←back to thread

606 points saikatsg | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
Boogie_Man ◴[] No.43928794[source]
The prevailing wisdom has been proven wrong on this occasion. He is very much a continuation of Francis's school of thought in spite of the "fat Pope thin Pope" wisdom, and he is an American who has been elected Pope, which was almost unthinkable because of America's economic, political, and mass media domination of the western world. Very unexpected
replies(4): >>43929161 #>>43929218 #>>43929330 #>>43931556 #
jampekka[dead post] ◴[] No.43929330[source]
[flagged]
ebiester ◴[] No.43929702[source]
Okay, yes, we get it. But the United States as a name even is not unique to western hemisphere countries - the name of Mexico is "Estados Unidos Mexicanos" - or United Mexican States.

We were the first country from the to be recognized by the Western Europeans, and the people at the time didn't anticipate the current situation, so forgive us for having a name in English that is a bit ambiguous, but how many people complain that there's no common name for Europe and Africa combined? Why is everyone so interested in lumping two continents together whose commonality stops with being the result of European colonialism and the consensus of a few mapmakers?

replies(3): >>43929990 #>>43930330 #>>43931012 #
1. probably_wrong ◴[] No.43930330[source]
I'd argue that, Vikings aside, it is a bit weird to use the term "America" to describe lands that neither Christopher Columbus nor Americo Vespucci visited in their lifetime.

The USA may have been the first recognized country, but the term "America" was coined much earlier. But I'm a reasonable person - if we really want to keep it as two separate continents, "America" and "North America" works for me.