I found this aspect of the letter frustrating too. I do have to wonder, personally speaking, whether I did enough to fight against the complacency and corruption in our government (or maybe I'm just being too hard on myself?). There were years in college and just after college when I didn't vote, because I simply forgot to register. If the US is a democracy, then do we take some collective responsibility for our collective decisions? (Of course, there are some who'd say we're not much of a democracy anymore, and they'd have a few points.)

That said, many of the problems that the letter described aren't even within the realm of control of the average American. In my mind, it's corporatism that brings about many of these issues. I don't want to see McDonald's everywhere I go, either. I don't even eat there. Haven't for years. Who makes the decision about where a new McDonald's will be built? Definitely not me. Let's get corporate interests out of our government; multinationals should not be running the country. This is tantamount to separating church and state.

Well, I already commented on this over at Times Shadow, but let me say that judging from my trips to Alaska through Canada, Canadians shouldn't have too much to say about the way we treat the environment.

They're allowing logging that we banned years ago, and they don't seem nearly as upset about it as Americans do. Their biggest concern seems to be selling their lumber to America at the cheapest possible price.

Faulty generalizations like those in the letter irritate all of us, but, if we let them control how we feel or what we write, then ignorance rules the day.

If we're going to change American politics, we still need to convince those in the middle that the Republicans are wrong and that we need to go another way.

Let's just make sure that we don't overstate our case and convince them that the Republicans are right.

Most tirades against America seem to side step one crucial issue. Of all the nations and empires who have existed in history, none has had the sheer economic and military power of the current United States. Not even by half. Yet, comparatively, the US is far more benign and cooperative than any of those lesser potentates. If all you have to worry about is a McDonalds going in down the street you should count yourself lucky. Other countries have to deal with much nastier manifestations of their powerful neighbors' ambitions. Besides, that McDonalds is undoubtedly owned by another Canadian.

Shelley a patriot!!!! That post was a fist raiser. Well said bb!

Is your trackback not working? My response is at http://davedorm.com

Is your trackback not working? My response is at http://davedorm.com

I pulled a couple of my earlier comments. Please grant me the indulgence of she who controls the weblog to pull what was said in haste.

And if I didn't speak in a hasty manner, I wouldn't be burningbird now, would I?

Au contraire, the trackback works too well; it double-pinged from me, I think. Well said. (I got here via Corante.)

I was compelled by Mr. McDougall's letter to write to the Chronical myself. Unlike McDougall, who is an ass, most Canadians don't mind the U.S. at all (afterall, you have Cracker Barrel)

I always assume that when someone criticizes "America" for its national and international policies (and the effects of those), he/she is writing about the problems that are becoming entrenched in the system because of the destructive decisions of the dumb decision-makers. I assume that, since most people around the world know that almost all of us Americans are not empowered to make those decisions, he/she is not writing about us. So, I am in agreement with what McDougall had to say. I'm also in agreement with Andrea. I have no say in or control over the current American system of mis-government. This is my country, but this is not my choice of leadership or policy. Right now, the decision-makers who run my country suck.

In arguments about America and how it's perceived around the world at Metafilter (where I do most of my quality arguing and where I fear that I am perceived as an America-basher most foul) I've always tried to draw a distinction between rage and loathing of the Nation and the Government, and a love for the People. (I've had pushback on this too, but I still feel it's useful).

Not long after September 11th, when those less tactful than I were saying things like 'America got what it deserved', I found myself explaining time and time again to Americans who simply couldn't believe their ears, that there are a lot of people, in a lot of countries, all around the planet, who hate and fear America, for a lot of different reasons. And paradoxically, often these very same people would give their left kidney to go and live in America (or, to be honest, fucking anywhere they could raise their whelps in safety).

What window there was of opportunity for the Bush Junta to capitalize in any productive way on the sympathy and love for the American people that came as a result of the attacks, well that window closed long ago, thanks to Shrub and his handlers. Conspiracy theories aside, the American government has used the attacks to further their own War and Money agendas as if they *had* planned it all along, and I think as a result, there are actually *more* people around the world who feel antipathy towards America than there were a year ago.

But, I ramble.

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men and women to do nothing, to paraphrase whatsisface. There are people like Bb who are actively trying to oppose the Darkness, Americans and others, this is true.

But I sometimes share what would seem to be a deep depair communicated in Mr MacDougal's rant : that no matter how many good people there are, it is not enough. The damage has been done, the corporatization of western culture has gone too far, and it's America that has destroyed us all. And sometimes, knowing as I do that there are good people in America, I nonetheless blame the American People as much as I blame their leaders, for letting it happen, for falling asleep at the switch.

I don't hold with the way in which Mr MacDougal has presented his 'arguments' - there is some serious tinfoil-hat fodder in there - but I think I understand the depths of his despair and fury.

I love Americans, as much as I can love any abstract group of people. But the American nation and its government? I fear it, and cannot love what it has become.

well said stavros

Actually Ellaine, we *do* have plenty of power over our politicians - we just don't have the will to use it like it's been done in the past.

Posting messages to blogs is a start. A big start that takes courage.

But taking to the streets in protest, boycotting products made by the supporters of the politicians you want out, and pushing the get out the vote message all have serious impacts.

I don't want to be mean but it's that attitude of "it all sucks and I have no control" that has completely destroyed Philadelphia.

We still *do* have plenty of power. But most of us - excluding present company of course - do nothing at all about it.

We've been lulled into a sleep by this false attitude of helplessness.

And we're far from helpless.

And it's that attitude - again stavros - that the damage is done and we might as well scrap the whole thing - that contributes to that same attitude of do nothingness.

Fact of the matter is we have a decent system built for reform. A system that works most of the time, and one in which people do have major influence over.

After all - how do people get elected - it's still by vote. What's the big deal over all the corporate backage? What is it that they do?

THEY BUY ADS THAT INFLUENCE THE VOTERS. That is the major thing campaign finances do. And people are like sheep.

You want to fight corporate influence over government - fight the ad industry. Fight for further campaign finance reform. Fight to demand better election coverage. Fight to get people out and vote.

And the system *will* work then.

Shelley, why take it personally. It was not ever suggested.

Elaine at Kaliliy perhaps summed it up best:

I always assume that when someone criticizes "America" for its national and international policies (and the effects of those), he/she is writing about the problems that are becoming entrenched in the system because of the destructive decisions of the dumb decision-makers. I assume that, since most people around the world know that almost all of us Americans are not empowered to make those decisions, he/she is not writing about us.

My postintgs were never ever, ever, meant to include the individual. It's your bloody government that's the problem.

Hell, Shelley, give me some credit.

Well there is a group of people who were 'criticising America', that decided to murder around 3000 people that were not empowered to make those decisions.

There is an awful lot of hatred going around. Pure, unadultrated hatred. That blinds people and binds people on courses that go to nowhere but destruction.

Let's educate one another. But lets' fight hatred no matter how much we agree with it's reasonings.

I gotta get out of the thread now.. :)

Loren - Canadians shouldn't have too much to say about the way we treat the environment.

True. Aren’t Canada & the U.S. the biggest polluters in the world, per capita? It’s funny how I agree with your comment, but when I read “They're allowing logging that we banned years ago, and they don't seem nearly as upset about it as Americans do.”, the hairs on my neck bristle. I want to argue. I want to say: but America does this and this and this. Then I remember what the thread’s about, and put my righteous indignation away. But let’s face it, most American, and Canadian, for sure, buyers don’t seem to worry too much about how a product is produced or harvested, as long as it’s cheap.

Allan - My postings were never ever, ever, meant to include the individual.

It doesn't sound like it when you say:
Comments are welcome, but please try and accept that you are not perfect. We're a little tired of your hypocrisy and cant. I think we all could be called hypocrits from time to time?

I'm not too fond of the original letter's title: Open Letter to America from a Canadian. In one swoop, he's painting all Americans with the same brush. Then, by calling it a letter from a Canadian, he does the same to us.

All generalizations are false ;)

I think it would have been better had the original author defined the Americans to which his letter was directed. Of course, his intent was to get the Americans who feel the same way he does to feel guilty and get active in trying to change things. The problem, of course, is that a large majority of those who agree with him are already active. The international intellectuals (oh dear, I'm sounding like a Republican conspiracy theorist) have a tendency to be very condescending when addressing these sorts of issues, and the unfortunate result is alienating people who agree with them, and further entrenching those who disagree.

I would be curious to see an explanation of how the Open Letter accomplished anything worthwhile. I strongly suspect that the only result was to aggravate people who should be working together, not against each other.

Contrary to what rev says, the open letter has accomplished much discussion, unlike, say, a reasoned and dull summation of all arguments and counter arguments. A rant, by definition, is passionate, and that's what people need to FEEL or we ain't ever going to get anywhere. After all, as Karl says:

"We still *do* have plenty of power. But most of us - excluding present company of course - do nothing at all about it.

We've been lulled into a sleep by this false attitude of helplessness.

And we're far from helpless."

Yet, we don't, and that's where the letter's frustration lies. In a way, the author is saying, you are the greatest country on earth (a compliment!), yet look what you have LET happen.

Karl also says:

"You want to fight corporate influence over government - fight the ad industry. Fight for further campaign finance reform. Fight to demand better election coverage. Fight to get people out and vote."

That's a lot of fighting to do (and I agree with it), but, back to my point, I guess, it's gonna take the passion of marching in the streets, which rants might help ignite, to change anything, imho. Perhaps if the writer had clarified his letter to say "American policies" "some Americans" "America's trend toward" and the like, it wouldn't have come off as offensive, but then, we wouldn't be talking about it either.

I swung by a day or perhaps two ago, Shell, and sucked in what you said [there were no comments] and kept that letter open. I've mulled over it today on my blog but track around in circles thinking much of what is said here - like Elaine, Chris, and others I tend to be doubtful but Karl, George and others are for getting things done and I appreciate that... because it does bring about the desired result in the end.

One thing I feel strongly about [and appreciate the fact that what I say as a South African is taken seriously by people who could tell me to piss off] is that McDougall wasn't addressing this audience... his words might have a very different effect out there 'on the street'. Something good could come of it.

Also, I get the feeling out here that, in the run-up to September and having been screwed about by the thugs at the top since early last year, most people affected by the shifting balance of forces under way are taking strain... people are on edge [which makes me respect the tolerance of my foreigner's (occasionally outspoken) views the more].

For relatively well-informed people, the negatives lie in that statement, "you Americans". While we accept it for the bullshit it is, it might yet be a positive tactic or strategy. I've had it [and still get it] whacked at me by dummies, i.e. "you whities" but a few short years ago, being lumped with a collective, a group that could be targeted, worked wonders for all South Africans.

In the end, it was well worth the occasional rants... the arguments beneath them were sound and went into ears previously deaf to them.

One thing about *you bloody Americans*; there's never a dull moment with *you* running the world :).

Respectfully [that's by way of a disclaimer for anybody who might feel I've no business chipping in...]

Bearman had a go at me for this:

It doesn't sound like it when you say:
Comments are welcome, but please try and accept that you are not perfect. We're a little tired of your hypocrisy and cant.

That was extracted from my blog and was pertinent to those who had commented and sent me blustery emails.

Talk about taking things out of context! Next time attribute the source.

Allan, I know you didn't mean me personally with your weblog posting. It wasn't necessarily pleasant reading for an American, the inane culture reference was a bit hurtful, but you weren't thinking of individuals when you wrote this.

As for the hypocrisy and cant, we know that was specifically directed to those who have been emailing you.

I did want to make a point with this posting that all of this is personal. "You American's" does mean me, and other American's like me. We can't sit back and say, "Well, I have no control", because ultimately we have more control then we think.

We at least have to try. And I guess I would like those outside of the borders to give us a bit of credit when we do try. A bit selfish that, though.

Sorry Allan. My only excuse is that for some god forsaken reason I couldn't sleep last night and tried to voice an informed opinion while being too tired to get all the information first. A good lesson, for me.