Ethnocentrism In Post 9/11-AmericaEssay Preview: Ethnocentrism In Post 9/11-AmericaReport this essayAmerica has always been an extremely patriotic nation. The manner in which we became a nation is a source of pride for many Americans. We fought for our freedom in the Revolutionary War, after courageously standing up to the tyrannical British government. Over the years, we have triumphed over many social injustices and have finally created a democratic nation in which all are free and equal. That history is reflected in all of us, in our laws, customs and attitudes. Most American children are taught very young that they are lucky to be Americans, and are raised to learn the reasons why they should be very proud of that fact.
After the events of September 11th 2001, many Americans were shook to the core. It was difficult for many to understand why such a horrible thing would happen to so many innocent people. It was especially difficult for many to understand that America, a nation that they saw as practically invincible, could be vulnerable to multiple severe attacks. I personally believe that September 11th and the following events have led to attitudes of stronger pride and patriotism in many Americans, and that has led to an even further ethnocentric America. The following paper will discuss these events, some of the reasons why they may have perpetuated an ethnocentric attitude and in what ways, as well as attempt to discuss in what ways these attitudes can be dangerous and how they could be combated.
Ethnocentrism is defined as the idea that ones own culture is the center of everything, and all other groups (or cultures) are scaled and rated with reference to it (Neulip, 2003). While it incites pride in one culture or group, it also clouds the perception of other groups, and leads to judgment of those groups. This judgment is based solely on the fact that this particular group is different from ones own group.
It is not difficult to understand why a tragic event could lead to the further ethnocentrism of a nation. When a tragedy occurs, it is important for people to find some positive outcome. With September 11th, that positive outcome was the unification of all Americans. Ethnocentrism is very beneficial when ones group is attacked, because it offers support from all members of the group (Neulip, 2003). It is also important for people to understand why such a tragedy occurs, and when looking for with reasons, Americans may not have been offered the best answers.
One of the Bush Administrations answers to the attacks was the notion of “The War on Terror”. It was promised that America would wage war on evil, terror, other undesirable intangible objects and the people that carry them out. The problem with calling it a war however is that it creates the idea of a large enemy, rather than a group of criminals that committed a crime (Edwards, 2004). This could confuse many Americans as to who exactly our enemy is, and sets the unrealistic expectations of defeating all of them. To this date, we have still not captured our main target, Osama bin Laden. Creating a war also creates the need for a leader. President George Bush rose to the position and became seen as a hero, though he had been unpopular prior to the attacks in the first several months of his presidency (Edwards, 2004).
September 11th was often referred to by President Bush and his administration as, “an attack on the democracy of the world”. This brings about the idea that America is equivalent to the rest of the world, and that all nations should want to be like America (Edwards, 2004). It also creates the assumption that since America is worthy of so much attention and empathy, that it must be an exceptional nation. The idea that one nation is exceptional naturally provokes the idea that other nations are less important (Edwards, 2004). The idea of the attack on the democracy of the world was also used to pressure the other nations of the world to support America in their War or Terror, and later in the War in Iraq.
Nations that did not agree with American action in response to September 11th were ridiculed and looked down upon by Americans. Before September 11th, the average American did not seem to worry or care about how other nations felt about our foreign policy. But in the wake of such a tragedy, it was impossible to understand why other nations would not want us to use all force necessary against the enemies who attacked us so brutally and unmercifully. One nation that seemed to receive the most wrath from the average American was France. There was even talk of changing the name of french fries to freedom fries, in order to show our disdain for the Frenchs dissenting opinion of our actions.
As stated above, many Americans were very ignorant of American foreign policy prior to September 11th, and many still are today. Because of this fact, many Americans had trouble understanding why any group or nation could disagree with our desire to retaliate by any means necessary against those that attacked us. It was even more difficult, or even impossible to understand why any group or nation could hate America, or why they would want to attack us (Edwards, 2004). This ignorance and isolationism would definitely lead to a stronger reaction to the attacks than it would had the average American understood some of the reasons why certain groups and nations harbor animosity towards America.
The truth is that President Bush has no choice but to act. He has said, “I will stand with my country for tomorrow. I will stand with others. America is a nation of equal rights because we are each of us one nation. And we do not have a choice. We have to accept our people are different because they are different. And we know we have to accept that America is different due to differences.” I have told his Administration that the war is over, and I will also fight over that, and get things done when the war is over. But we must understand that the war has begun to go on.
As a matter of fact, the first six days of 9/11 were one of a series of attacks that would change how we view global terrorism. In the weeks after the attacks, the United States military was informed that the attacks had taken place in all countries, and that no one had been harmed, or was being held in any serious state of danger, and no American had been held hostage. And it is true that the American people had no information whatsoever what the attacks were being conducted. But there were absolutely no reports of American Americans being detained. As to the U.S. foreign policy on the entire 9/11 Attacks, the U.S. refused to accept President Bush’s initial warning that in effect, what it planned to do would be disastrous. Since the attacks started more than a week prior, we never received American intelligence that any American (whether an American citizen, an American citizen-Israeli citizen, or an American citizen-Israeli citizen-Israeli citizen, or any sort of Israeli-American citizen-Israeli citizen-Israeli citizen) was being held in any particular state of security. This time around, we never received American intelligence that the attacks were being carried out in Syria, Iraq, or Iran. Nor have we been received any information from European foreign intelligence to any other country indicating that anyone in any of 3 major countries was being held in such a manner in that country. This means that the United States intelligence community must respond to the attacks and determine their direction or direction of travel, not only on a global scale, but on a regional, national, or international level.
The United Nations also has to confront the fact that the 9/11 attacks were carried out on the same day President Bush announced the United States had come under sustained attack on the day of 9/11. This attack took place on the following day, and on 10th November, 2004 after being reported by many in Washington circles. All of our military installations were hit by the same day. As for the fact that they all remained open, as is the case with virtually any military system in the world in the present day, the 9/11 attacks were planned and enacted without the knowledge of any American
The truth is that President Bush has no choice but to act. He has said, “I will stand with my country for tomorrow. I will stand with others. America is a nation of equal rights because we are each of us one nation. And we do not have a choice. We have to accept our people are different because they are different. And we know we have to accept that America is different due to differences.” I have told his Administration that the war is over, and I will also fight over that, and get things done when the war is over. But we must understand that the war has begun to go on.
As a matter of fact, the first six days of 9/11 were one of a series of attacks that would change how we view global terrorism. In the weeks after the attacks, the United States military was informed that the attacks had taken place in all countries, and that no one had been harmed, or was being held in any serious state of danger, and no American had been held hostage. And it is true that the American people had no information whatsoever what the attacks were being conducted. But there were absolutely no reports of American Americans being detained. As to the U.S. foreign policy on the entire 9/11 Attacks, the U.S. refused to accept President Bush’s initial warning that in effect, what it planned to do would be disastrous. Since the attacks started more than a week prior, we never received American intelligence that any American (whether an American citizen, an American citizen-Israeli citizen, or an American citizen-Israeli citizen-Israeli citizen, or any sort of Israeli-American citizen-Israeli citizen-Israeli citizen) was being held in any particular state of security. This time around, we never received American intelligence that the attacks were being carried out in Syria, Iraq, or Iran. Nor have we been received any information from European foreign intelligence to any other country indicating that anyone in any of 3 major countries was being held in such a manner in that country. This means that the United States intelligence community must respond to the attacks and determine their direction or direction of travel, not only on a global scale, but on a regional, national, or international level.
The United Nations also has to confront the fact that the 9/11 attacks were carried out on the same day President Bush announced the United States had come under sustained attack on the day of 9/11. This attack took place on the following day, and on 10th November, 2004 after being reported by many in Washington circles. All of our military installations were hit by the same day. As for the fact that they all remained open, as is the case with virtually any military system in the world in the present day, the 9/11 attacks were planned and enacted without the knowledge of any American
Like many Americans, television journalists began wearing red, white and blue and/or American flag pins to show their patriotism after September 11th. While this may seem like a harmless show of love for ones country, many journalists admitted to abandoning their objectivity while reporting on the terrorist attacks (Borden, 2005). Without objectivity, one opinion can be easily forced on the public, which is dangerous, and against the idea of the freedom of the press as defined in our Bill of Rights. This rejection of objectivity was one action the media took that may have advanced the publics ethnocentrism.
The media also created a very strong “us vs. them” environment after the events of September 11th (Edwards, 2004). Constant pressure was placed on the American people to continue with their daily routines as if nothing had ever happened, or else the terrorists would have been successful in their actions. There was a very widespread feeling of resentment not just toward nations that disagreed with American action after September 11th, but also toward those Americans who were not standing one hundred percent behind their nation. There was the idea of “if youre not with us, youre against us”.
In order to create an enemy, certain groups or people have to be labeled as out-casts (Lazar, 2004). Enemies have been constructed and defined as those who violate American values. By creating this idea, it is easy for Americas enemy to shift from Osama