5 ms·
Of course, because by the new definition, the leader is "peak American", so everything in collision with his view is naturally "anti-American". The usage of th
by rickdeckard 21d ago
Of course, because by the new definition, the leader is "peak American", so everything in collision with his view is naturally "anti-American".
The usage of the term "anti-American" by anyone in a public role should be rejected as insufficient definition and unfit for a representative to use. On the spot, immediately.
Is it anti-American to brush your teeth after breakfast? or rather before? Is both American? Neither of it?
- smallmancontrov 21d agoWhen Trump calls Democrats "enemies from within," that's anti-American. When Trump refuses to peacefully transfer power to his victorious opponent and instead plays "heads I win tails you cheated," that's anti-American. When Trump sends the FCC chair to suppress speech "we can do this the easy way or the hard way," or yucks it up with the president of El Salvador over suspending Habeas Corpus, that's anti-American. The "American Experiment" isn't an empty concept, but it is about democracy and law and rights as opposed to conservative cultural values, and when people in power start to argue that the former must be sacrificed for the latter they certainly deserve to be clowned on. Not because they are wrong to imagine an American Ideal, but because they have its contents exactly backwards.
- rickdeckard 21d agoWhile I understand the intention of what you're saying, you're still attempting a definition of the term "anti-American", which needs no definition as the term should be rejected as a whole.
- pc86 21d agoI mean, to pick what is perhaps the easiest example, wanting to abridge speech is anti-American by its very definition. It is possible to have a thing that is anti-American. So I'm not sure what good it is to reject the term altogether.
- rickdeckard 21d agoIt could e.g. be "anti-democratic" by a universal definition of democracy and civil liberties which no single country then gets to fork and redefine...
- smallmancontrov 21d agoLet's suppose you had your way and the cultural concept of America as a set of ideas and values related to democracy was erased. Would the universal non-national concepts of democracy and civil liberties have been able to inspire Mike Pence to stand up to Donald Trump on January 6th?
- rickdeckard 20d agoSorry, I don't know what this conversation is about. This is not about a "concept", it is about the label itself. When the term "anti-American" is used, it is a placeholder for "against my values". Noone is ever anti-American himself, it is only a label applied upon others. That's why IMO it should be rejected when used by people in a public role, see original comment. You are free to think otherwise, which I may then label as "anti-American" in passing, while quickly moving on to you mentioning Mike Pence and some random conspiracy I have /s Again, /s/s/s/s
- smallmancontrov 20d ago"Trump is misusing a term, better roll over and let him do it!" Gross.
- rickdeckard 20d agoWhich is not what I'm saying, I'm saying to NOT let him use this term. How can you miss this fundamental aspect of what I'm repeatedly stating? "Sad."
- 8note 20d agoits encoded in the US constitution, so its anti-american. it can be anti-other things too, but its certainly anti-american
- parineum 21d agoNot really. America stands for something, they wrote a whole document about it. There is a big difference between being "American" and being something like "German" because Germany has existed for so long as different governments and the thing that ties it together is not an ethos, but an ethnicity. Being American is different, there's no ethnicity that makes one American, there is only it's ethos. The ideals written in the declaration of independence are American values.
- rickdeckard 21d agoAnd that's the weak link of tying ideals and values to a location like a country: The group elected to lead and represent this location also represent ideals and values, so THEIR ideals and values become inseparable of the location they were elected to represent. For a certain period in the mid-1900s, "German values" meant something different than it did before and after, because Germany was represented by a different leader...
- parineum 21d ago> And that's the weak link of tying ideals and values to a location like a country My entire post is about exactly how this is not the case, American values are defined in a document[1]. [1]https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcrip...
- rickdeckard 20d agoAnd what I'm trying to explain is, that this paper doesn't matter if it is represented by someone who doesn't uphold its content. Germany had the Paulskirche-, the Bismarck- and the Weymar-Constitution, all of them before that certain Leader elected into power. He got to define who is worthy/unworthy, decide how to read the document his party represents and change the definition of "un-German"
- parineum 20d ago
- deleted 20d ago[deleted]
- georgeecollins 20d agoIt's just the idea that vague terms get misused so much I demand the specific. "Anti" anything can just mean you aren't "pro" it enough, or not pro a particular version. So for restricting speech, you could say not honoring the first amendment or something like that. I think about this because sometimes people or ideas are described as "problematic". Sometimes for very good reason, but sometimes you find out the speaker has trouble being specific. I like to hear the specific reason when I can to understand the facts or logic. Sometimes these classifications come third hand.
- rpdillon 20d agoI mean, there are American values. The country was built around the idea of limiting the federal government's power, and adherence not a person, but to a set of values (like freedom of speech). We're explictly founded on the concept of rule of law. Through that lens, it is very clear what anti-American means: adherence and loyalty to a person instead of a set of values, expansive government overreach, erosion of individual liberties, including the ability to express dissent.
- iamnothere 20d agoIt was also built around a process by which those values can be codified and changed to reflect changing times, i.e. the amendment process. Which we have forgotten about entirely.
- cestith 20d agoWhat Trump and his followers mean by it, though, is that any disagreement with Trump on policy, strategy, tactics, procedure, or belief is anti-American. The way they use the term "anti-American" is anti-American. Therefore the term outside of context is meaningless. It's been coopted, twisted, and perverted.
- flir 20d agoIs it exists, something must be antithetical to it. (Truth is its just rhetoric and it doesn't mean much of anything. That's why its main use is as a cudgel).
- saltcured 20d agoClearly, the southern Indian Ocean and a tiny slice of the Antarctic coast are the most anti-(US of) American. It only involves a swathe of South-East Asia and China once you are inclusive of South America... ;-)
- RobRivera 20d agoI disagree. I would define confidently that Anti-American is aligned with Anti-Constitutional. By definition, it is this nation's founding document and treatise. An the Supreme Court's ultimate role is to affirm or deny nebulous case law as aligned with the Constitution.
- rickdeckard 20d agoFor you that might be a confident definition, for others it might not mean "anti-constitutional" but "against the declaration of independence", for even others it might not create any clear association at all. That's because something being "American"/"anti-American" is not sufficiently defined in this context. It triggers a highly subjective assumption of what it means, allowing people to evoke "us vs. them" solidarity without actually taking a position. Example: I can (probably) break your assumed association by stating "women owning credit-cards is anti-American". It (probably) doesn't fit your mental model of what being "anti-American" means, but women were in fact not allowed to own credit cards in US until 1974. So my definition might be more in-line with the era of the constitution than yours. That's a blunt example. Now imagine I use "anti-American" in a context of "law and order" and then keep talking. People instinctively glance over it because they create the meaning by taking their personal association of being "American" and invert it. You may feel like agreeing but I might actually say the complete opposite of what you think. That's why IMO the phrase should be rejected from people in a public role.
- bryanrasmussen 20d agoIf you will not say what something is against, then it is by definition for nothing. on edit: fixed grammatical error, based on bad keyboard gesture moving stuff around.
- pc86 21d ago> When Trump refuses to peacefully transfer power to his victorious opponent When did this happen? I didn't realize Biden wasn't inaugurated. I could have sworn he was the President for 4 years.
- smallmancontrov 21d agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_January_6_United_States_Capitol_attack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_January_6_Unit...
- pc86 21d agoI'm skimming the "Aftermath" section and I'm not seeing where Biden's inauguration was cancelled or Trump retained power or anything else? If Trump "refused to peacefully transfer power" how was power peacefully transferred to Biden exactly on schedule the same way it's happened in every other election? I do see this happened on Jan 7th though: > 7:10 p.m.: Shortly after Twitter unlocked Trump's account, Trump released a video statement condemning the violence at the Capitol, saying that "a new administration will be inaugurated" and that his "focus now turns to ensuring a smooth, orderly, and seamless transition of power" to the Biden administration.
- smallmancontrov 21d agoThe American people deserve to know that President Trump and his advisors didn’t just ask me to pause, they asked me to reject votes, to return votes, to essentially overturn the election. To keep faith with the oath that I made to the American people and to almighty God, I rejected that out of hand and I did my duty that day. - Vice President Mike Pence This is why the Jan 6 crowd was carrying around an improvised gallows and chanting "hang Mike Pence." The crowd was there to serve as a pretext for what Trump wanted Pence to do, but Pence refused to do it so the self-coup attempt failed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_fake_electors_plot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_fake_electors_plot Show me where this happened in every other election.
- deleted 20d ago[deleted]
- caseysoftware 20d ago> The "American Experiment" isn't an empty concept, but it is about democracy and law and rights as opposed to conservative cultural values, and when people in power start to argue that the former must be sacrificed for the latter they certainly deserve to be clowned on. Not because they are wrong to imagine an American Ideal, but because they have its contents exactly backwards. From the many responses on this thread, it appears that many either don't want a defintion of "pro-American" or "anti-American" or "an American Ideal" or don't have one but these are core to your point. How would you define each?
- gaze 20d agoif you're explaining, you're losing
- zahlman 20d ago> When Trump calls Democrats "enemies from within," He did not say this. Please spare me the part where you show me the things that you think establish the claim. I have already seen them and they do not establish the claim. At best you are intentionally conflating "Democrats" collectively with specific individuals who happen to be part of the Democratic party. I could continue on with the rest but you get the idea.
- cucumber3732842 21d agoWhile the exact point at which it becomes "anti-american" isn't clear there's certainly a category of rhetoric in which people peddle subservience to the state (usually dressed up in obfuscating words, like they'll use "society" instead of "the government") that is undeniably "anti-american" except perhaps by some obtuse technical interpretation of all the words. And I will die on the hill that those who peddle such ideals are bad people and ought to be looked down upon the same way we'd look down upon someone peddling phrenology as a basis for racism.
- RobotToaster 20d agoIt's like the John Birth society are back in charge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Un-American_Activities_Committee#Hollywood_Blacklist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Un-American_Activities_C...
- smallmancontrov 20d agoI'm pretty sure that's the idea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unhumans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unhumans
- derivagral 20d agoHistory sure does rhyme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_Nothing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_Nothing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Scare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Scare
- sailfast 20d agoDon’t give them any ideas.
- xtajv 20d agoIf unsure, ask the House Un-American Activities Committee. (P.s. don't ask any questions that they don't like, that would be Un-American).
- nonethewiser 20d agoIm not quite following. Things can be mislabeled as anti American, but everyone has some idea of whats anti-American in principle. Anti free speech for example is anti American. How that gets applied is a matter of debate. But I think all public officials should agree with that. Its kind of a fundamental thing to have an idea about the nation’s values. If that’s too taboo for someone then they are quite literally anti American. Having a country means organizing around a core set of values. We can debate what those are but arguing you can’t stand for anything?
- abustamam 20d agoI'm Muslim. Born in the US. I've seen politicians and right wing public figures call my entire faith anti-American. One of them just had a nice memorial for their one-year since their death. The term may have had an agreed upon meaning at some point, but not anymore. Edit: it seems like most right-wing people conflate "non-Christian" with "anti-American". i don't know what's worse; the fact that these people say and think it, or the fact that their constituents don't know the difference.
- frumplestlatz 20d agoI’m as atheist as they come and I see the tenets of Islam — as widely practiced throughout the world, and self-reported in a litany of surveys — to be clearly anti-woman, anti-freedom, anti-free speech, pro blasphemy-law, et al … and as a result, anti-American. Charlie Hebdo was not that long ago. Anti-women practices are the predominant norm. The list of regressive and oppressive political norms is practically endless. Nothing here absolves Christianity or any other religion of its crimes either, but (1) the sexism is on another scale entirely, and (2) we’ve been far more successful as a global society of separating those religions from their political aspirations.
- abustamam 20d ago> the sexism is on another scale entirely Several nations that are predominantly Muslim have had female heads of state before the US has. If your perception of Islam is based on how Middle Eastern countries practice it then you are only looking at the countries that choose a theocratic way of ruling. Islam mandates that women (and men!) cover certain parts of your body but the most populous Muslim country (Indonesia) you'll see women in hijabs wearing short sleeves or low cut shirts. Additionally, Christians are the predominant voice on many female-regressive laws in the US, such as the overturning of Roe. Women have been arrested for having miscarriages. If that isn't "anti-woman" i dont know what is. > we’ve been far more successful as a global society of separating those religions from their political aspirations. Have we though? Just a few years ago right-wing politicians were complaining that the woke left wanted to cancel Christmas. As mentioned above, Christians won the lobby on overturning Roe. Christians won the lobby on banning same sex marriage. A religion taking over a country isnt every citizen bowing down to that religions faith. Its everyone in the country being subject to that religion's laws and beliefs regardless of your faith.
- brocklobsta 20d ago100% agree. Also because the view, preferences, and cultural norms of America change over time. A law should not rely on such a dynamic definition.