/asklatinamerica/comments/fwp0aj/does_it_bother_you_how_the_world_refer_to_usa_as/ https://www.reddit.com/r/asklatinamerica/comments/fwp0aj/doe... https://www.reddit.com/r/asklatinamerica/comments/15zlo42/is_brazil_the_only_place_in_latam_where_people/ https://www.reddit.com/r/asklatinamerica/comments/15zlo42/is... https://www.reddit.com/r/asklatinamerica/comments/fwp0aj/does_it_bother_you_how_the_world_refer_to_usa_as/fmscgsr/ https://www.reddit.com/r/asklatinamerica/comments/fwp0aj/doe...
nyantaro1 6mo ago
Let them have it. 'America' is so loaded with horrible things that I don't really think the rest of the continent cares
ishouldstayaway 6mo ago
This is the point: in English, it is not a generic geographic term. It is in Spanish, though, so I get where the confusion comes from (at least when that confusion is genuine and not just boring troll shit). In Spanish, "América" refers to what in English is "the Americas", because in English we use separate terms for North, South, and (sometimes) Central America. It's not pushback. It's just dishonest ragebait bullshit.

or, perhaps, they are wryly pushing back against the USA capturing a generic geographic term for themselves

by smarf 6mo ago

or, perhaps, they are wryly pushing back against the USA capturing a generic geographic term for themselves

To be fair though, that horse bolted a couple of centuries ago. What other name would you call it by? There's another "united states" on the same continent. The country to the immediate south is formally known as the "United Mexican States".

Brian_K_White 6mo ago
But the whole hemisphere is not "Mexico". USA and Canada are not also "North Mexico". Their harmless little reminder is more correct than any of the attempted arguments against it.
- triceratops 6mo ago
  It was the first group of united states on the continent. North America was, relative to the land that became Mexico, thinly peopled. Unlike in Mexico there was no pre-colonial, indigenous empire that had ruled and named the land which eventually became the 13 colonies. So there wasn't necessarily a better alternative to put after "United States of" at the time. Do you know of one?
  - nobody9999 6mo ago
    >Unlike in Mexico there was no pre-colonial, indigenous empire that had ruled and named the land which eventually became the 13 colonies. Actually, there were multiple indigenous political entities both along the Eastern Seaboard (where we find those 13 colonies) as well as across what is now the US and Canada[0]. We just took their land and killed most of them, but they were still pretty organized -- with political groupings of various types. [0] https://scholar.flatworldknowledge.com/books/32177/ourhistory_vol1-32698-20190228-133137-189989/preview https://scholar.flatworldknowledge.com/books/32177/ourhistor...
    - triceratops 6mo ago
      Where's the Tenochtitlan of the 13 colonies? Of course colonists committed genocide against indigenous people everywhere they went. No one's denying that. I'm addressing precisely what you yourself said > there were multiple indigenous political entities both along the Eastern Seaboard They were fragmented and smaller than the Aztec empire. That doesn't make it right to take their land. It does explain why their names didn't apply to the entire land. Because none of them was so big and centralized. If you look at the geographical features of the Eastern seaboard - mountains, lakes, streams, rivers, cities and towns, even 2 states (Massachusetts, Connecticut) - native names abound. The lands that became the US and Canada really did have fewer people living on them than the lands that became Mexico. [1] Again because Mexico had centralized states and large-scale agriculture capable of supporting large populations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_the_Indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_the_Indi...
      - nobody9999 6mo ago
        >They were fragmented and smaller than the Aztec empire. So what? Portugal was smaller than the Aztec Empire too. As was the Netherlands. And England. Should we pooh pooh them as unimportant as well? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahokia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahokia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iroquois https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iroquois https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salish_peoples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salish_peoples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancestral_Puebloans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancestral_Puebloans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algonquian_peoples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algonquian_peoples And many others. Just because they had brown skin and often didn't engage in wholesale slaughter doesn't make them unimportant -- or not political entities.
        triceratops 6mo ago
        You're putting words in my mouth. I don't see the point in continuing this conversation.
ciupicri 6mo ago
If I'm not mistaking the name "United States of Mexico" appeared in 1824, whereas "United States of America" appeared earlier in 1787.
gib444 6mo ago
How about its real name, the USA? Crazy idea I know

marssaxman 6mo ago

The level of arrogance some western-hemisphere Spanish speakers have, trying to tell foreigners that the name they use for their own country in their own native language is wrong, demanding that they translate the Spanish name and use that instead, is so absurdly entitled that it's just... hilarious.

guzfip 6mo ago
> The level of arrogance some western-hemisphere Spanish speakers have It’s almost exclusively Western Europeans doing this IME
Brian_K_White 6mo ago
It's so wierd to perceive that as arrogance. Actually "wierd" is being too nice.
- marssaxman 6mo ago
  In your world, then, is it normal to complain about other people's names, and expect them to change what they call themselves to better suit your preference?
  - Brian_K_White 6mo ago
    Again, wierd. No one is doing that. But for some reason you decide that someone has done something to you, or done anything at all to anyone.
    - marssaxman 6mo ago
      I am sure it sounds bizarre, if you have never encountered it before, but people really do this. A few quick examples - all in English: https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/a96v93/america_is_the_whole_continent_not_only_the/ https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/a96v93/am... https://www.reddit.com/r/asklatinamerica/comments/fwp0aj/does_it_bother_you_how_the_world_refer_to_usa_as/ https://www.reddit.com/r/asklatinamerica/comments/fwp0aj/doe... https://www.reddit.com/r/asklatinamerica/comments/15zlo42/is_brazil_the_only_place_in_latam_where_people/ https://www.reddit.com/r/asklatinamerica/comments/15zlo42/is... https://www.reddit.com/r/asklatinamerica/comments/fwp0aj/does_it_bother_you_how_the_world_refer_to_usa_as/fmscgsr/ https://www.reddit.com/r/asklatinamerica/comments/fwp0aj/doe...

nyantaro1 6mo ago

Let them have it. 'America' is so loaded with horrible things that I don't really think the rest of the continent cares

ishouldstayaway 6mo ago

This is the point: in English, it is not a generic geographic term. It is in Spanish, though, so I get where the confusion comes from (at least when that confusion is genuine and not just boring troll shit). In Spanish, "América" refers to what in English is "the Americas", because in English we use separate terms for North, South, and (sometimes) Central America. It's not pushback. It's just dishonest ragebait bullshit.