Sorry to hear that you think anything we've studied or that I may have said made you think "Canadians are nice" and "Americans are not nice".
Whenever I used the word "American" I did so with their government in mind. There were times when I made reference to certain segments of American society (the Christian Right in particular) when we discussed the controversy around American health-care, etc. Regan asked why the Americans had such a problem with a public health-care system like we do. I answered: Americans do not like spending their money on one another, i.e. If I work, I pay for my insurance and the money I paid for insurance goes towards me and not my neighbor; it's a very individualistic approach and way of thinking. I admit I'm not friendly to it (though I did in class confess to sharing this mindset in my early 20s) because I find it a morally indefensible position to hold, e.g. A significant proportion of those opposed to public health-care are Christians in the USA; and I don't know how any person who'd call themselves a Christian could be so tight-fisted with their money when their fellow human beings (who Christ commanded we are supposed to love and take care of) suffer.
Shannon: I don't know how to spin an aggressive American foreign policy in a good light:
1). Invasion of Iraq: considered illegal by the UN (2003) and for this reason the Government of Canada did not participate. See:
www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/16/iraq.iraq2). The attempted assassination and overthrow of Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez. See:
www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/apr/21/usa.venezuela3). The bombing of a pharmaceutical factory in the Sudan by the "Americans" which has subsequently led to the death of tens of thousands of people in the Arab World and Africa due to preventable diseases in the late 1990s. See:
partners.nytimes.com/library/world/africa/102799us-sudan.html If I am correct, the impact of this bombing is still being felt in the Middle East and Africa.
4). The genocide of the Timorese people in the 1970s made by possible by both American technical, military and financial backing. See:
www.etan.org/timor/uspolicy.htm5). The American support of a secular and unpopular Shah in Iran through the 1960s and 70s. In return for money, arms, etc. the Shah repressed his own people who resented American interference in Iran's (see:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Revolution) domestic affairs. Or how about the use of the CIA to train "death squads" (see
www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/deathsquads_ElSal.html) in vritually every Central American country killing priests critical of governments, leaders of grass roots democratic movements or trade unionists?
I'm sorry I cannot spin that in a good light whatsoever. So, again, when I spoke of the Americans it was by and large their government. With that said, America has at times been a force for good. Their involvement in both world wars, Korea, etc. were morally justified and right. The war in Vietnam...not so much. The meddling in the domestic affairs of other countries...not so much.
In as much as I agree you should not be taught to think prejudicially in school (in fact the opposite should be occuring), if you look at the events themselves (as I've listed them) you'll find that the Americans have made
themselves unpopular or appear as the "bad guy". I'm giving you the information. You make of it what you will. But it is false to assume that everything you study in class has to paint everyone in an equally rosey light, i.e. I've been critical of residential schools in Canada, anti-Semitism in Canada, the mishandling of land claims by the Canadian Government, etc. No one gets a pass.
Again, the use of the word "Americans" was in reference to their government and not the average American like Joe the Plumber or Wanda the Grocery Store Clerk.
With all this said, certainly individual Americans need to be appreciated
individually; yet, with that said, who is ultimately responsible for electing and oversight of the American Government? Doesn't the average American have some responsibility for what is done in their name (and for their material benefit, i.e. Maintaining the high standard of living enjoyed by many (not all) Americans) by the American Government?
I think so. I don't do the historical narrative any justice if I leave out all the bad stuff done in the name of democracy and only speak of the good.