Wow, not at all racist there!
And yes, we're from all around the world

Well, I must appologize. Us Americans are, by and large, too busy getting drunk, arguing about how "Happy Holidays" is a war against Christmas, and consuming a disproportionate share of the world's resources to play a game that rewards discussion more intellectual than "zomg u lose lol".

'Racist'? As much as I think Diplomat is a intellectual twit, I can't see racism there.

As a Canadian I'm actually quite complimented by this post.

And dingle, just because its not traditional racism (like against a visible minority) doesn't mean its not racism. He termed the problem groups "nationalities" and then stated a prejudiced opinion against them. Textbook racism.

I still don't see it Centurian. Essentially he stated Canadians and Europeans are more liberal than Americans are. (and yes, he was saddened by that fact). How is that racist? I'm not disagreeing with you, I just don't understand.

I believe its a generally accepted fact that Americans tend to be more conservative than their Canadian and European counterparts?

I'm American, and I'd say it's fact, not racism (or nationalism, or whatever) to say that Canada and most European countries are significantly more liberal than the United States. I'd also like to apologize on behalf of my countrymen.

True, its not strong racism. Anyway, people got my point!
It would be interesting to see an IP map for this site...

It depends on how you present it. There are things that are statistically true and then there are things that are prejudice. I'm Canadian and I'm what an American would term Liberal (I'm what a Canadian would call a centrist or a moderate). I don't really care, even if it was offensive (and its not) its from diplomat so noone should take it seriously regardless.

What was your point figlesquidge? I didn't get it.

@ figle
no, i dont think people did get your point. Im with DJ on this one; i dont understand where the racism in his post was.

@fig: "True, its not strong racism. Anyway, people got my point!"

you're rught, it wasn't strong racism, or weak racism, for that mater - there was absolutely nothing that was even remotely racist about the assumption that 2/3 of the people on some website would be American ... nothing

@Cent: "He termed the problem groups "nationalities" and then stated a prejudiced opinion against them. Textbook racism"

to make a generalization based on some characteristic, could certainly be called prejudice. To discriminate based on some characteristic could be called discrimination. To make unfair judgements about a group of people based on some characteristic can be called biggoted. But unless that characteristic is race ... it's NOT racism, textbook or otherwise.

This is why the term has lost much of it's impact. It has been way overused and misapplied to situations to which it doesn't apply. Some one can be prejudiced and not racist. Someone can discriminate and not be racist, and someone can be racist and yet, not discriminate.

racism is:
1) thinking that a race is superior to others
2) thinking that a race is inferior to others

That's pretty much it.

I'm curious if it's just the Americans who are taking the side that there was nothing racist about that statement. Could it be that because of our past, we take the term more seriously? I saw this term inappropriately thrown out many times during the discussions of the US election in November, and was honestly surprised at the ease of which it was thrown about. As far as I could tell, it was always someone who I thought or knew to be American that would correct it. Maybe in Canada, Europe and Australia, "racist" has just come to mean "offensive"?

Racism is if you pre-judge an individual, based on the colour of his/her skin and/or other racial signs.
Thinking one race is superior or inferior to another is not racism but cultural anthropology.......

@pant:
I think you're making a joke there, but I don't know enough about cultural anthropology to find the humor (but I'm sure it's very funny, just the same)

While I would maintain that pre-judgement alone is biggotry, rather than racism, and I thinkt hat superiority / inferiority is a necessary component, I don't think we're too far off, because you at least you got the race component in there.

Its discrimination on the basis of nationality. Admittedly not race. I think those two things are atleast similar. Its like saying being Islamaphobic is racist. Technically its discrimination against a religion, but the connotations are similar.

I think its strange that we are arguing over this though. I personally don't care, but since I've been drawn in I feel obligated to respond.

Oh and philcore. I think the racist assumption was the europeans and canadians were liberal. Not that Americans are the majority on a site.

How is saying that Canadians and Europeans are more liberal than Americans (with the unsaid 'on average') 'discrimination'??!??!?!?

Even if it was false, which it isn't, how is it discrimination?!

Is saying 'French people speak French' discrimination? Even though some near the German border may speak German, or some may now live elsewhere and never learned or forgotten French?

@Cent: yeah - I caught on that that was the offensive part after my first post.

holy shit - Islamaphobic? We have a term for that now? People who fear Islam ... interesting. Maybe a topic for another thread though.

I think ethnicity is equivilent to race, and a lot of Religions do imply at least a majority ethnicity. Budhists tend to be from the far east, Hindus from India, Muslims from the Arab world, etc. So I can see that line being easily blurred and wouldn't even argue the point that if someone said Muslims are ___ and someone called that a racist statement. It's close enough for my standard. Same with Jews. Technically a religion, but there's also some implicit ethnicity that goes along with it.

But having said all that - there was still nothing even remotely racist about the statement that Europeans and Canadians are more liberal than Americans. Or that they're shorter, taller, smarter, dumber, stronger, weaker or anything else, whether it was complimentary or offensive. There simply isn't a racial or ethnic component to the statement.

Fair enough. I agree if I reposted I would have used different wording to make my point clearer.
It just seemed rather stereotypical to say that the site was liberal and that was due to the number of canadian's and Europeans.

Yes - Stereotypical - there's the correct word for it! I was searching my brain for that word earlier, but never found it.

Figle +1

This is a stupid thread.

I'm from New York, if there's a conservative majority in America, I simply never see it.

I don't think there was a question as to whether there was a conservative majority in America. It was whether America, on the whole, was more conservative than Europe.

If there was a conservative majority in America, the election wouldn't have gone the way it did.

And tuco, you aren't required to post to threads that you think are stupid, so ... why bother.

Hey here's a question - If I say "New Yorkers are rude", is that racist? I think we can all agree that it's accurate, and it's definitely stereotypical, but not racist. I think Tucoblahblah just helped me prove my point. thanks!

We Canadians are aware of how the word 'liberal' has become offensive to some Americans. Indeed it is often used in a derogatory fashion, as evidenced by your media prior to the Obama victory. We watch much of the same television you do. As a result it is not surprising that a Canadian would be startled by the language used by our more conservative brethren down south.

@Samo: It's only used in a derogatory fashion by people who are idealogically opposite. But even the word Democrat is used that way. I don't think anyone who is characterized as liberal in America is offended by the term. If they are, then that's a little sad, and it means that the attempt to make it an insult by the likes of Rush and Hannity is working. They definitely use it as an insult saying things like "tree-hugging liberals" and "anti-war liberals" and the like. But it's my impression that using it as an insult isn't very insulting to the targets of the insult. Which is exactly how you defeat an insult, by the way.

But really, the last election showed, that the majority of America IS liberal. It's just a smaller majority than the same political mindset in Canada/Europe/Australia, whatever it happens to be called there.

You know, now that I think about it, because of the immigration issue from Mexico, the word Mexican is almost viewed as a racial slur now by some! How fucking absurd is that? People actually look around nervously when you say Mexican as opposed to "Latino" or "Hispanic" - when you're talking about someone from Mexico!!. I get that people from other countries in Latin America don't appreciate being mistaken for Mexicans, because of their own national pride, but they'll just tell you that they are Colombian or Ecuadorian or Cuban or whatever. And if you are refering to the entire ethnic group then latino or hispanic is more appropriate, but maybe that's where the word Liberal is headed - at least in the minds of Canadians, but I assure you we're not there yet in the US. Most people only see it as a descriptive word describing a set of political and social viewpoints.

tuco,
You live in a very liberal part of a blue state on the East coast. You realize there is an America outside the 5 boroughs, right?

Well, I can certainly see how the statement might be construed as racist. Much as stereotypes involving Americans might be on average true (you guys are fat!), it doesn't make it less offensive... it's really the tone, and as diplomat probably uses liberal as some sort of slur connoting cowardliness or misguidedness it's easy to see the offensiveness.

Also philcore, the majority of American liberals would be considered fairly conservative or centrist in Canadian or European politics. Most of America is still iffy about universal health care and many other social programs that are second nature to Canada and other European nations... we get up in arms whenever the conservatives mention privatization of health care... they don't even try that much anymore. I hear people saying that the Republican party is falling out of it's conservative roots (eg. against big government), and while that may be true, you would probably scoff at what Canada calls the Conservative party.

@chrisp - The point I was trying to make is that it has nothing to do with whether the statement is offensive - it only has to do with whether or not it has something to do with race. Your comment about Americans being fat is offensive, but not racist. When I say that Canadians are unambitious, that's also offensive, but still not racist. Canada and America are not races, they're just countries, with damn near the same racial makeup (except we probably have more Mexicans - see that sounded a little derogatory to some, didn't it?)

And I agree that what you call conservative will still fall on the liberal side of our spectrum. Which is where I think diplomat was coming from (btw - I can't believe I've spent this much time defending him - oh well, I'm defending ideas, not personalities). He was making the statement that Europe and Canada are more liberal than America - which it seems everyone agrees with. So it clearly wasn't "racist", but not only that - it's not even offensive! Or is it?

I think it's as much a kneejerk reaction to label any generalization as "bigotry" or "discrimination" as it is to be a bigot or discriminatory.

Oh, and Chris has it right about pretty much everything, though I don't know Diplomat well enough to make a judgment about his intentions. I'd also like to point out that there are two axes of conservatism and liberalism - fiscal and social. The Republican party in the United States is by and large socially and fiscally conservative, while the Democratic party is generally socially and fiscallly liberal. Many Europeans hold views that are more socially conservative than the average American (Scandinavia, I'm pretending you don't exist), but very few (which still means tens of millions) have fiscal views more conservative than the average American.

@Zilph - what do you consider to be social conservative stances on issues? Because I'd be surprised if Europe were truly more socially conservative than America.

Here are the ones I consider conservative stances on social issues:
Abortion - against
Gun Control - against
Death penalty - For
Welfare - against
Drug legalization - against
Euthanizia - against
legal prostitution - against
gay marriage - against

Violence in movies/TV - against (not most of America)

my guess as to percentages in America on those issues. I'm really curious what someone from Canada or Europe thinks they are for their part of the world. These are just guesses, but yours will be too:

Abortion - 55% for 45% against (leaning liberal)
Gun Control - 60% against 40% for (leaning conservative)
Death penalty - 65% for 35% against (leaning conservative)
Welfare - 60% against 40% for (leaning conservative)
Drug legalization - 85% against 15% for (solidly conservative)
Euthanizia - 75% against 25% for (solidly conservative)
legal prostitution - 60% for 40% against (leaning liberal)
gay marriage - 70% against 30% for (solidly conservative)
Violence in movies/TV - 80% for 20% against (solidly liberal)

Those are my 5second guesses, no research done. That's just my impression of American social values from my own experience. Anyone care to do the same for Canada / Europe / Australia?

philcore, I suppose under your definition of racism it's not racist... but many would include nationalities in the definition of racism. Regardless, it still might be construed as slandering and offending an entire people... even if that people might be diverse and similar demographically to yours.

I think Europeans are fiscally and socially more liberal than Americans... It is interesting that Europeans have a problem with violence in film/TV, and Americans have a problem with sex and swearing... while the other has no qualms.

This would be my estimate of North and Western European countries...

Abortion - 80% For 20% Against
Gun Control - 70% For 30% Against
Death Penalty - 90% Against 10% For
Welfare - 80% For 20% Against
Drug legalization - 60% For 40% Against
Euthanasia - 50% For 50% Against?
Legal Prostitution - 65% For 35% Against?
Gay Marriage - 65% For 35% Against
Violence in movies/TV - 65% Against For 35%
Sex in moves/TV - 70% For 30% Against

This isn't necessarily accurate because I'm not European... but it's based on my estimations which are based on the impressions I get from Europeans I know and general reputation which may not be representative.

figlesqudge nailed it with stereotype - that's the word that fits - even if it's not offensive, stereotype still works. Generalizations based on any characteristic are stereotypes.

And that is interesting about the juxtoposition of sex/nudity with violence. It's gotta be a morality thing. Sex is considered immoral while violence isn't - I don't know, I think we have that backwards, personaly. Then again, I don't mind either of them - give me sex and violence in my movies!! Hell give me violent sex and sexy violence with lots of cussing and drugs thrown into the mix!! AND a prostitute who gets an abortion!!

That's it, I'm going to imdb.com and looking up those keywords! I'll probably get a European title!

Lots of people have already said it but I give my support here to diplomat1824. There was nothing wrong with his statement. I think he is probably is right. Even if he is turned out that he is wrong, it still isn't offensive. It is not as if he said all Americans are conservative or all Europeans are liberal. Sometimes it is necessary to make generalizations.

From a Diplomacy hobby perspective if we use the stats in the Face to Face part of the hobby over all the US side is about 40 % of the hobby and maybe Canada 5% the rest is scattered with the largest part of the hobby face to face being in France. This web site does not cater to the French so there is very little representation.

As for Liberal vs Conservative it depends on what you define as those issues. There is no place in the world that has as 'liberal' or free a press and political speech as the US. In Germany you can not use the word Nazi, in many European countries you cannot deny that this or that happened. Libel laws are also excessive in various places.
I also find it very convenient that when Europeans talk about 'Europe' they exclude, the Serbs, Rumanians, Bulgars, Russians, Ukrainians, etc.
And as for Turkey... well can't you get tossed in jail for saying that the Armenians were butchered in WW1?
So let's not be so quick to jump on the liberal-conservative divide.

It was not rascism, but a politically incorrect assumption about a group of people. There is a difference. I do not think that any race is superior/inferior to another

And, yes. In an American's eyes, most Europeans/Canadians (note the "most") are considered liberal, political or otherwise.

It wasn't politically incorrect.

You know what I mean. It was an unjustified assumption.