> Wait, what? I'm American... South American, to be precise.

Just to be precise, being American means you're from the United States of America. I don't call myself North American, for example. Neither does anyone else. When you introduce yourself you don't say "Hi I'm the_af and I'm from America". That would be confusing, unless you're actually from the United States.

> The US as world police doesn't exactly fill me with confidence, given their track record in our part of the Americas.

Compared to what?

> Whether this world policing is a "US liberal" or a "US right-wing" thing is of no interest to me. Both camps will call anyone who disagrees anti-American, anyway. (I think right now it's more of a "US liberal" thing but it used to be "US center-right/neocon". US politics are confusing!).

The "let's get America out of international organizations" rhetoric are right-wing talking points propped up by countries that seek to divide democracies. Brexit is another good example. It's not that you're being called "anti-American" it's just that you're incorrect. The rhetorical talking points that discredit our international institutions and create anti-American sentiment seek to destroy those institutions (because they're maintained by the United States) to get the US to withdraw from those organizations to collapse them.

> Just to be precise, being American means you're from the United States of America. I don't call myself North American, for example. Neither does anyone else. When you introduce yourself you don't say "Hi I'm the_af and I'm from America".

No, this is false. I call myself American. We're from the Americas. (North)American exceptionalism is bullshit.

But my point is that disagreement over US policy and their role as world police, and disagreement with their Manifest Destiny, is not "being anti-American". Even the phrase "anti-American" reeks so much of exceptionalism it should be avoided at all costs.

I'm not anti-American. Being American is about cooperating with all of America, not being a bully who doesn't have to comply with the rules unless you're the one writing them.

> No, this is false.

Ok. I don't really think I have anything else to add from this point on. Have a good day/evening.

Sorry you’re not American. At least not in the way the word is used today.

"Sorry" how? Don't feel sorry for me, I'm happy to remain American and will also always be considered so by my fellow countrymen.

But the point is that using these words, "American" and "anti-American", to refer to how people across the world choose to bow down -- or refuse to -- to the way things are handled by the US, is absurd. If you don't look up to the US you're not anti-American.

Nobody is "anti-American" just because they don't think the US is (or even should be) the guiding light of freedom and morality in the world. Nobody is anti- or un- American because they think the US is not above the rules.

"You're either with us or against us" -- a ridiculous and jingoistic mindset.

I’m sorry in the sense you’re using the word “American” incorrectly.

American = Citizen of the USA

I mean, you do you, but don’t get mad when people don’t understand what you’re trying to say.

That is how American should be used, its like saying "I am European". Only thing is popular usage of "American" refers to US citizens.

Perhaps using "American" (also) for South Americans is popular usage in (certain regions of) South America. You can't just declare that it's wrong just because it's not popular usage in Western culture (which is heavily influenced by the USA).

Indeed, in Latin America we call ourselves "americanos". It's even mentioned in the English language version of Wikipedia for the "American (word)" entry, under "Cultural reception" or something like that. It states "Hispanic Americans" challenge the notion that "American" should be exclusively used for people from the US. It also states the RAE (linguistics body from Spain) also challenges the English language common usage as "abusive" and recommends against adopting this usage in Spanish.

But this is neither here nor there. I didn't intend to lead this in a linguistics direction, but rather towards this notion of Manifest Destiny and exceptionalism, that leads some people (like the ones who replied to me) to believe that rejecting the notion of the US as World Police is somehow the same as being "anti-American".

Since not everyone is from the US, I argue, this idea that we are "all in the same boat" and pushing against US supremacy and above-the-rules'ness is somehow "being anti-American" and "right-wing" is both ridiculous and parochial.

That's fine if Americanos means something different in Spanish. But in the English language it's most typical use is citizens of the USA. That's fine if you want to use the word differently, but don't complain when people don't know what you're talking about.

You are deliberately avoiding the central point, which wasn't about linguistics. In any case English language Wikipedia acknowledges this controversy.

> don't complain when people don't know what you're talking about

I'm not complaining and everyone here does know what I'm talking about.

Actually it was u/ericmay who was complaining about alleged "anti-American" sentiment. Because this is about the world stage and about international rules, the interpretation that America != US is particularly relevant in this case; the interpretation about "common usage" is less relevant since this has major implications for the rest of the world (i.e. that the US is not above the rules and is not the moral light of the free world or whatever).