Loving Uncle Sam

New Zealanders should reflect more deeply on the source of anti-American attitudes which have taken hold here, writes NICHOLAS KERR.

[This op-ed originally appeared in The Press, Christchurch, New Zealand, November 21, 2006]

From Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez calling United States President George W. Bush the devil in an address at the UN, to political rallies in the Middle East, there is no doubt there is a great deal of anti-American sentiment across the globe.

A widely published article in the US seized on surveys of other countries’ attitudes towards the US, including New Zealand’s. Entitled ‘Kiwis Turn Sour on America’, the piece cited a Phillips Fox survey showing that the number of New Zealanders who felt “positive” towards the US had fallen from 54 per cent in 2001 to 29% in 2004. The main explanations offered were America’s assertive posture in the world since the 9/11 attacks in 2001 and the Iraq war in particular.

Former New Zealand Ambassador to the UN, Terence O’Brien, suggested that New Zealanders were becoming more America-conscious rather than anti-American. However, being more conscious of a friend and her actions does not necessitate feeling less positive about her.

What it comes down to is the context in which you view that friend. Arguably, the context in which Kiwis view America has been distorted over the years by the country’s leaders, educational institutions and media, leading to an inevitable decline in New Zealanders’ attitudes towards it.

In 2003, Prime Minister Helen Clark made clear her sentiments towards America by suggesting that the Iraq war might not have happened if Al Gore had been president. As a backbencher in the fourth Labour Government, Clark led the lobbying of the then prime minister, David Lange, to reject the American offer of a conventional ship visit that would have enabled New Zealand to remain in the countries’ Anzus alliance and lessened the antinuclear rift.

Furthermore, New Zealand’s adoption of MMP, which provides a bigger stage for minority parties, has brought to the fore fringe parties with a deep dislike of America.

This country’s education system has failed for decades to provide young New Zealanders with any context of the world’s only superpower and its people. There was virtually no mention of America during my own schooling; the only foreign country we studied was the global nonentity Fiji.

Little has changed, with New Zealand’s curriculum making clear the priorities for schools: “Societies which have close relationships with New Zealand, such as communities of the South Pacific and Asia.” Thus New Zealanders are left to interpret the US and its actions through the prism of its leadership and the media. The latter provides news coverage of the lJS and is a huge importer of American programming, music and other fare.

Given the media’s selective reporting, many New Zealanders were naturally in disbelief that George Bush won the 2004 presidential election over John Kerry. With reports focusing on Bush, his propensity to misspeak and inevitable campaign setbacks, and a lack of focus on his weaker challenger, such incredulity is to be expected.

Similar myopic reporting on matters of global importance has failed to provide New Zealanders with the context in which the US must view such issues and the constitutional and geopolitical constraints within which it operates.

Given that local media are rapacious in their purchase of American broadcasting, Americans share some of the responsibility for the content of what New Zealanders consume.

Hollywood seldom attempts to defend the lot of the US and frequently reinforces many of the falsehoods that abound. Also via the media, America’s propensity to label itself the greatest land on Earth and claim to be the best in a myriad of arenas and ways doesn’t sit well culturally in New Zealand.

However, a moment’s reflection suggests that such a reaction is hypocritical. Kiwis use no shortage of hyperboles or superlatives to describe New Zealand. For instance, think of the use of”Godzone”, the declarations of uniqueness about our flora and fauna and the pedestal we reserve for the All Blacks and other athletes.

Pride in one’s country is nothing to be ashamed of and surveys suggest there is no shortage (of it) in America or New Zealand. As Tom Smith, of the University of Chicago, has observed: “National pride serves as a resource to buttress people’s fortitude during times of adversity.” With a healthy stock of national pride and in spite of the attitudes of some New Zealanders towards the US, America will weather this storm as it has others.

In the meantime, New Zealand’s educators, leaders and media would do well to ponder what they’ve done to diminish the standing of a once great friend in the eyes of many Kiwis.

Nicholas Kerr is an adjunct scholar of the Australia-based Centre for Independent Studies, He is a New Zealand citizen and a permanent resident of the United States, and currently lives in Seattle, Washington