If you don't like it then you can get out.

Oooh, nice question. My wife and I traveled abroad (England and Scotland) during our honeymoon which was in the second GW Bush term--'07 to be exact, and we pretended to be Canadian during that trip. That was when Tony Blair was PM, and I think that the British opinion of Americans was pretty low at that point. Recently we traveled to Peru, and everyone assumed that we were extraordinarily wealthy because of our nationality. To be fair, in comparison to many of the residents of towns like Puno and Cuzco, we were. Those are my only two experiences abroad. If I were to guess at much of the rest of the world's opinion it might be much like a harsher version of my own--the majority of Americans are slovenly semi-ignorant war-mongerers. Perhaps mix that in with a little bit of disbelief that such a wealthy nation comes in so low on the global scale in areas like education and healthcare. That opinion may be shaded by my living in the Midwest as well, though...

On that note, please berate me now.

Warning: exceptionalism follows this post.

If you have objections to "foreigners" in America then please, explain to me how we were a) started by radical foreigners, and b) we've had six Presidents that were first-generation (their parents immigrated here), and if you exclude Jefferson (parents were born when nation didn't exist), we still have five. President Obama is not included.

If you are xenophobic, you don't belong in America, and our history proves that.

I wasn't talking about "foreigners" as in colours, cultures or believes... Just people who are not Americans.

So people who don't live in America mostly, so Europeans, Mexicans, Australians, Asians (is that a word? I'm hesitating) South Americans (continent obviously), Canadians, Africans, did I forget anyone?

@Steephie, is you read the threads around here, it is very easy to get the opinion that non-American citizens blame America for all the world's problems. Hell, half the nutjob Americans around here do the same...so it is easy for Americans to have a jaded opinion of "foreigners".

Talk to a soldier returnging from overseas - say the Middle East - and you will find that they have had a very positive experience with citizens of the countries they are liberating from tyranny. Talk to business men that have traveled overseas, and you will, again, find favorable relations. I myself have traveled to Japan and Europe on business (albiet 10+ years ago) and had very positive experiences.

I suspect most non-Americans find the US a little absurd at times with our politics, but respect us in general.

Unfortunately, the media would never portray the truth of foreigner's opinions, so knowing the reality is a difficult thing at best.

murraysheroes is close enough as for my opinion I'd say. Basically, I think the majority of Americans are semi-ignorant warmongers. Don't know what slovenly means though, will see when done eating :P

Also, just out of curiosity, is there a difference between patriots and nationalists in America?

steephi...if you are asking what the difference between a "Patriot" and a "Nationalist" is...and yet you think all Americans are semi-ignorant warmongers....then you are just a typical opinionated ignorant...no, scratch that...stupid...fool.

Stupid because you know there might be a difference between the terms - which clearly you are attributing to Americans - and yet are too lazy to inform yourself *before* forming a harsh opinion on a entire people.

"disbelief that such a wealthy nation comes in so low on the global scale in areas like education and healthcare."


Laughable misinformation. funny...if Americans are so stupid and backwards in advancing the world, the why does so much innovations come from the US? why do the elite from the world over come to the US for medical procedures when death is on the line?

heh heh...keep fooling yourself...keep believing that UN propoganda...

To answer your question, krellin, it's because the world elite can afford a different class of healthcare than the average citizen, right? Do you think that the crowned prince or CEO of anywhere is coming to the U.S. to see my HMO doctor? I'm glad that you're a more reliable source of information than the U.N. I'll keep that in mind next time I look at any global statistics.

Steephie, what interests me about this question is what you assume the international median is, so to speak. I don't know that I'd characterize the majority of Americans as semi-ignorant warmongers, but it's close enough to be fine. What I don't see is how that's particularly unusual; if anything, I'd say America is better than most of the world along those lines. America does some generally terrible stuff and since the end of the Cold War or at least since the 9/11 attacks I'd say American foreign policy has been overall harmful or at least counter-productive (krellin's talk about American soldiers "liberating from tyranny" is generally inaccurate), but that's not because of anything about American morals or culture specifically. It's about American power. If the Russians or Chinese were as relatively powerful as the United States is today, things would be much worse; I can't imagine a state who would be doing things much better.

I have various problems with international standards of education and healthcare which purport to show the USA as being relatively low, which I could describe in more detail if you're interested. But my main point is that such criticisms usually come from hypocritical European countries who tut-tut American foreign adventurism while ignoring the fact that the USA continues to shoulder a disproportionate burden of their defense. Scandinavian countries would not have such generous social welfare programs if they'd spent the years WWII paying for their own defense against expansionist Soviet and Russian neighbors.

Doubtlessly many people around the world blame America for their problems. Some of it is probably true, but mostly it is because America currently is the hegemonic power. 100 years ago they would have been blaming England or Europe in general; 100 years from now they'll be blaming India or Brazil or whoever the new superpower will be.

krellin, the only reason I didn't inform myself before posting is because dinner was waiting and I forget things really fast, so I figured I could choose between posting it or forgetting it. I chose to post it. Also, I didn't form a harsh opinion based on whatever it means. Or a harsh opinion at all. I just think murraysheroes is the closest to what I think so far. I don't know well what to think about it. All I know is that a load of Americans seem to think they do know what I think about it. I'm trying to adress that first since it seems to turn up in every debate, and I have a hard time denying it since I don't know what I think about it. I don't want this to turn into a debate about what Americans are. Now if you'll excuse me I'll find out what a patriot is exactly. (Also note that I do disagree with some of the other things said here but like I said, not looking for a debate, so I will save that for another day.)

" it's because the world elite can afford a different class of healthcare than the average citizen,"

In other worlds, the World's elite come to the US because it is **the best**...

Thank you for making my point.

FACT: Nobody in the US is without health care...walk in to an emergency room, and you will be treated.

The so-called full coverage in wonderful places like Canada and Engalnd? Rationed health care, multi-month waits for simple procedures like a CAT scan, etc. No thank you...I'll keep my US health care. It's quite wonderful, in reality.

I don't personally know anyone that would give up their current health care for a government plan - even the ignorant fools that vote for Obama. They *vote* based upon hype...they live in reality.

You surveys that are *designed* and formulated to denigrate the US system simply deny the reality that we have the *best* health care system in the world. Period.

The UN is primarily an anti-US organization. They can lump all the hate on us they want...until they need funding, them they come pounding at our door. The UN is a joke.

You can tell me how great the UN is, how accurate their surveys are, etc...but the reality is, people from all over the globe are trying to come TO the US...because of our education system, because of our health care, because of our generosity as a people.

I can structure a survey to say pretty much anything I want...so yes, I think the UN's survey's are worth about as much as the paper they are published on.

But you keep your head firmly buried in the sand and keep telling yourself how horrible the US is, etc blah blah blah...Please don't ask for aide next time you have a natural disaster, though...

I think the interesting thing about Americans is that in many ways they're a lot like people. Some are greedy, but some would give you the shirt off their back. Some are xenophobic idiots, others - even Republicans! - take in homeless teenaged illegal aliens and treat them like family. Some view hegemony as a right to be exploited, others view it as a solemn responsibility, and still others feel it's a poison that lurks in the heart of the nation.

So, just as if you were forming an opinion of the Nepalize or the Congolese (who, despite popular stereoptypes, do *not* eat people), I would hope that foreigners would be cautious about making snap judgements and would look below the surface of what they see in the media.

Also, +1 to ckroberts.

@Steephi: "All I know is that a load of Americans seem to think they do know what I think about it. " Uh...do you see the fault in your own argument? What load of Americans do you know? And how do you fault them for supposing to know what you know when you do the same to them?

I will grant to you that far too many people think they know what everyone else thinks...based upon media input. Which is why I made my offering based upon talking with returning military personal and businessmen that have had exposure to foreign countries and found highly favorable opinions.

Honestly, most Americans are just living their lives, raising their kids, etc...and most Americans couldn't give two shits about what someone in Europe thinks about them....just as any average person in Europe could care less what Americans think of him. But when pressed for an answer, people turn to whatever media glop has been thrust in to their head and spit it back out without thought, and without realizing they have no *honest* experience upon which to form an opinion.

The real answer most people *should* give: I have no idea what foreigners think of Americans...and don't much care, because I'm just trying to get a job/pay my bills/finish my education/etc.

All that being said...I pity you for forming an opinion based upon little to no information that most Americans are warmongers, etc.

As for Ckroberts suggesting Americans are not freeing people from tyranny...I suggest you go ask any European who *lived* through WWII what they think....ask the Iraqi citizen that no longer fears his government (as much as he used to)...ask a girl in Afghanistan that is allowed to go to school, unlike her mother...You may denigrate the US military, but you do so out of ignorance and poorly informed opinion. I'm not saying every conflict we have ever been involved in was correct - but we spill more blood *on behalf of other's freedoms* than any other nation in the history of the world. That's not opinion...it's simply fact, whether you like it or not.

ckroberts: I see your point, but didn't a lot of non-Americans consider the majority of Americans semi-ignorant warmongers before they got that powerful? I mean, Americans started out as a country fighting Indians (feather, no dot), British and themselves, right? For the record, I think that, at that time, the same counts for a lot of countries, but today it kind of only counts for America, Israel and surroundings and North Korea. Oh, and possibly Iran. That's just how I think most people see it right now.

The only one seemingly thinking the whole world thinks they're warmongers and being opposed to it would be America. Again, that's just how I think most people see it right now.

I think that doesn't count for Russia and China, probably also because most people, myself included, know less about their wars than America, but they're not really justifying them either as far as I know. Americans seem to be much more proud about the wars they fought, the people they killed and such. They seem to claim they had the right to do so. Russia and China don't seem to act like that.

I'm not really including my own opinion in any of this I think, just saying. Now I should finally read about patriots :P

"but we spill more blood *on behalf of other's freedoms* than any other nation in the history of the world."

Actually, that is an opinion. Thinking people with a nuanced understanding of the world generally understand that most human activities have mixed motivations, so it is quite arguable that many American wars have been conducted primarily for self-defense and/or to extend American hegemony. Has human freedom been *part* of the motivation? Sure. The whole or primary motivation? Certainly not and perhaps not.

WWII for example, since it's the "perfect just war". Hitler very clearly outlined his agenda in Mein Kampf - but the US did not act when he came to power. Hitler, in league with Stalin, invaded Poland in '39 and France in '40, but the US did not act. Only when American security and hegemony were directly attacked by Japan did the US bestir itself to "rid the world of tyranny" - and it is interesting to note while congress declared war on Japan immediately, it was Hitler who declared war on the US first! An even more cynical view might be that the US didn't even invade Europe until the lion's share of the land war had been won by the Soviets. One might easily argue that the Russians bled an awful lot more to defeat Hitler than Americans did

And finally, an earnest thinking person might argue that shedding blood isn't the best way of securing human freedoms.

First of all: google seems to be pretty vague to me on this one, but patriots are the same as nationalists then? I asked in the first place because I remember someone on this forum said: "I'm not a nationalist, I'm a patriot."

Basically, if it's not the same someone will have to explain to me I fear, because that's what I understood from wikipedia, and I looked a bit further than that...

Then, krellin, as for what load of Americans I know, I was referring to the 10-25 or something I know from this site. And I know a few more personally.

And the difference between me and those people is that they tell me how ignorant we are blabla, and about how ignorant we think they are and so on... I didn't tell them the same. I'm only supposing to know what they TOLD ME they know. That's the difference.

As for the rest, not what I want to discuss right now so I'll ignore it. Sorry if you don't like that. You're welcome if you do like that.

Well, I said I didn't want to discuss it, but with what FlemGem said, it's really easy: what he said. All I have to add is that I'd argue that if I had to choose between America and Russia, I'd say Russia won WWII, for the same reasons FlemGem said, and also some even more plain facts, for example, Russia was in Berlin first. And that while if I remember correctly, the Germans preferred being occupied by America than by Russia for obvious reasons, and therefore maybe fought harder vs Russia.

But to be honest, this isn't where I planned to go, all I planned to say about it is that I think the description murrayheroes gave felt the most accurate. And I wanted to know if there's a difference between patriots and nationalists. I still want to know that btw.

The word "nationalist" is rarely used in American English except by those with enough historical education/background to understand the connotation of the word. It is rare for an average American to accuse another of being too "nationalist".

Strong American exceptionalist emotions still stubbornly hang on in much of the United States, and calling someone a patriot means that they love America, and it is considered a profound compliment.

I see. Thanks for the explanation. So nationalist is an accusation, patriot a compliment? So how do you call it in a neutral sense?

Steephie, America was born during a period of enormous colonial and imperial and eventually nationalist war in Europe. Britain and France slugged it out in a series of wars to see who would be the master of Europe and the biggest colonial power from 1689 all the way until 1815. And questions about what other countries thought about Americans historically is very messy (and vice versa!), tied up in notions of racial and what we would today call ethnic mixing, conquest of the wilderness, etc etc. But in general I would say that before WWII, most European powers were far more prone to war than America was. Of course, the Europeans didn't see it that way because for most of the post-Napoleonic 19th century it was brown people getting the short end of the stick, but that doesn't mean that European imperialism doesn't count.

Today, there is tons of war and fighting going on, not always involving the US. We just don't see most of it on TV. And there aren't many "big" wars because either America won't allow them or the involved parties possess nuclear weapons (or both).

"Americans seem to be much more proud about the wars they fought, the people they killed and such. They seem to claim they had the right to do so. Russia and China don't seem to act like that."

I think that's because generally speaking the biggest conflicts that the USA has been involved in since let's say 1945 have all been ostensibly either defensive or on behalf of someone else. Korea, Vietnam, and the Persian Gulf War were all in response to invasions by other countries of our allies/proxies. The Iraq War and Afghanistan are seen as strikes at international global terror (though how accurate or effective that is can be argued).

Or to put it another way: America's wars (and we should include allies involved in them, though they're easy to forget) are mostly at least arguably justified in terms of protection or aid for another; most other conflicts are pretty openly about maintaining or expanding power.

FlemGem, all that you're saying is correct and insightful, but I am sure you've seen this episode of the krellin show before. For example I am tempted to ask what about Poles and Ukrainians who lived through World War II, or Vietnamese who lived through Vietnam, but I won't. I won't!

ckroberts, I guess I have seen this episode before, but I live in a land of optimism where unicorns leap over piles of cotton candy, there's a pot of gold at the end of every rainbow, and sometimes - sometimes! - a hothead gets a fresh breeze of insight and gains a new and broader perspective on the world around him :-D

@ steephie22

I wasn't clear. "Nationalist" is rarely used because most Americans aren't aware of the word or its negative connotation. "Patriot" has a more positive connotation by those who are sufficiently educated to use the word, but it is also seldom used in everyday political speech.

There is no "neutral" word to describe someone because there is no such thing as "neutral" devotion to one's own country. You're either an ignorant, blind nationalist/exceptionalist or a patriot.

As an American, it is my opinion that your opinion is irrelevant, because you are not an American.

@GF:

"calling someone a patriot means that they love America..."

Only true among conservative circles. Most of us on the left basically equate what you call "patriotic" with nationalism. It's hard for us to tell the difference.