Why do other countries hate the United States?

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Probably the hypocrisy.

Even today, what we're seeing is a Christian right, terrified of the demographic changes happening in their own country, have decided that the best way to preserve "Christian values" is to first ignore Christian values in an effort to put down those they don't think belong.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Probably the hypocrisy.

Even today, what we're seeing is a Christian right, terrified of the demographic changes happening in their own country, have decided that the best way to preserve "Christian values" is to first ignore Christian values in an effort to put down those they don't think belong.

Regarding the Christian right, I'd add "religious freedom for me, but none for thee" to what you stated.

 

[F1fan]

Amrican is going through a social civil war, and there are many things to not like about the less ethical side of it. The good is still there, but overshadowed by the more negative side. Many counttries are having similar divisive issues, but the USA is on such a high pedestal that it gets more attention.

 

[Heyo]

Isn't it interesting how we often speak of countries as if they are individual persons? Why is this done, I wonder? Even as an animist for whom "person" is not constrained to "human" I'm not sure what a country would think or feel about anything. What is the Spirit of a Country? How much does it reflect all who dwell within its borders - human and non-human - and contribute to its nature as a Spirit? I just don't know what this Country Spirit - Spirit of the United States of America - is. I don't know how I would define it as it is tremendously complicated and multifaceted. Certainly hating the Spirit of a Country falls into the realm of non-rational prejudice given that, wouldn't it?

"L'État, c'est moi."
In those times (and before and some time after) a country was synonymous with it's ruler. That has stuck even to this day when it isn't.

 

[Stevicus]

Isn't it interesting how we often speak of countries as if they are individual persons? Why is this done, I wonder? Even as an animist for whom "person" is not constrained to "human" I'm not sure what a country would think or feel about anything. What is the Spirit of a Country? How much does it reflect all who dwell within its borders - human and non-human - and contribute to its nature as a Spirit? I just don't know what this Country Spirit - Spirit of the United States of America - is. I don't know how I would define it as it is tremendously complicated and multifaceted. Certainly hating the Spirit of a Country falls into the realm of non-rational prejudice given that, wouldn't it?

I've noticed it as common practice whenever countries are mentioned in news articles, current events, as well as in historical accounts. It's accurate enough and it simplifies things. I think it's pretty well implicitly understood that referring to a nation doesn't mean each and every citizen of the country. It's like, if someone writes "On September 1, 1939, Germany invaded Poland," then it's understood what is meant and implied. Or you might see someone write "France and Britain declared war on Germany." The names of the countries are expressed as singular units.

In the U.S., similar observations may be seen regarding how people look at states. Another common practice is when people refer to "the government" as a singular entity, even when it encompasses different branches and numerous departments, committees, bureaus, etc. But maybe they perceive some kind of "spirit of government."

 

[libre]

The below is written by Fidel in 2002.

Our struggle is not, and will never be, aimed against the American people. Perhaps, no other country receives Americans with the respect and hospitality displayed by Cuba.

We are men and women of ideas and not a community of bigots. In Cuba we have never cultivated hatred against the American people or blamed them for the aggressions perpetrated by the governments of that country. That would have run contrary to our political doctrines and our internationalist conscience, both well proven throughout many years, and increasingly rooted in our ideas.

...

I have always felt, based on my reflection on the most recent history of that country, that the American people can support a bad cause—as it has done on not a few occasions—but only when it has been misled. Albeit in the case of the Vietnam war, the painful daily images of the dead American youths that were brought home highly contributed to build an awareness about how useless, unfair and absurd that war was, the situation with the child was different. However, when the American people learned, through its own media, of the cruel injustice being committed against that little child, it did not hesitate and took sides with justice. That, Cuba will never forget!

Source: Socialist Viewpoint

Generally speaking, the citizens and governments of Communist countries that were victims of US aggression are more understanding and forgiving than the citizens of the Imperialist core typically are to their government's enemies.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Other countries? Shoot, I'm American and I struggle not to hate this country. I just remind myself that it's the federal government that is the cause of our woes, and they ceased representing the common American citizen long ago, if they ever did.

 

[exchemist]

It could be that. I was also thinking that, as much as our government crows about supporting freedom and making the world safe for democracy, our track record doesn't really reflect any actual adherence or commitment to such a principle. It's often been reflected in the regimes and the allies we support. For example, South Korea was not exactly a bastion of freedom and liberalism during the Korean War. Same for South Vietnam. Or Iran under the Shah. Or Chile under Pinochet. Or the Philippines under Marcos. There are other examples of coups, covert ops, assassinations, and other such behind-the-scenes intrigue, in addition to overt military actions.

So our government doesn't exactly practice what it preaches, so I can see where some might take issue with that.

Yes, US actions in the world have become rather more ambivalent since the moral clarity of its involvement in WW2, for which we in Europe remain eternally grateful.

I've just read the Oppenheimer biography on which the recent film was based and what struck me was the anticommunism running through the US establishment as early as the 1930s. (Oppenheimer was bugged and under surveillance, illegally, long before war broke out). This resurfaced after the war of course and became the guiding star of US foreign policy. Some of that was justified, but it led to some extremely unsavoury alliances and actions in far-flung parts of the world, which tarnished the reputation of the US.

In 1955, Graham Greene wrote an excellent novel called "The Quiet American", about an idealistic CIA operative in Vietnam. I think it captures well the naïvety and inability to balance right and wrong, or to see nuance, or others' points of view, that many feel tends to characterise the US attitude to the rest of the world. (I read it in 2002, just before the Iraq invasion, and I felt it hit the nail on the head about the madness and twisted logic of that adventure - a naïve madness shared by our then Prime Minister, sad to say.)

 

[Stevicus]

Yes, US actions in the world have become rather more ambivalent since the moral clarity of its involvement in WW2, for which we in Europe remain eternally grateful.

I've just read the Oppenheimer biography on which the recent film was based and what struck me was the anticommunism running through the US establishment as early as the 1930s. (Oppenheimer was bugged and under surveillance, illegally, long before war broke out). This resurfaced after the war of course and became the guiding star of US foreign policy. Some of that was justified, but it led to some extremely unsavoury alliances and actions in far-flung parts of the world, which tarnished the reputation of the US.

In 1955, Graham Greene wrote an excellent novel called "The Quiet American", about an idealistic CIA operative in Vietnam. I think it captures well the naïvety and inability to balance right and wrong, or to see nuance, or others' points of view, that many feel tends to characterise the US attitude to the rest of the world. (I read it in 2002, just before the Iraq invasion, and I felt it hit the nail on the head about the madness and twisted logic of that adventure - a naïve madness shared by our then Prime Minister, sad to say.)

I think anti-communism goes back even further, such as during the Palmer Raids. The U.S. was the last major power to recognize the government of the Soviet Union, when FDR did so shortly after his election. Before WW2, it seemed to focus more on the ideology of communism itself and how it could affect America internally if allowed to spread. After WW2, the USSR was much bigger and more menacing to national security, so anti-communism took an almost desperate turn in the form of McCarthyism at home, and more aggressive military intervention overseas.

Anti-communism was synonymous with American patriotism, and it was as if our entire national purpose was shifted to that objective. I think when it got to Vietnam and Watergate, people were starting to say "whoa, let's rein it in, if we can." There was a brief window in the post-Nixon era when we might have turned it around, but then, Reagan got in and it was back to the same ol' same ol'.

And it's been that way ever since.

 

[Willamena]

Rocket science. They hate America because of rocket science.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I knew a sheriff's deputy who was moonlighting as a security guard where I worked in college, and he was kind of a wannabe mercenary kind of guy. He showed me a t-shirt he was wearing under his uniform which had picture of a skull wearing a military beret that said "Let's kill 'em all, and let God sort out the rest." I've grown up with people like this, and this mentality is firmly embedded in America's cultural fabric.

That is horrible, and I don't think I've ever met anyone here in the states with that attitude. Criminals perhaps. Sheriff's t-shirts may be colorful but not of general public opinion, and that one sounds hyperbolic.

I've often heard descriptions of Americans as superficial, flighty, short-sighted, with short memories and short attention spans. In many cases, this is actually true. The general public has a short memory, and it's often fairly easy to gaslight people when it comes to events of the past. This is especially true when it comes to matters of foreign policy where Americans may not have any experience or direct knowledge of.

All people are this way. I remember someone mentioning N. Korea. Talk about a gaslit citizenry!

...but the bottom line is that we're still relatively more moral than the rest of the world, and on that basis alone, we have the right to pass judgement and take military action against any nation or faction which we see fit. In other words, being on the side of good, we have no other choice to bomb our enemies "back to the stone age," since they're so intractably evil....

I don't think that is USA at all. I do not think it is us. We do, however, have actual scheming enemies who are not imagined. In particular fascists in charge of failed states such as N. Korea are embarrassed by the happiness of all of the successful republics such as S. Korea.

20% of the North Korean population wiped out.

Since then a much higher percentage has been wiped out mainly through starvation by the installed government.

Listening to most historical accounts and the commentary from politicians and pundits, they think these countries just inexplicably decided to become evil for no reason whatsoever. Or as Bush once put it "They hate us for our freedom."

That is several presidents ago, and in the time quoted Bush is probably referring to specific enemies that did mistrust our freedoms, such as our freedom to wear bikinis on beaches and freedom to not be religious and such other things as are considered evil freedoms in many places. Our freedom to eat whatever we like would be considered evil by leaders in N. Korea . Our decadent food is scandalous.

Americans are taught from a rather young age about how our country was founded in concepts like "freedom," "democracy," and "justice for all." We're told that America is a generous, compassionate, loving nation which gives of itself to the less fortunate nations of the world.

Founded upon the concepts, yes, and at great risk. It was a unique time when most would not have taken such a risk, but the people here in the original colonies were from previously oppressed minority groups such as quakers, baptists etc.

Generous, compassionate and loving is debatable. It is generous in that it allows full immigration though. Immigrants can become citizens with complete rights as if born here, able to vote, able to work in government or join our military.

The reason to hate USA is: too big. The government is so large and unwieldy. Countries ought to be smaller. While citizens have benefited in many ways, we really are far too large of a country. The military while large and powerful enough to defend us is overwhelmingly too large, too expensive, too influential. Are we going to take over the world or not? Its like we can't back down since WWII, and its an awful situation that can not be sustained.

 

[Heyo]

Rocket science. They hate America because of rocket science.

You mean rockets fired?
If it was rocket science than they should stop hating the US and start hating the Russians. Not only did they invent rocket science but were always better at it than the US.

 

[exchemist]

Rocket science. They hate America because of rocket science.

As it says in "The Right Stuff", apropos the competition with the USSR, "Our Germans are better than their Germans".

 

[Stevicus]

That is horrible, and I don't think I've ever met anyone here in the states with that attitude. Criminals perhaps. Sheriff's t-shirts may be colorful but not of general public opinion, and that one sounds hyperbolic.

Such people do exist, at least around here where I live in Arizona. Maybe it's because I live in a military town. A lot of people have that warlike "edge."

All people are this way. I remember someone mentioning N. Korea. Talk about a gaslit citizenry!

Yes, although as the OP article indicated, their reasons for being hostile towards the U.S. are not entirely manufactured. We carpet bombed their country and wiped out 20% of their population, and we still maintain a military force right on their borders.

I don't think that is USA at all. I do not think it is us.

Some people use that as a justification for U.S. military actions.

We do, however, have actual scheming enemies who are not imagined. In particular fascists in charge of failed states such as N. Korea are embarrassed by the happiness of all of the successful republics such as S. Korea.

I'm not so sure of that. How can we possibly know what people (particularly leaders) in other countries think and feel? How do we know what they're scheming? It could be just the opposite. They might think that our government is scheming, and they're desperate to build up their defenses to prevent it. Since we already have bombed them excessively, as well as a long track record of warmongering interventionism in East Asia - while they have not dropped a single bomb on us or sent a single soldier to our soil, it seems logical to assume that their fears of us are more well-founded than any fears our leaders have of them.

Likewise, we have a track record of military interventionism in China and Russia - yet they never did anything to us. Yet our government tries to pass off the notion that they went against us for no reason and that we never did anything to provoke them.

In the here and now, it probably doesn't really matter anymore, since we may already be past the point of no return. Now that we've decided that they're enemies, they are responding accordingly - and that might mean doing a bit of scheming on their part. Just as our leaders have to do their scheming. They're certainly not imagined, but perhaps in the future, it might behoove us Americans to learn a bit better about the outside world before throwing our weight around. If nothing else, at least we should follow the old saying: "Know your enemy."

The other downside of entering a new cold war is that it could have unintended side effects here at home. If we are forced to defend ourselves against enemies around the world, then we'll have to focus even more on national security issues.

Since then a much higher percentage has been wiped out mainly through starvation by the installed government.

I haven't seen the statistics on that.

That is several presidents ago, and in the time quoted Bush is probably referring to specific enemies that did mistrust our freedoms, such as our freedom to wear bikinis on beaches and freedom to not be religious and such other things as are considered evil freedoms in many places. Our freedom to eat whatever we like would be considered evil by leaders in N. Korea . Our decadent food is scandalous.

I've never been to North Korea, so I really wouldn't know if they consider Americans' freedom to eat to be evil. I don't think they care so much about what Americans eat as much as where we put our military bases and forces, especially when it's in close proximity to their borders. Just as our leaders would freak out and go into a panic if ever North Korea had bases and troops in places like Tijuana or Ciudad Juarez.

I honestly can't believe that our enemies would commit the 9/11 bombings because we have the freedom to wear bikinis on beaches. They did it because we had been interfering in their region for decades. I don't think they had any desire to take over our territory, nor did they care all that much about how we lived or what freedoms we had. They were just telling us to stop messing around in the Middle East and keep our troops out of the region. It was their way of saying "Yankee, go home."

Founded upon the concepts, yes, and at great risk. It was a unique time when most would not have taken such a risk, but the people here in the original colonies were from previously oppressed minority groups such as quakers, baptists etc.

Generous, compassionate and loving is debatable. It is generous in that it allows full immigration though. Immigrants can become citizens with complete rights as if born here, able to vote, able to work in government or join our military.

The reason to hate USA is: too big. The government is so large and unwieldy. Countries ought to be smaller. While citizens have benefited in many ways, we really are far too large of a country. The military while large and powerful enough to defend us is overwhelmingly too large, too expensive, too influential. Are we going to take over the world or not? Its like we can't back down since WWII, and its an awful situation that can not be sustained.

My point here was that, all too often, the perceptions of America can come across too one-sided and exaggerated.

I do agree that we could stand down somewhat, at least in terms of our military posturing. We could pull back from the world to a certain degree. But that might also mean taking a more tolerant attitude towards certain other countries in the world we have declared to be enemies. Either we can negotiate, compromise, and find peaceful solutions. Or we can put ourselves on a war footing and prepare for whatever onslaught may await us. It would probably be comparable to the Cold War, but with the added dimension of cyber warfare and space warfare.

Should be a boon for industry, but civil liberties will probably take a tumble - "for reasons of national security."

One thing I keep in mind, at least as an American, since 1941, for all practical purposes, we've been in a constant state of war. As you say, we never could stand down after WW2, as the Cold War came right after, and even when the Cold War ended, we still couldn't stand down. Of course, during the same period, life still went on in America - and life improved greatly in America following the Depression and WW2 era. Things also got better in the area of civil rights and equality for all citizens. But we were also having air raid drills, and many people were building bomb shelters. The public got a great scare during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the public started seeing more and more pictures and film footage coming out of Southeast Asia - and the public started showing its dislike for such activities more and more.

Nevertheless, discussions of geopolitics were common among regular people, and foreign policy and our military activities became one of the most important political issues of our time. The public, for the most part, has accepted limitations on their freedoms for reasons of national security. Whole generations have been raised with this kind of "national security" mindset which I've observed to be quite prevalent among a lot of people. People accept it, but this is where the great trap lies. While I'm hesitant to use the term "fascism" and apply it in America, whatever we want to call it, Americans have already been conditioned and programmed 80-90% of the way already.

That's one of the downsides of long-term warmongering under the pretext of defending our freedom. We shouldn't be surprised when some people start to actually take it literally.

 

[libre]

I remember someone mentioning N. Korea. Talk about a gaslit citizenry!

I don't think they have to be gaslit about the Americans, they have a lived experience of being at war with the United States. For instance, 85% of the buildings in their country were destroyed by the American bombings.

The DPRK emerged when the United States backed a military dictatorship that outlawed the PRK provisional government. These were the conditions wherein Il-Sung was installed by the USSR. The origin of their country and virtually it's entire history they have spent fighting because of the United States.

This is to not absolve the leadership of the North Korean government, it's just that we ought not to absolve the US of it's responsibility in the peninsula.

As for the successful republic in the South, let's not forget that this is the Sixth South Korean Republic, and that their country has swapped between dictatorship and democracy many times for a young country, and US interference is widely criticized in the South as well.

 

[беспокойный путешественни]

Why, indeed?

Here is my incomplete list of personal reasons:

• If other countries had that many ongoing wars, people would probably call them a "terrorist state". List of wars involving the United States - Wikipedia
• They are holding the journalist Julian Assange captive under torture because he exposed their war crimes.
• They would like to put Edward Snowden on trial for exposing their crimes against democracy and civil rights.
• Their language is the worst English dialect I know.

 

[Estro Felino]

Here is my incomplete list of personal reasons:

• If other countries had that many ongoing wars, people would probably call them a "terrorist state". List of wars involving the United States - Wikipedia
• They are holding the journalist Julian Assange captive under torture because he exposed their war crimes.
• They would like to put Edward Snowden on trial for exposing their crimes against democracy and civil rights.
• Their language is the worst English dialect I know.

I would also make a distinction between commoners and the powerful élites that decide all these wars. The citizens undergo and suffer such decisions.

You forgot the number 4) the most important: They live in a perennial state of double-standardism.
Meaning; they helped Kosovo because Kosovars were victimized by the government of Belgrade.
But they sided against the Donbas people who were victimized by the government of Kiev.

Which means: Kosovars were good and deserved to be rescued. The Donbas people are ugly, dirty and bad and deserve nothing.

 

[Bthoth]

The US is quite literate and educated. The overall land mass offers a capability unmatched with a huge range of cultures.

Proprietary of products and know how, is perhaps the biggest dividing venue and the most ruthless. To be ruled by business, is our gravest problem.

I live within the monster of capitalism and understand the benefits as well our weakness from it.

This is the greatest country of all time and will be the land mass of the long sought shambhala or what is sought in the middle east zion.

 

[беспокойный путешественни]

The US is quite literate and educated.

Numbers: Uneducated America

 

[Estro Felino]

I can just say this: I believe in America as principle and as the beacon of my civilization.
Democracy, peace, freedom, free economic enterprise.

But unfortunately...I see that this idea has been betrayed by many. There are too many renegades. And I say it clearly, and out loud.