I have to say that I have a dislike of Mexicans. It may sound racist but whether it's their government, or their people in general, I get this "entitlement to come into the U.S." vibe.

Why do Russians and people in other Slavic countries have so many great ballroom dancers in this country?

I've heard rumors that the Japanese consider Americans to be idiots. I don't know if that's true or not because I doubt a Japanese, or Japanese-American would just blurt it out in the open. If it is true I can kinda understand why, since their educational system (k-12) seems better than ours.

__________________
Is our children learning? -George W. Bush

"I think—tide turning—see, as I remember—I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of—it's easy to see a tide turn—did I say those words?"—Washington, D.C., June 14, 2006

"[T]he illiteracy level of our children are appalling."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2004

Indeed. It's not so much a person's nationality that I like or dislike, it's a "type" of person, found undoubtedly in all countries, that I like or dislike.


Unless, of course, that person is Puerto Rican.


I kid.

__________________
"Jesus said: I have cast fire upon the world, and behold I guard it until it is ablaze."
Gospel of Thomas

Wow ... Sorry for your lack of humour. This is the real conversation stopper if you ask me.

Your post itself was a generalization on all non-Americans (the majority population on the globe) and, you will not like what I am going to say, you are the person not allowing the conversation to go on, and this simply because you don't like what you are being told.

You cannot, on the one hand, ask for an opinion and on the other hand discard this opinion because it hurts your feelings.

With regards to foreign nations, ignorance is the rule, not the exception. The good thing about ignorance, though, is that it can be educated. Therefore, instead of stalling the conversation altogether, why not try to educate the ignorant non-American ?

The thing about many Americans is that they don't see the paradox: they're allowed to say or do or invade any other nation they please, but if you so much as criticize them in any way, they get all bent out of shape. Their feelings are like those of a child sometimes. Very naive. Very protectionist. If you're secure with yourself and with your country, than you can admit when your country is fucking up. Good countries fuck up sometimes. It happens. The test of a good country is if it can wake up and change course.

Stating that one hasn't a sense of humor is not a very clever method of refuting a point. If you would like to refute my point that your post was irrelevant, this is quite a diversion from that particular point.

So, let's review: The thread is about what Americans think of non-Americans. I post that I like speaking with non-Americans, but when they generalize, it's a conversation stopper. You state that the thread isn't about Americans. I state that your post is irrelevant. I also state that you have generalized and cite an example. I state that if you intend a genuine exchange of ideas, generalizations do not indicate that intent.

Now, we move into your accusation that I haven't a sense of humor? That is funny.
If you can demonstrate where I said anything even close to ALL non-Americans generalize, you may have a point. Otherwise, your generalizing my opinion is projection.
I wasn't aware that you actually expressed an opinion when you stated that the thread wasn't about Americans. How you conclude that my feelings are hurt is bizarre.
I had no idea that you were ignorant. If you really do wish to be educated about Americans' opinions of non-Americans, many have posted their opinions, as have I. I have no other opinion of non-Americans other than what I have already said.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them; speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

What's wrong with generalizing when the generalizing is generally accurate?

Like, in general, Americans like to eat. A lot. No other country has buffets like in America. They even have butterscotch pudding at the salad bar sometimes. Freaky!

In general, Americans watch way, way too much television.

In general, non-Americans might think that Americans are religious, but actually, in general, most Americans don't go to church.

In general, Americans like their porn.

In general, Americans tip very well.

In general, if Americans were given a blank map of the Middle East, they wouldn't be able to situate where Iraq is, and which countries are to the east, north, south and west of it.

In general, Americans don't know the difference between a muslim and a sikh.

You see, I just made generalizations. Some Americans would be able to place Iraq and surrounding countries on the map. But what I proposed, is it way off base? No. That's how come it works as a generalization.

The difference is that you haven't drawn any conclusions about the whole based on a small sample. You haven't generalized because you recognize that not all Americans love that butterscoth pudding (yeech).

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them; speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

LMAO

My wife has the same reaction to butterscotch pudding.

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

But I have generalized! Generalizations have modulations based on not only what somebody is saying, but how they're saying it. Like when I say Americans couldn't find Iraq on a blank map of the Middle East. I think if I were to poll that, that that would be, in general, an accurate statement. It would reflect my opinion that although some might be able to place it, most will not.

So when Bush won in 2004 and people around the world were like, "dude, Americans are idiots", that was a generalization that meant, people who voted for Bush are idiots.

(I don't think I have ever done that because it is not my style to directly insult people, besides I respect people with faith if I do not share it, and I hope I havn't.) However, I would say, frankly, that this is a common opinion in (most*) European countries, yes: religious people are "brainwashed" (Marx = religion is the opium of the people), hence they cannot think by themselves, hence they are ”dumb”.

Yes, the Enlightenment, its philosophers and its disciples have thoroughly done the job : thank you Spinoza, thank you Voltaire, Diderot, Rousseau & co, thank you Schopenhauer, thank you Nietzsche, thank you Marx, thank you Freud etc. - Religious thinking belongs back in the Middle Ages. Don’t get me wrong : the Middle Ages is not an abstract in Europe, it is a concrete time of history, a time where people were foltered if they thought differently than the Church.

This is precisely what I meant when speaking about "categories" of thoughts. This different experience has shaped two distinct ways of seeing religion. People in the US have emigrated to live their faith in peace, while in Europe faith has been destroyed in order to get peace. Now, how do you build a bridge between two opposing conceptions built on two different (painful) experiences ?

(*) Poland would be an eminent exception

In such a case ("My country is Nbr 1 in so and so" but this is not true), what would your line of argumentation be then ?

Please consider that, very often, examples taken from one’s homeland are used, because this is what the poster knows best ?

It is a bit naïve, but I would not necessarily interpret it as arrogant.

My only problem is when sentimental types like you don't even understand why some people hate Bush, or hate America. You think it's in "fashion" to hate America. You probably follow that line of thinking, well, it's not really thinking, it's more of a mental illness really, of people who think that "they" hate you because of your freedoms or because "they" are jealous of you. The hate that many dangerous people have for America right now is real, not schtick, and it's gotten worse. That's how you can measure Bush's success or failure as president: less peace than 6 and a half years ago across the Middle East before his stinking policies make him a failure.

I don't hate Bush. Don't hate Americans. I hate the war though. Bush is in way over his head. I'm sure he's a nice guy and everything(although the fact that he doesn't ever drink or seem to have any sexual thoughts whatsoever other than to talk about gay sex does make you wonder about him!).

Let' recap.

My post was not expressing an "opinion", I was just making fun of your post (but not of you) which was rambling on all ignorant opinions non-Americans had on Americans.

So, yes, you are right, it was not relevant as an "opinion".

But you are wrong to say that you were not generalizing. If you weren't it was not clear at all from the way you wrote your message.

To finish with : yes, I am ignorant about many things in the USA. In fact I am ignorant about many things in the world but at least I have the modesty to recognise it.

Jason, the act of generalizing is drawing conclusions about the whole based on observation of a sample. That is a definition. Speaking in general terms and generalizing are two different things.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them; speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

Yeah, just thinking about it is making my stomach churn...especially this early in the morning.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them; speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

A "rambling" post of ~140 words

Incorrect. Generalizing is drawing a conclusion about the whole based on observing a sample. My use of the word "when" in my original post indicates, by default, a subset. A subset is not a whole. (Venn...?) Thus, your projection is without foundation.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them; speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition