while I support Canada boycotting the US, you have to admit this in particular is “freedom fries” tier patriotism. it was embarrassing then, and it is embarrassing now.
Agreed that it would definitely be much worse, and maybe I wouldn’t have found it as cringe if I hadn’t seen the push for “Freedom Fries” back in the day.
Yes. Please refer to my original comment, once again, clearly in support of boycotting the US in actually meaningful ways. I say this would be more understandable coming from Mexico because then it would be a jab, against the US unilaterally trying to rename the Gulf of Mexico, so it would make sense to rename something named after America(ns) in return.
“Oh, you did tariffs and threatening annexation, I shall no longer call this coffee Americano” just doesn’t follow logically. And compared to the threat it is the weakest, lamest, most pathetic form of protest imaginable. That’s my point.
A better analogy is to say that it’s as lame as Freedom Fries, but it being aimed at the country that re-labeled the French Fry, so that makes it ironic and much funnier.
The “freedom fries” 20 years ago occurred because France did not want to support our stupid middle eastern wars. That spawned the stupid movement to stop calling them French fries. If you were not pro-war in the US in the early 2000’s, a lot of people would suggest you were unpatriotic.
I know what Freedom Fries is. That’s why I brought it up. I don’t understand how that’s relevant to my comment that calling Americano Canadiano is dumb.
I didn’t question motivations. I already said I support boycotting the US. this is not a method of protest that does anything. it’s lame and stupid. Americano is not even American, nor is it Canadian. it’s just dumb. it’s like saying you remember watching Canadian Pie as a teen.
Except back then the US was the aggressor, and now the US is the aggressor. I wouldn’t equivocate “you don’t want to blindly follow me into a pointless war” to “you’re targeting me in a trade war”
My point is that neither name change actually sends either message. They’re both weak and pointless, literally inconsequential and completely self contained. Imagine the French being … hurt? annoyed? … that some fuckwits on the other side of the world don’t call fries French Fries… as if they gave a shit before. Same here.
while I support Canada boycotting the US, you have to admit this in particular is “freedom fries” tier patriotism. it was embarrassing then, and it is embarrassing now.
If politicians are pushing this particular change, it would be a bit cringe imo but I chuckled when I saw it.
Agreed that it would definitely be much worse, and maybe I wouldn’t have found it as cringe if I hadn’t seen the push for “Freedom Fries” back in the day.
Depends. Tongue in cheek it’s pretty funny.
I would agree if this was Mexico doing it as a response to the gulf thing… then it would have made some sense in context.
I’ll take one Mexicano please. /s
Have you not heard about the tariffs and threats of annexation from Trump?
Yes. Please refer to my original comment, once again, clearly in support of boycotting the US in actually meaningful ways. I say this would be more understandable coming from Mexico because then it would be a jab, against the US unilaterally trying to rename the Gulf of Mexico, so it would make sense to rename something named after America(ns) in return.
“Oh, you did tariffs and threatening annexation, I shall no longer call this coffee Americano” just doesn’t follow logically. And compared to the threat it is the weakest, lamest, most pathetic form of protest imaginable. That’s my point.
You are being too literal.
A better analogy is to say that it’s as lame as Freedom Fries, but it being aimed at the country that re-labeled the French Fry, so that makes it ironic and much funnier.
Yeah, no. If you didn’t support their pointless wars back then, they would call you a traitor. Fuck me for not wanting my friends to die.
You could not support their wars, and also not stoop to their level of pettiness.
I don’t understand what this has to do with anything I said.
The “freedom fries” 20 years ago occurred because France did not want to support our stupid middle eastern wars. That spawned the stupid movement to stop calling them French fries. If you were not pro-war in the US in the early 2000’s, a lot of people would suggest you were unpatriotic.
That is why they said. Because you brought it up.
I know what Freedom Fries is. That’s why I brought it up. I don’t understand how that’s relevant to my comment that calling Americano Canadiano is dumb.
We changed the nane of a product because you haven’t joined us wilding an unjustified war on brown people
vs.
We changed the name of a product because you waged an unjustified trade war against us for no reason, even tough we have been your closest alley.
Not the same.
You understand how despite the differences in justification, someone can find both examples cringe, right?
I didn’t question motivations. I already said I support boycotting the US. this is not a method of protest that does anything. it’s lame and stupid. Americano is not even American, nor is it Canadian. it’s just dumb. it’s like saying you remember watching Canadian Pie as a teen.
The name is very specifically a reference to america
I didn’t say it isn’t. i said it’s not American, as in it doesn’t come from the US.
I mean that’s a pretty specific phrasing.
Those are not the same things, but i know what you mean now, so thanks.
Except back then the US was the aggressor, and now the US is the aggressor. I wouldn’t equivocate “you don’t want to blindly follow me into a pointless war” to “you’re targeting me in a trade war”
My point is that neither name change actually sends either message. They’re both weak and pointless, literally inconsequential and completely self contained. Imagine the French being … hurt? annoyed? … that some fuckwits on the other side of the world don’t call fries French Fries… as if they gave a shit before. Same here.