Digital Journal — No matter where you are in the world, if you’re seeking a heated argument or a chance to hear some fiery invectives in an exotic accent, just mention the United States.
Sentiments towards the world’s last great superpower have fluctuated wildly over the years. America was once considered a beacon of liberty, democracy and human rights, shining the path of our collective future. Europeans, seeking reprieve from the jarring reality of war, would tune into American radio just to hear their reassuringly breezy voices and wild, liberating jazz. Once upon a time, being a Yankee abroad practically guaranteed you an exciting job and a friendly welcome.
But the times have changed.
Anti-globalization rioters, offended by America’s spreading influence, burn effigies of Uncle Sam and firebomb McDonald’s outlets. American athletes are booed and spit on at the Olympics and American tourists return home with reports of even scarier behaviour.
This phenomenon has been growing since the 1960s, says Bernard Chazelle, a Princeton University computer science professor who writes extensively about politics. Chazelle’s articles have appeared in CounterPunch, Eschaton, History News Network and hundreds of websites where his essays, including “Anti-Americanism: A Clinical Study,” have been viewed by millions.
Digital Journal spoke to Chazelle about widespread disappointment in his country and the increasing “U.S. vs. them” attitude.
Digital Journal: How does today’s anti-American paradigm differ from the past?
Bernard Chazelle: I think the current variety differs qualitatively from its predecessors, at least in Western Europe. The change predates this administration, but no doubt President George W. Bush catalysed the current full-blown anti-American mania.
If we think the French are the most hostile to us in Europe, we should think again. In the last 50 years, Spaniards and Greeks have been consistently more anti-American, probably because unlike the French, they’ve had legitimate gripes against us — having supported their dictatorships in various ways. French anti-U.S. sentiments are the sort of ill feelings one might have toward an obnoxious cousin.
But despite the hostile rhetoric, it’s all in the family. Well, until now.
The lack of remorse about Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo is something deeply shocking to Europeans. That’s the sort of behaviour one might have expected from the old Soviet Union, not from America. So a lot of the new anti-Americanism has to do with sheer disappointment, like if you caught Mother Teresa stealing food from a starving child’s mouth.
Digital Journal: How will Bush’s re-election change things?
Chazelle: Before Bush’s re-election, the world would tell us, “Don’t worry. We hate Bush, but we love Americans.” No more. For many around the world, Americans have now given themselves the president they want and deserve. I’m afraid this will boost anti-Americanism.
The Daily Mirror‘s recent headline, “How can 59,054,087 people be so dumb?” is easy to dismiss as typical English tabloid ranting but, fairly or not, it captures a lot of what’s on people’s minds: Today, in the eyes of the world, Bush is America.
Digital Journal: Is anti-Americanism really as widespread and virulent as we’ve come to believe?
Chazelle: I think in the Muslim world, anti-Americanism is rabid, violent, and it’s there to stay. There, we’re associated with the cardinal sin of Westerners since the Crusades: humiliating Muslims. No hatred is more durable than the kind spurred by humiliation.
Indeed, we treat those countries like children: columnist Tom Friedman referring to Baghdad as our new “baby,” Bush talking about taking off the “training wheels” of Iraqi society, a U.S. Marine captain “teaching Iraqis about civilization,” touchingly unaware that Iraq is the world’s oldest civilization.
Digital Journal: How can people claim to reject America’s culture and values, while accepting only its trashiest elements?
Chazelle: I wouldn’t go that far. The trashy component is the visible tip of the iceberg. Junk food only becomes a problem when it overshoots its purpose and becomes culture.
The rejection of McDonald’s in France has nothing to do with the food; they like it as much as we do. It’s the fear that it will redefine the meaning of the meal, its social and aesthetic ramifications. In Europe, culture is attuned to lifestyle in deep, time-honoured ways. There’s no big conceptual difference between attending an impressionist painting exhibition or reading Camus or eating a meal — lunch conversations can go on forever.
But a trip to McDonald’s only serves the purpose of filling one’s stomach. A bit like going to the bathroom. One has to do it, so better make it short and sweet.
Digital Journal: You’ve said Americans can be “maddeningly provincial.” How do their attitudes differentiate from others?
Chazelle: There’s a bit of a paradox. Holland is by definition provincial and yet, precisely for that reason, it’s very hard for the Dutch to behave provincially. Their “province” is simply not self-sufficient culturally. Dutch TV doesn’t even bother with dubbing or subtitles when it shows American movies.
America is the opposite: entirely self-sufficient and basking in arrogant self-awareness. While opening up to latte, European cheeses, etc., America has also, paradoxically, grown more self-confident culturally than it was in the ’40s.
Virtually everything foreign is filtered through an American lens, and foreign influence on American culture is waning. Recall that the most “American” of all American movies were made by European émigrés: Wilder, Lubitsch, Curtiz, Kazan. No such wholesale influence now. Foreign movies are confined to art-house theatres.
Digital Journal:Today we see an increasing “us versus them” attitude appearing, especially among conservatives. Was it always this way?
Chazelle: It was latent but now it’s out in the open, because from the conservatives’ perspective, the world has “betrayed” America. In 1945, the U.S. was not only admired but revered. It stood for so many progressive values the world yearned for — anti-colonialism, anti-fascism. Today, virtually no one sees the U.S. as the societal model they want to copy. This rejection is viewed as betrayal.
Digital Journal: Do you personally feel hurt by anti-American sentiment?
Chazelle: As you know, only one person is allowed to criticize your mother, and that’s you. Primitive anti-Americanism is odious and hurtful. But intelligent criticism doesn’t bother me at all.
Digital Journal: How have people responded to your essays?
Chazelle: Overwhelmingly positive. At the same time, I’ve gotten the sort of hate mail I didn’t know people could write. But I’m used to it now, more amused than spooked. And the literary creativity behind some hate mails is quite impressive.
Interview by Mike Drach
This article is part of Digital Journal’s national magazine edition. Pick up your copy of Digital Journal in bookstores across Canada. Or subscribe to Digital Journal now, and receive 8 issues for $19.95 + GST ($39.95 USD).
