What is the most descriptive word for a person from the United States? ‘American’, although widely used and accepted, is not really descriptive enough. Consider that anyone native or naturalized to the American continent – north, central, south – is an American. A Canadian is just as American as a Chilean, a Brazilian just as American as a Panamanian, and a Paraguayan just as American as a United States-?.
And while I’m on the subject, what is the correct word for being overly-centered on one’s own country? The word’s definition, if there is such a word, would be along the lines of jingoism, sans chauvinism and the proclivity toward the bellicose; or egotism, replacing the concept of ego with one’s country. I thought ‘patriocentric’ might be the right word, but no dice: I just made it up. (Yes, I really should have known better than to take the ‘o’ from ‘otic’ and move it to the end of ‘patri’, but I did it anyway, and I’m really not very proud of it.) I found ‘patricentric’, but it doesn’t have the definition for which I am looking. ‘Nationalistic’ – nope; ‘superpatriotic’ – uh-uh; ‘ultranationalistic’ – guess again: none of the words I looked up were quite right.
Any thoughts?
Any thoughts?
Well yes, Dgeigh, but first let's seperate your question in the first paragraph from your question in the second paragraph because they do not commingle.
(1) Yes, of course everyone who is a citizen of the New World can be called an American. However, most people in countries overseas reserve the term for the good people of the United States because we are the flag ship of Western Culture in this World and calling us "Americans" saves them time.
(2) Pride.
we are the flag ship of Western Culture in this WorldThat is a very U.S.-centric point of view, themilum.
Web not so U.S-centric anymoreIndustry Standard magazine, March 15, 1999
Throughout the 1990s, the bulk of the Net's growth has taken place in the U.S. The unabashedly American character of Web content is impossible to overlook.
However, the Internet's demographics are slowly shifting away from U.S.-centrism.
Some of the first signs of a more cosmopolitan Net population are visible on the major U.S.-based community sites. http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9903/15/webworld.idg/Who are the "Americans" in "America" anyway?
The Province of Ontario across from Michigan has more in common with Michigan than Michigan has in common with Alabama, for instance. Likewise, Washington State has more in common with British Columbia than with Alabama.
And much has been made of the "red state/blue state" divide
*.
So it might be fair to ask, themilum, which America "is the flag ship of Western Culture"?
Dgeigh came very close with "patri-centric". How about nation-centric?
* Blue states buzz over secessionTHE WASHINGTON TIMES, November 2004
Secession, which didn't work very well when it was tried once before, is suddenly red hot in the blue states. In certain precincts, anyway.
One popular map circulating on the Internet shows the 19 blue states won by Sen. John Kerry — Washington, Oregon, California, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Maryland and the Northeastern states — conjoined with Canada to form the "United States of Canada."http://snipurl.com/cubw
I don’t understand your explanation Milum. Even if we do not dispute the U.S. “being the flagship of Western Culture”, how would that have translated into USians being called “Americans” by Europeans. How is this a time-saver? There is no link between the two terms.
I’m thinking US folks started calling themselves Americans because it is easier to say than United Statesians, or USians. Humans tend to take the easy route if possible, even in language. Also, since “America” is an integral part of the country’s name, I think USians appropriated the name of the continent to describe themselves.
[through gritted teeth] Here you go, Dgeigh:
patriolatry. See:
http://www.onelook.com/?loc=rescb&w=patriolatryEdit: gritted teeth not due to you, bel.
Oh, is that what OneLook is, a dictionary. I'll have to find the thread where I asked what it was and edit.
Patriolatry is the right word, Jackie, if the word Dgeigh is looking for is equivalent to "jingoism', but he excluded "chauvinism" and "bellicosity" - sans chauvinism and the proclivity toward the bellicose, he said - which is associated with "jingoism", at least in this definition:
Dictionary.com jin·go·ism n.
Extreme nationalism characterized especially by a belligerent foreign policy; chauvinistic patriotism
An American citizen can be U.S.-centric without having "excessive devotion" to their country, as per this definition:
patriolatry n.
excessive devotion to native country
Being U.S.-centric means that you look at the rest of the world through the eyes of someone whose life is centred in the United States. This is a matter of perspective, not patriotism.
So I guess we need Dgeigh to tell us what he means.
Are we talking about perspective here, or patriotism?
re "Edit: gritted teeth not due to you, bel"
Hey, I didn't write the Washington Times story, Jackie. In fact, the so-called 'blue state secession' thing was started in the U.S. not in Canada. Canadians had nothing to do with it. We weren't even consulted.
I was simply making the point, Jackie, that "American culture" is as varied as "Western culture". I'm not knocking American culture. I love American culture in all of its different expressions in all the different regions of the U.S. I have visited. But, in each of those different regions, American culture is different. [Which makes traveling in the U.S. all the more interesting.]
Well yes, Dgeigh, but first let's separate your question in the first paragraph from your question in the second paragraph because they do not commingle.
As you have made plain, themilum, they don’t commingle in your mind, but they do, nevertheless (based on conversations I’ve had with other people – both citizens of the United States and citizens of other American countries), commingle in the minds of others.
However, most people in countries overseas reserve the term for the good people of the United States because we are the flag ship of Western Culture in this World and calling us "Americans" saves them time.
I seriously doubt that the apparent lack of a widely-used word, exclusively describing citizens of the United States, can be traced to people in overseas countries trying to save a millisecond or two out of their busy day. Such an argument suggests that the citizens of the United States are so easily influenced by the time-needy citizens of overseas countries that we’ve allow them to lull us into not coining a word to exclusively describe ourselves, just because they may use the word ‘American’. It also suggests that overseas citizens, of their own invention, decided to coin the word ‘American’ for their own time-saving convenience. I suggest that an English-speaking American coined the word, and that the word became popular and widely-used by the citizens of the United States for the reasons belMarduk mentioned above. [Well stated, bel] Perhaps the world’s overseas citizenry do use ‘American’ to exclusively describe us, but I do not think it was their invention.
Pride.
Fervor for the United States aside, ‘pride’ is entirely too broad a word to describe the concept.
[through gritted teeth] Here you go, Dgeigh: patriolatry.
Thank you for the link, Jackie. I hope the gritted teeth are not due to me.
The definition of ‘patriolatry’ certainly describes the “jingoism, sans chauvinism and the proclivity toward the bellicose”, I suggested, but it leans too much toward the patriotic for what I had in mind. Seeing patriolatry’s definition makes me realize that the concepts of ‘devotion’ and ‘patriotism’ aren’t quite what I had in mind either. Plutarch’s citation of ‘U.S.-centric’, with accompanying definition, is closer to the mark than anything else. But it too is not quite right, either – very close, but slightly off, particularly: looking “at the rest of the world through the eyes of someone whose life is centered in the United States”. The concept of which I am thinking is more along the lines of being blind to anything outside of one’s own country – rather than nation-colored glasses, so to speak, nation-absorbed blinders.
My thanks to everyone for their input on this subject.
Plutarch said:
"The Province of Ontario across from Michigan has more in common with Michigan than Michigan has in common with Alabama, for instance. Likewise, Washington State has more in common with British Columbia than with Alabama."
________________________________________________________
Bullmoose!
Commonality is determined by shared beliefs and mutual history and customs not proximity.
As well, your blue state exodus is frivolous. 70% of the counties in your blue states voted for Bush, only the over-crowded dysfunctional cites voted for Kerry. This is a Republic, don't you know.
And BelMarduk, the Gross National Product of the US is bigger than the combined total of all other countries in North and South America. Wow!
A few years back over 90% of the visitors to oversea lands were Americans of US descent.
And when the foreign people wrote signs that said [YANKEE GO HOME] they were not talking about Canadians or Cubans, they were talking about Americans...USuns, whom they loved to hate.
Yet the dream of half a world in the last Century was to come to America. And that dream was to them, to come to the United States.
And they came and they are still coming.
70% of the counties in your blue states voted for BushHey, they weren't
my blue states, themilum. I didn't get a vote.
Does "parochial" work for you, Dgeigh?
BTW themilum, the Ambassador Bridge connecting Michigan and Ontario is the busiest truck border crossing in the world.
Many of my Michigan friends prefer the CBC evening news to their own evening news.
They party and dine and hunt and fish and own cottages all over Ontario.
They share the Great Lakes with Ontario and many of them supply goods or services to the same automakers and their suppliers on both sides of the border.
About the only thing we don't have in common with our Michigan friends is the same passport, themilum. But we don't need a passport to cross the border. Heck, many of my Michigan friends get across even when they forget to bring their Birth Certificate.
Can't resist appending this, themilum: In Ontario, anyone from the U.S. is just one of "us". 
USns are the onliest ones use the word America in the name of our country.
> Yet the dream of half a world in the last Century was to come to America. And that dream was to them, to come to the United States.
I have a dream, that one day we will live in a country that has a name for its inhabitants that we can all agree on and that isn't derived from some questionable eponym.
http://www.ensignmessage.com/archives/viking.html
Yep. As belM and Faldage point out, the full name of the country is the United States
of America, hence the short-form "Americans" to refer to the citizenry. Perhaps, to avoid confusion (not that I think there really is any), it should be "U.S. Americans."
Listen up Frozen Ones, if you Canadians want so badly to become Americans, do as did this chick...
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=529&u=/ap/20050217/ap_en_mu/people
_alanis_morissette&printer=1Edit: Or, as Annasrophic suggested, you old folks
with short minds might prefer to use
this shorter url ...
http://tinyurl.com/4gjvn 
There is no confusion on this side of the ocean, Nancy. Nobody calls themselves American but you guys. When we say where we're from, we're very specific about making sure to name our country.
I'm wondering if there is confusion on the other side of the ocean, though.
For example, we'll use European or Asian to describe people from a slew of countries on those respective continents. Do they use American for the continental dwellers of any country, or just for the people in the U.S.
the full name of the country is the United States of America, hence the short-form "Americans" to refer to the citizenry.
Yes, that certainly seems a logical enough explanation as to how the word ‘American’ came to be accepted as meaning ‘a citizen, or the citizens, of the United States’, but, having recognized that possibility, doesn’t remedy the problem of the word lacking exclusivity for the citizenry of the U.S. As I mentioned above, citizens of the U.S. are Americans, but so are all other citizens of the American continent, just as the citizens of Morocco, South Africa, Somalia, Senegal, Chad, Egypt, Angola, Gabon, and Tanzania are all Africans.
You’re right; there is no confusion, only the absence of a word that exclusively describes the citizenry of the United States.
Your suggestion of ‘U.S. Americans’ seems less unwieldy than ‘United Statesians,’ or using, as you wrote, the full name of the country, ‘United Statesians of America’. It is the best suggestion so far.
When I was on a bike trip in Ireland many years ago, it was pretty obvious that I was from the US, primarily because, unlike about 99 percent of the cyclists in Ireland at the time, I wore a helmet.
I was cycling through a remote area and came to a crossroads with signs pointing in about 7 different directions and there were two helmeted cyclists squabbling over a map. I said, I assume you're Americans, judging from your helmets, and was told in no uncertain terms that even though they were Americans they considered themselves Canadians first.
Thereafter, I was very careful to say I was from the US. It was only later that I learned the ambiguity of making even that statement. Not many people realize that our neighbor to the south is in actuality the United States of Mexico.
TEd
>>Listen up Frozen Ones, if you Canadians want so badly to become Americans, do as did this chick...
Good god, no. I don't know any Canadian that wants to be an American, or any that would want to be mistaken for one.
I don't mean to hurt your feelings, and I hope you will forgive me if I do, but Milum, I'm sure I'm not teaching you anything when I say that Americans are not very appreciated in many places. It is even common knowledge that many Americans traveling overseas will pretend to be Canadian by sticking our flag on their luggage and backpacks.
EDIT: ADDING a bit of info.
I'm a bit slow in posting so TEd got in a post before I sent mine in responding to Milum...but TEd lived that reaction I am talking about. People don't want to be mistaken for Americans. I think it is because they are treated badly if they are - that's what I've read anyway, and what several friends have told me. When they specified they were from Canada, the reception they got changed completely from one of animosity to one of friendliness.
...many Americans traveling overseas will pretend to be Canadian by sticking our flag on their luggage and backpacks.
As a college student I for one sure did, and that was 30 years before the current regime [/sticking toes into political water and finding it too cold]
Meanwhile, it's interesting to note that Brazilians call Americans "norte-americanos" while they call Canadians "canadenses."
Dgeigh, I'm curious about something. When you identify yourself, do you say I'm an American from Texas.
I'll usually say, "I'm French Canadian" which pinpoints me to living in Québec. (Yes, there are other French people in Canada, but only the people from Québec identify themselves as such immediately. It's a whole long civil strife thing that would take a while to explain.)
I've not noticed what other Canadians say. I think they just say Canadian. It's hard to know since, when speaking amongst ourselves, we'll identify ourselves by our province.
I am disappointed. You Canucks have become brainwashed by your socialistic government. You should be sending me Hallmark Cards daily with a five dollar bill enclosed and with a thank you note attached that reads...
Because of you we are not the Canadian Republic of Germany.
Because of you we are not the Canadian Republic of Russia.
And we hope
Because of you we won't become the Canadian Republic of Communist China.
Or any other gun toting despotic country that wants our trees.Yes you people must be real cheapos,
because I've yet to receive a card.
Dgeigh, I'm curious about something. When you identify yourself, do you say I'm an American from Texas.
I rarely have a need to identify my national citizenship, bel. Usually, I’m asked to identify the state in which I live. Therefore, I usually say, “I’m a Texan.” For non-Texans, that’s usually enough. Among native Texans, however, I must further specify whether or not I am a native Texan. For the record, I am not. When the need does arise, on occasion, for me to identify my national citizenship, I say, “I’m from the United States”, or “I’m from the U.S.”. After researching TEd’s post, however, (Interesting fact there, TEd – I did not know that.), saying, “I’m from the U.S.A.” would be more exact.
Yes, the point above about the name of our nation being the United States of America is the best explanation for why Americans came to be known as Americans. People are named according to the name of their nations when referring to those nations and the unwieldiness of "U.S. Americans" seems unnecessary.
And how very, very sad it is to read from Bel' that Americans travel with the flag of another nation on their luggage. I will struggle with this knowlege all the night long...
In reply to:
how very, very sad it is to read from Bel' that Americans travel with the flag of another nation on their luggage.
A related sentiment is part of the motivation behind moves here in NZ to change our flag, making it less easily confused with our neighbours'.
They are a lot alike: I'm put to it to tell the difference; from a distance, anyway. I saw that program on the Travel Channel again the other night: where Helen Clark takes the guy on a tour of NZ. Pretty cool.
And how very, very sad it is to read from Bel' that Americans travel with the flag of another nation on their luggage. I will struggle with this knowlege all the night long...
I know!! It is sad. I'm sure that if the people I know would have told whomever asked that they were American, that would have help your national image out a lot. It is by knowing more and more individuals that opinions get changed.
Milum, perhaps you are not taught the same history that we are...
I was not aware that we had been under attack by Germany or Russia, nor that Communist China was trying to take us over.
I did learn that the only gun toting despotic country that tried to take us over a few times was the U.S., and well, it got a solid thrashing - and we're still Canadian, and we've kept our trees.
But again, that's just what we've learned in history class. Now, if your history books differ from the history books of the rest of the world, let me know, and I'll spend that five-dollar bill on the stamp to mail you a new one.
"I was not aware that we had been under attack by Germany or Russia, nor that Communist China was trying to take us over.
I did learn that the only gun toting despotic country that tried to take us over a few times was the U.S., and well, it got a solid thrashing - and we're still Canadian, and we've kept our trees."
___________________________________________________________
All right boys, look up,
^ See...Patriolatry!
Notice the blind disregard for reality. The Nazis weren't bad, Uncle Joe Stalin was our pal,
and its them damn rich USens what want our trees!
A pig or cow can bark me-ow but a goldfish likes to sing,
I saw a frog swim up a log but he fell and broke his wing...
Milum, are you joking? I can't tell.
Gin.
I was if you was, Gin.
Well, ya. I thought we were doing the blustery thing, you know, like the stooges..."oh ya!", "ya!!"
But I really didn't get your last post, so it's always better to ask. You know how it is with the written word in this type of forum, you can't see the expression of the person on the other end.
Friends.
Way to go, belMarduk.
As you can see, themilum, we are not as defenceless as you thought we were. :)
BelM:
I believe that what themilum was saying was that it was the US which pulled Canada's chestnuts out of the fires of WW II and prevented those chestnuts from being consumed by a totalitarian regime (either Cummunist USSR or National Socialist Germany.) No mention was made of Japan or Italy, I noticed.
What themilum may not realize is that Canada's military losses during WW II were approximately 50 percent higher on a per capita basis than the losses by the United States.
To wit:
Canada in 1941 had a population of 11.5 million, and lost either 39,000 or 40,000 warriors during WW II, depending upon which internet source you use. The US's 1940 population was 132 million, and the dead warriors totaled 295,000. Simple division shows us a death rate of 3.4 per thousand for Canada (using the 39,000 figure for deaths) and 2.2 per thousand for the USA. 3.4 is pretty close to 50 percent higher than 2.2. Actually 54.5 percent, but I think you get the picture.
It is commonplace for USA citizens to believe that the USA won WW II, and to be completely convinced that the world would be either fascist or communist had it not been for our involvement.
With all due respect to veterans of every stripe who fought to contain and defeat the Axis powers, the 295,000 deaths incurred by US citizens are truly dwarfed by the 21.3 million people who died in the USSR and the 11.3 million who died in China.
And while it's probable (though I am too lazy to get the figures) that the US's dollar expenditures exceeded those of most other countries on a per capita basis, it's my belief that the true measure of devotion to the cause is by the number of battle deaths. And the US was far richer than most other countries to start with. In comparison to Canada, I think it's safe to say that we bought our way to victory while Canadians bled their way to victory. This is not meant to disparage all those who gave their lives, but simply to point out that themilum's post may have been out of line.
TEd
While I'm busy kissing a duck, Milo, I'm pointing out that you widened the screen again with your link to Alanis Morisette. As has been pointed out before and elsewhere, you can use this:
http://tinyurl.comor this:
http://snipurl.com/to shorten your link.
Having to scroll back and forth on wide screens tires old eyes. As a young'un, you wouldn't know about that but please respect your elders. Thank you.
Real funny, Milo.... and we should be sending France greetings cards thanking them for not being called "The Colonies" anymore...
Bullmoose! Commonality is determined by shared beliefs and mutual history and customs not proximity.Don't forget... "pride" is one of the seven deadly sins.
In reply to:
Canada in 1941 had a population of 11.5 million, and lost either 39,000 or 40,000 warriors during WW II, depending upon which internet source you use. The US's 1940 population was 132 million, and the dead warriors totaled 295,000. Simple division shows us a death rate of 3.4 per thousand for Canada (using the 39,000 figure for deaths) and 2.2 per thousand for the USA. 3.4 is pretty close to 50 percent higher than 2.2. Actually 54.5 percent, but I think you get the picture.
Ted, in our schools in the deep south we learned of the bravery of the Canadian soldiers and of their high ratio of representation to the mutual cause of freedom in WWII, both in the number of casualties suffered, and in the per capita percentage of soldiers sent to fight the Huns.
Let no one call the Canadian people cowards unless they like me to spit on their shoes.
Now here's a little known fact: "More brave Canadians boys crossed the border into the states and joined the US Army to fight in Viet Nam than the number of pot-smoking US hippie kids who fled to Canada and hid out for the duration to avoid the draft."
And as for me, I wouldn't bother insulting our friends the Canadians if I did not admire them greatly and think them worth saving, would I?
Of course I wouldn't.
TEd, did you see the movie "PATTON"? Good movie.
Here is a long URL that I have made short...
http://tinyurl.com/2f3ed
Orginally...
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/MovieSpeeches/moviespeech
patton3rdarmyaddress.html
As for the strong reaction to not wanting to be American, I don't want to be Polish, Argentinian, or Australian either. This does not imply a judgement about any other country just pointing out that Canadians too are patriotic.
(Would it be rude to mention 1812? Nothing a Canadian hates more than being rude.
)
Well, that is true Zed. It doesn't matter what nation might beckon, I wouldn't want to be any nationality but Canadian. I love it here. I love the mix of people, I love the different characters from one shore to the other and to the other northern one too. Just as no-one is perfect, I realize that no country is perfect but I believe I live in a country that actually values my opinion, one in which I can, if I really wish, help change the things that need to be.
oh Zed were you here for the long discussion of the war of 1812--my it was fun..
everyone had a slightly different perspective, (each was mostly true)...
i remember, having 'D'oh' revelation.. i knew the american history of the war of 1812, and i knew the peice of music, the 1812 overture(with the cannons) and i had never --well --put it together! i 'saw' the war of 1812 as new US against England.. (and yeah, there was this, mumble, mumble, attempted invation of Canada, mumble mumble.. (glossing over the details!) but i never considered (not at all!) the action in europe..
the thread was great fun.. and included lyrics from the pop song about the andrew jackson, and the battle for New Orleans.
i KNOW my knowledge of history is incomplete.. (and i have been to canada--and Know its not all 'frozen north' and mounties in red jackets riding in the forest, (and singing duets!) but...
It is the nature of people (and goverments run by people) to paint history with a rosy glow.
I can love my country, and still reel in shame at facts about how we treated the japanese during WWII, and how we are treating all to many foriegn born(or just foriegn looking) citizens now.
>>>and yeah, there was this, mumble, mumble, attempted invation of Canada, mumble mumble..
HA!!! Thanks of troy, that made me laugh.
I agree with you that you can disagree with what was done in the past but the important part is making sure that they don't repeat themselves, eh!
What a lovely thread, guys - I just read it all with a gentle grin on my face (having been shut out of it for a couple of days due to one of those strange gremlins I still get on this site) Celebrating difference without animosity does work. :)
>in our schools in the deep south we learned of the bravery of the Canadian soldiers and of their high ratio of representation to the mutual cause of freedom in WWII
them:
I will take that cum grano salis, having been educated in the south, though not THAT deep. US-Virginia history, which was required where I went to HS, did not mention Canada much at all, and certainly didn't laud the Canadians for their contributions to our freedom. Of course it didn't dis them, either.
>I wouldn't bother insulting our friends the Canadians if I did not admire them greatly and think them worth saving, would I?
I admire them and think they are worth saving, ergo I will insult them. Themilum, that's arrant bullcrap. What do you do to people you don't admire or don't think are worth saving? And what the heck makes you think that the Canadians NEED saving, anyway?
I'll tell you what I think, themilum. I think you just like the anonymity of the internet so you can get your jollies by going around insulting people without getting your head pounded in, not that such would be your fate in your town there in Mississippi or Alabama or hwerehever it is you hail from. Nope, you go and insult some of those good ol' boys down there to theirs face and they're pretty likely gonna kick your ass until your nose bleeds!
PLEASE! Think about the effects of what you say. Putting a smily face after an insult or coming back later when you've been confronted to say you were only kidding does not detract from the hurt you inflict on others, particularly when, as in this case, your criticism is groundless. [/rant]
TEd
What a lovely thread, guys - I just read it all with a gentle grin on my face (having been shut out of it for a couple of days due to one of those strange gremlins I still get on this site) Celebrating difference without animosity does work. :)
___________________________________________________________
Look TEd, Mister Maverick got back from this thread the light-hearted spirit that he brought to this thread.
I, for one, wish I had included in my posts some nice, clever, corny, puns.
________________________
Have a nice day
_______________________
Ted, i don't always get themilum humor.. (and he has had several PM's from me) since some of his comments seemed so harsh
(yeah, i know, kettle calling the pot black--i know i have sufferered from bad cases of viperous tongue)
but i have also figured out, most often, milo is being sly, and witty, (and sometimes we miss that, because his tongue is stuck so firmly in his cheek as to make his words hard to understand!
and sometimes, too, TEd, i hate it when an interesting thread goes off topic, and turns into yet another Pun fest.
i don't always get milo's humor, but i enjoy it (when i do get it) better than puns.
Chalk and Cheese-- or what ever pair of opposites you'd like..
i like gritty chalk (crossing thread), i have never had the urge to eat dirt, but i like the old tums. i really like the dry hard grittiness of them. and occational eat one or two as snack.. (and a good sourse of calcium!) --
interesting isn't? dairy food and cheese is another good source of calcium.. they have something in common..but they are different as can be.
>, most often, milo is being sly, and witty, (and sometimes we miss that, because his tongue is stuck so firmly in his cheek as to make his words hard to understand!
Most often he's being the sort of spoiled brat who thinks causing pain is fun, and grows up to be a serial killer, wondering why nobody else gets his "jokes". That is, of course, assuming that such a person grows up. No sign of that here.
And a good morning to you too Vernon Compton. We didn't rest very well last night now did we, Vernon? Well, treat yourself to a doughnut and a glass of warm milk, and take take a Happy Slumber Pill and go take a little nap.
Then, when you wake up, go over to your computer and erase all those nasty personal things you said about the Milum.
You'll feel oh-so-much better, because at heart, I'm sure, you are not a bitter man.
aaaw, come on, Vern, don't tell you also believe the Swift was advocating cannabalizism when he wrote his suggestion for the 'solution' of the irish "problem"?
(i am brain dead at the moment, and can't remember the name of the essay--but someone here will supply it, if needed)
i think Milo plays the devils advocate (with relish!)because he's afraid of being caught out as the liberal he is, --what with him living right in the buckle of the (US) bible belt!
Bible belt. And then a good bit northward, there's the snow belt. The farm belt must be in the midwest.
A very overweight nation we are with so many bellies held in place by so many belts. Being double- or triple-chinned is one thing, but being triple-bellied? Gulp.
Too, too funny, tsuwm.
In the spirit of having your most complete record, here are the bellies in order:
Belly #1: rumen
Belly #2: reticulem
Belly #3: omasum
Belly #4: abomasum
*All of the above belly terms from tsuwm's site where he sends you from one to the other backwards.
...and you thought taphonomy was too technical?
Getting back to the original question, there are a number of words which might cover an over-eager love of one's country, but the most dangerous one is "Fascist". Fascism is characterised by an almost mystical (and generally unhealthy) view of one's country as "the best". And it's coming back after a half-century of slumber. If Themilum was joking about Canada and its relationship to the US, I can only say it was in bad taste given what's going down these days. Words just like his are being bandied about quite seriously by a lot of people, mostly from the US, of real ill-will.
Love of country is an interesting emotion (when it's not being used to justify some war). I "love" New Zealand, but in a rather abstract way. New Zealanders are typically laconic about patriotism, preferring not to wave banners or sing anthems or salute the flag - except at sporting events involving Australia. I have a T-shirt which has "I support two teams - New Zealand and anyone playing Australia" on the back.
But I think that New Zealanders do not really feel the need to display patriotism in the same way that the US (and, increasingly, Australia) does. It's just a given. Having said that, I was at Gallipoli in Turkey last year for the Anzac Day celebrations, and I have to say that I felt quite patriotic that day. Not against anyone else, just proud to be a New Zealander.
Up to 15% of New Zealanders are out of the country at any given time and many of us either have dual nationality or are long-term residents in other countries. I'll be taking up British citizenship (while retaining my New Zealand citizenship) later this year, and I don't feel any real sense of conflict (except when the French give the English their annual hiding at rugby).
As for the etymology of the use of "American" to describe citizens of the US, WW and the others who agreed with her are exactly right. It's a contraction which came into use simply because the US doesn't have a simple "name" in the same way that Canada, Australia or Great Britain do. I don't think it generally causes any confusion on the other sides of either pond. If people say they are American, most people assume that they are from the US. I usually say "I'm a Kiwi". I don't remember the last time I had to clarify that. I suppose it's down to my long beak and big feet ...
But recently I have noticed an increasing prevalence of people not bothering to say that they from the US at all. They say "I'm from Indiana" or "I'm from South Carolina". While it might bespeak a certain arrogance - an assumption that people know that these states are part of the US - I find it saves the two-question hit: "Where are you from?" closely followed by "Which state?"
And I have noticed a lot of maple leaves around USns lately, too.
> big feet ...
... placed so artfully, Pfranz!
"Getting back to the original question, there are a number of words which might cover an over-eager love of one's country, but the most dangerous one is "Fascist". Fascism is characterised by an almost mystical (and generally unhealthy) view of one's country as "the best". And it's coming back after a half-century of slumber. If Themilum was joking about Canada and its relationship to the US, I can only say it was in bad taste given what's going down these days. Words just like his are being bandied about quite seriously by a lot of people, mostly from the US, of real ill-will." - Capfka,
_________________________________________________________
Perhaps Capfka, you will share the words of bad taste that you hear bandied about by me and the people of the United States these days.
Perhaps it is poor taste for you to drop such open-ended comments in a paragraph of which the subject is "Fascists and Fascism".
Make your point.
Do you know, Milo, I believe I already have?
Yes, Capfka, I guess you have.
can't remember the name of the essay
A Modest Proposal
Thanks to everyone for their input on my first question. It seems there really is not a single word to exclusively describe the citizenry of the U.S.A. ‘Citizen of the U.S.A.’ is about as wieldy a term as we can get.
Regarding my second question: unfortunately, I still do not think we have found the right word for what I had in mind. Perhaps such a word does not exist. Nevertheless, thanks for your input on that question too.