Understanding Anti-Americanism: Its Orgins and Impact at Home and Abroad

This book begins with a fine introduction by Paul Hollander, who points out that one aspect of anti-Americanism is a bogus attempt to equate the United States or its policies with those of National Socialist Germany, the Soviet Union, or Arab terrorism. And he mentions some of the fiercer domestic "criticism" of our nation. James Ceasar then discusses the philosophical origins of anti-Americanism in Europe. We see the image of the United States as MacDonald's, Disneyland, and Microsoft. But that's unfair, of course. I rarely eat at MacDonald's: much better hamburgers are available elsewhere. I dislike Disneyland, but I do like some of our fine National Parks, including Yellowstone. And I do use Microsoft products, even though I admit that they have some serious inherent flaws. There is no need to blame America for one's dislike of some of its less attractive products of course. The rest of the world is at least as responsible. Anthony Daniels talks about French anti-Americanism. He explains that French is no longer the language of all civilized men. Instead, it is the sixth most common European language, with fewer native speakers than English, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, and German. Michael Mosbacher and Digby Anderson write about British anti-Americanism. That includes a discussion of Harold Pinter, who regards America as waging war against the rest of the world. And we see combined effects of radicalized Islamists and a left-wing anti-American elite, as well as a few folks on the far right. Michael Freund's chapter is on Germany, and he makes an interesting between opposition to modernity in National Socialist times, and anti-American anti-modernist tendencies today. Patrick Clawson and Barry Rubin tell us about anti-Americanism in the Middle East. Some say that much of this is a reaction to American support of Israel. But that's an oversimplification: Arab anti-Americanism was strong even in "the 1950s and 1960s, well before the United States developed a special relationship with Israel." It appears that radical Islamists hate America at least as much for its "religious liberty, freedom of the press, and equality before the law" as it does for our support of human rights in Israel. In addition, they mention that while the Arab "street" is rather anti-American, that is not at all the case for the Iranian "street." Michael Radu mentions that 10% of those who live in the United States are Latin Americans. Nevertheless, quite a few people find a way, generally fraudulent, to blame America for the poverty of many Latin Americans. In addition, most Latin Americans incorrectly feel that the United States can manipulate and control Latin America at will. Finally, the Catholic Church has played a role in all this, with Jesuits often disseminating anti-U.S. "liberation theology" material. David Brooks has a chapter on Nicaragua. I found it interesting to see how academics who visited Nicaragua in 1987 got a very unbalanc

I just happen to live in the same community as the author although I don't know him personally. One can listen and read all the theory and opinion of the Left about world issues but all one really needs to do is immerse oneself in a "People's Republic" college atmosphere to get a true understanding of the real thinking behind the rhetoric. Did I say thinking? What we have confronting us here is an immense tautology: Americans who have made up their minds that their country, its history, its people, are bad, who only accept information that confirms this point of view, and who immediately invalidate any contrary evidence. The amount of historical ignorance in this college community is astonishing. My "favorite" comment, by a graduate of Smith College no less--typical of what one can hear on the streets or in a coffee shop daily--was "We dropped the bomb on Hiroshima AFTER the Japanese surrendered." Too many people here unthinkingly believe these sorts of lies and distortions, and this is a grotesque example. Imagine the thinking that goes on regarding complex and subtle issues Another Smith grad, almost in tears, admitted to me that after six years of private school and four years at one of our most prestigious women's colleges she knew absolutely nothing about history. Oh, she knew plenty about women's issues and imperialism and gender theory and racism but when I gave her a book on the general history of this century she was shocked over, for example, Woodrow Wilson's attempts to create a permanent peace and a League of Nations. You see, she'd been taught that the whole history of history, the "white male patriarchy," was one of non-stop oppression and exploitation. She was also amazed that Teddy Roosevelt worked in partnership with his wife and didn't keep her barefoot and in the kitchen. Take all the ideas she'd been handed in her life and replace most of the key white male terms with "Jew" and she was as well indoctrinated for hate and genocide as any Hitler Youth ever had been. Even she was finally disgusted with talk among her classmates--talk most emphatically not discouraged by the school--of certain classes not being worth taking because they were all about "dead white males." I'm not a Conservative, in fact my sympathies are with old-fashioned Progressives, Populists and Liberals, but over the years, hearing one hateful, irrational, and horrifying thing after another emerge from the mouths of self proclaimed Leftists, and revolutionaries, hearing "ecology" advocates talk excitedly of the need to eliminate the human race so the planet can survive, and listening to feminists projecting their rage about family and personal troubles on half the planet, I have learned to utterly despise the American Left. What's deeply troubling is most of these people I've encountered come from comfortable upper-middle class backgrounds, some finance their political exploits with trust fund money, most, if not all, have no direct experience with want or

This is an excellent book. However, unlike the suggested censorship of the LBHR, you must decide for yourself whether to read it or not.