Posted on 07/06/2002 8:59:49 AM PDT by ginle
I've just moved from New York City to London, into a little house with a little garden - and it seemed a good idea to throw a Fourth of July barbecue. After years of cramped Manhattan parties, craning out of our air-conditioned apartment window to catch a glimpse of fireworks, I was determined to have the traditional outdoor feast.
My British flatmate loved the idea. "It's a themed welcome-back party," she exclaimed. She emailed invitations to our friends. I bought gourmet sausages, and then suddenly I panicked. Why would a bunch of Brits, anti-Bush and liberal Brits at that, want to celebrate our most all-American day?
Having lived in London on and off for two years, I've realised that young British people don't like America; in fact, now that Bush is waging his war on terror, they hate it. At a dinner party in the autumn, a boy I'd just met said: "You know, basically bin Laden is right." I began to cry. "America oppresses every other country, and really exploits them just to get richer and, you know, crushes them if they try to stand up for themselves. Bin Laden was telling America to mind its own business; it needed to be told."
And all this when my city was plastered with posters for loved ones missing since September 11; when I had just discovered that a friend had died in the attack. Knowing that one of the charges against Americans was that we "take everything too seriously", I apologised for crying.
Since September, most of my introductions to young Brits begin: "Oh, you're American." Then comes a barrage of questions and assertions about Bush and America's place in the world. If you can clear such political minefields, you find yourself with some friends for life, whose political attitudes about America do not extend to their opinion of individual Americans. "So really," I told myself, "stop worrying. These are your cherished friends coming to the party. You can make it through an evening without talking politics, and everyone loves a camp themed party, especially one with gourmet sausages and mustard in a squeezy bottle."
Then I read the "youth" survey in The Telegraph - a huge majority of young Britons thought America was "aggressive", "inward-looking", "concerned only with its own place in the world" and "not a good example to other countries". Thirty-seven per cent thought Bush was either "poor" or "dreadful". I accosted each new guest - even before they had negotiated the red, white and blue balloons that covered our floor - with interview requests. "Please will you tell me what you really think about Bush and America? I swear I won't get upset and really the more honest the better and I know that we disagree anyway." It worked, but not until we had more than a little drink. What a sight: BA literature students, photographers, actors and people in the theatre - all British but me - piling on to a sofa and talking tipsily about politics.
"Well, America," began someone, nestling into the couch and setting her drink on the table. "I really like America, but I don't think their political system inspires much confidence." "Bush is awful - a total idiot," broke in a boy from across the room, and the polite reserve was broken. "Yeah," nodded another friend earnestly. "Everyone in Britain thinks he's horrible; we were really gutted when he won. We wanted the other guy, what's his name? - Gore - to win."
Turning away from a conversation revolving around an Alabama-style chocolate cake that one of our friends had brought us, someone volunteered: "Bush is a homicidal megalomaniac; he wants to take over the world." My friend's boyfriend added a new sort of conspiracy theory: "The US is the world's biggest terrorist. They think that it is fine to go into other countries and pillage them for their own good, but when other countries attack them they call it terrorism. George W welcomed September 11. Look what it did for him. He didn't exactly engineer it, but he wanted to go into Afghanistan because of their oil resources. Do we really know Osama was behind September 11?" "Where did you hear this?" I asked, trying desperately to be impartial. "Well, I pieced it together," he replied. His paranoia was met with approval from some quarters: "Yeah, Bush wants to use 9/11 to start a world war." He was shot down by the others: "He's too stupid to do that."
I wondered out loud why they were convinced that he was so dumb. The answer was a bit feeble: "Our media has hyped him as stupid." But another friend, while pouring us more wine, came to the rescue: "He always messes up the speeches that are written for him and trips over big words." "He's a knob," yelled a friend as she went into the garden to partake of the sausages.
Finally, I went out into the garden to talk to my friend, the war studies undergraduate, who seems the exception to the rule. "There is less to worry about George W than everyone makes out," he said, lighting my cigarette with an "I Love NY" lighter. "He is a strong hand on the tiller and his responses are not wrong. The Republicans pick people for character traditionally and set up a really intelligent strong team behind them. I don't think we have to worry with Colin Powell and Rumsfeld." This inspired a boy who had been quiet the whole evening - "I am the most British person you'll ever meet," he confided, "and I am completely behind Bush and America. So I guess that I don't have anything to say here."
Probably this, not the paranoid anti-Americanism, was the most shocking comment. But it was a lovely evening, and no one got into an argument, except for two Brits about the NHS. The Telegraph poll said that 63 per cent of young Britons think America is a good friend to Britain, and that is what I most noticed at my party. For all their criticism of America and its supposed militant posturing, here were my friends, bearing wine, celebrating the Fourth of July and staying late, long after we wanted to clear up and go to bed.
After all, these were the same people who had called me and my parents on September 11 and sent flowers to lay at the site.
Well, you're about 50 hypotheticals ahead of the game in all this. Like I said, it's far from clear the Nazis would have attacked US mainland. You really disagree? (Meaning, you think it's clear they would have?)
Maybe the USA could have just sat by and let the most blatantly genocidal regime in history take over the whole of Europe.
In fact, the USA did. Well, maybe not the whole of Europe, but half of it. Remember Uncle Joe? But the USA fought against the other blatantly genocidal regime to save people who were almost exclusively foreigners. Instead of adopting the attitude of "too late", "about time", "the USA should have done it anyway", perhaps you ought to do some thinking until you realize that this is actually pretty remarkable.
Also why should Britain have helped America fight the Japanese, after all, we could have just scampered off back to Europe, our home country is in Europe you know.
Good point. Britain deserves credit.
You were good allies [although] you stayed out of the war until the NAZI allied Japanese attacked you.
As is to be expected. (Why should a country join a war in which they're not involved?)
Then I won't stop saying that without Britain, Americans would be speaking German, or perhaps Japanese.
You are free to say all the untrue things you wish. It's a free country, after all. Best,
I think that together with the Japanese, and with Britain and the USSR out of the war, there would have been a good chance that the mainland USA would have been a target. After all, this is Adolf Hitler we are talking about. He actually wrote down the dates by which he intended to conquer the European countries. The man had a similar attitude to Alexander the Great when it came to conquering other countries.
As is to be expected. (Why should a country join a war in which they're not involved?)
Good point. Britain only declared war on Germany because they invaded Poland. Britain could have signed a pact with Hitler, which he would probably have honoured since he respected the British people and the British Empire. But Britain had some moral fibre.
Exactly my take, What in the world is wrong with this writer that she simply accepts this crap without counter attacking. Oh yeah, she went to college in America recently.
Surprise, surprise.
All you have done is sit at your computer and denigrate another country's war effort from behind a phony-macho screen name. You don't even know enough about the American Revolution to realise how important opposition in the British parliament was to its success.
And what about the old Americans of the WW2 days, Inkie? Do you think they would have rushed in for a free kick at Britain, on the word of some tabloid journalist? Or do you think they might have said, 'let's focus on our common enemy- socialism'?
Well, my understanding is George the Third never did get over the loss of the American colonies, and even bitterly complained about it on his deathbed.
But nevertheless, I am an Anglophile; having spent many a day at RAF Chicksands, Upper Heyford, Lakenheath, and Mildenhall, and surrounding environs, always enjoying British company as IF I WAS AT HOME HERE IN THE USA. We really are related, not just in the genes, but in the culture as well.
To Byron the Aussie--I spent two years at Woomera and absolutely loved it--well not out in the bush but Adelaide especially. Same as being in America. I never met more friendly people.
Just two more points. This one celebration didn’t go well, but for this one maybe 10, 20 or 50 others did. We will never hear about these of course because 'good will' isn’t newsworthy. Lastly, I can’t think of any other country where former adversaries can celebrate ones victory over the other. But I would be interested if you know any.
It occurs to me that in this hypothetical, you are conceding that Nazi Germany has overrun Europe and is now looking to expand across the Atlantic. Of course, it remains true in this situation that "you'd be speakin' German". Now all you're saying is that, afterwards in this hypothetical, Nazi-run Europe would have attacked the US next. The winner of this hypothetical war is (of course) open to speculation.
In any event, "you'd be speakin' German" regardless. Right?
Good point. Britain only declared war on Germany because they invaded Poland. Britain could have signed a pact with Hitler, which he would probably have honoured since he respected the British people and the British Empire. But Britain had some moral fibre.
I won't dispute that. Best,
Next!
I'm really wondering why we should help these socialist retards at all. Hell, the "empire" barely won against the military might of third world argentina.
This is a predominantly American web forum. Look at how many times you've been flamed on this thread.
Your dilapidated "empire" is strongly in need of fixing. You need us far more then we need you.
It's not the 'best I can muster', bozo.
It's all you deserve.
Thank you for such a warm and hopeful blessing. I and many foreign conservatives hold the same wish, for your wonderful country.
OF COURSE WE ARE. Thank you, for acknowledging that. It's a breath of commonsense in amongst this fog of moronic xenophobia.
Wouldn't you and I have more in common with a British or Australian or Upper Slobbovian conservative who, 1. loves God, 2. believes in the rights embodied in the Constitution, and 3. is alarmed at the growth of the State, than we would have with some pro-abort Million Marcher who just happens to be American?
Forgot to mention how delighted I was to read that. I have had exactly the same warm reception in the US and am really looking forward to another visit. Ashamed to confess my aunt in Redondo Beach is a Dem, but I will keep working on her. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.